National Reciprocity
Chris Cox discusses the bill and dismisses some of the, uhm, loonier theories put forth by anti gun people.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
October 25th, 2011 at 10:25 am
As someone who travels heavily for work, this would be a huge boon. Drives me nuts that every time I drive to PA from VA, I first have to unload and lock in my trunk my gun and ammo in separate boxes to get through MD. Then I have to pull over in DE and unbox and holster up again. Sometimes I take the long way there and back, driving through WVA to get to Pitt or Philly.
October 25th, 2011 at 11:00 am
National Reciprocity further erodes state’s rights. Pragmatically, it helps me in the short run.
October 25th, 2011 at 11:10 am
Why don’t they try for further incorporation, or better yet, constitutional nationwide carry?
Or how about allowing states to limit free speech, unless you test and qualify for a permit, and when entering new jersey, no free radio speech.
October 25th, 2011 at 11:20 am
Hell as somebody who lives in a state completely surrounded by states that don’t recognize my home permit, and I live North of New York (meaning if I travel outside of New England I MUST cross New York)
This is a humungous boon. Plus I was married in Maine, I don’t worry about my wife suddenly not being my wife when I cross state lines. I got my Driver’s test in Maine, and currently hold a Mass DL, but I don’t worry about crossing a line where suddenly me behind the wheel is a crime.
I don’t see why I can carry all day long in Mass, but cross into Connecticut or Rhode Island suddenly I’m committing a crime.
BS!
October 25th, 2011 at 2:14 pm
Scotty,
Think of it this way. What other fundamental human rights arbitrarily stop at state borders?
State governments do have powers the Feds can’t touch. Violating Constitutionally-recognized rights is not among those powers.
(I do agree the list of what are “legitimate” rights is open to debate, especially among the new “positive rights”, but the 2nd, flowing from the natural right of self-defense is not.)
October 25th, 2011 at 10:13 pm
States do not have rights. Individuals have rights. State and federal government have powers relative to one another as granted by the Constitution, but individual rights are logically and morally prior to all of it.