Ammo For Sale

« « Kel Tec KSG update | Home | Actually, I put a lot of thought into it » »

National Concealed Carry

A bill in the house.

12 Responses to “National Concealed Carry”

  1. Gunmart Says:

    Now, if it were only national CONSTITUTIONAL concealed carry then we would have something!

  2. wizardpc Says:

    My concern is at some future date Congress will decide to turn it into may issue or add a ridiculous tax to it.

  3. Mike Says:

    If it were a constitutional carry bill, you’d have something that simply would not pass Congress. This will be tough enough to get through. The bill isn’t perfect but few things are.

  4. Jim S Says:

    AARGH! Stop trying that crap! If it is an agreement between states, then it is fine. But if the government puts its stamp of approval on a national CC law, then they get all sorts of oversight in the process!

  5. mikee Says:

    Leading to national registration in 4, 3, 2, 1….

  6. Bubblehead Les Says:

    Too many RINOs would join their DemiCommie Buddies to defeat it in a “Bi-Partizan Manner” to get it passed away. Of, course, this means that means in those States that keep SENDING those RINOS up to Washington ( S.C., AZ, IN, you listening?), the Tea Party types COULD use those votes against them in the next election, if they COULD get on the Retardican’s Primary Ballot. And, as a Buckeye, I apologize for inflicting Voinivich on the Nation, but he’s gone now, and if we could just find a good candidate to beat Sherrod Brown and the Cleveland/Columbus/Cincinnati DemiCommie Political Machines…

  7. Jake Says:

    But if the government puts its stamp of approval on a national CC law, then they get all sorts of oversight in the process!

    This is my concern as well. The current bill appears to not allow the feds to override the states, but once it’s actually in place modifying it will be much easier. It opens the door to the feds eventually defining minimum training requirements (which you can be sure states like MA or NJ will be screaming for within a year or two), then requiring fees (to maintain the centralized federal registration database) and other requirements (like “need”).

    The current system, while far from ideal, seems to be both working well and continually (if slowly) expanding. We’d be better served expanding CCW to the remaining states that don’t allow it and also expanding Constitutional Carry. If we get reciprocity or Constitutional Carry in every state, then federal involvement becomes unnecessary.

  8. Steve Says:

    I can see how involving the federal government might cause us problems in the future but without a federal law mandating it how else do we force NY, NJ, MA, CA, etc. to respect our RTK&BA when we travel there?
    And why do we only see a bill like this when it is 100% guaranteed to be vetoed?

  9. Huck Says:

    IMHO, this is just a “see, we’re doing something for you gun-owners who voted us into office” show. It wont fly, and I’m sure that the folks who proposed it know that. It’s just show to make it seem like they’re doing something positive, like gun control.

  10. Ian Argent Says:

    This measure passed the House last year and lost in the Senate to a procedural vote requriing 60 Aye votes. Every one of the senators that voted Aye last year is still in office – several who voted Nay lost their seats, a couple to the forces of freedom. That measure came within one vote of being attached to a “must-pass” bill going to the president’s desk.

    I wouldn’t count on this being only a propaganda measure…

  11. Diomed Says:

    “If it is an agreement between states, then it is fine.”

    Yes, but wouldn’t that still require Congressional approval (Article I, section 10, interstate compacts and agreements)? Or is that something else that’s a dead letter now?

    Now I’m wondering how reciprocity agreements work, never really thought about that before…

  12. Ian Argent Says:

    “Full faith and Credence”, most likely.

    At any rate, the reason to do it via the 14th amendment is that Congress is given the explicit power to enforce “by appropriate legislation”.