Once Daddy Fed has the power to regulate carry permits .. and requiring all states to recognize any state's permits IS regulating! and sets the precedent for more regulating... the "less stringent requirements" between states is the argument that will be used by the most restrictive states to demand Daddy Fed institute a countrywide.. fair and uniform... system of permit requirements/criteria that must be met in order to receive a carry permit from any state.
To all those in favor of a national reciprocity scheme... be careful what you are asking for because we all just might get it.
Yup. You nailed it. The1968 Gun Control Act was enacted to help states regulate firearms.
Apparently some folks have not bothered to familiarize themselves with the Federal Gun Free School Zone Law, 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(25). It is based entirely on the commerce clause and regulates firearms possession and carry permits.
It is illegal under federal law to carry any gun that has moved in interstate commerce within 1000 feet (as the crow flies) of any K-12 school. An exception is granted to those persons who possess a permit to carry issued by the State in which the school is located, if the permit requires a criminal background check before issuance.
The "precedence" (a word grossly misused in this type of statutory discussion) is already well established.
The "precedence" is also well established that the feds can ban guns for any reasons including purely cosmetic. So why is it that we don't have a federal, scary looking gun ban? Or a federal ban on normal sized magazines today? The 1994 bans expired in 2004 under George W Bush. Why haven't they been renewed?
Hint: The Democrats controlled the White House, The US Senate, and The US House of Representatives from 2009 through 2011 with sufficient majorities to push through Obamacare, a massive power grab. Why didn't those gun-hating, tree-hugging, rock-licking, pinko commie liberal Democrats pass a new gun ban?
It has nothing to do with lacking any "precedence" to do so and everything to do with the precedence of too many democrat Congressmen who voted for the 1994 having their hats handed to them and forced into retirement.
It is foolish to ever let your enemies set your agenda for you. So the fact that the ABA opposes this bill is not a reason to automatically support it. But anyone who opposes this bill (or even worse, opposes national recognition generally, on principle as opposed to some specific concern with how this specific bill is written) ought to at least pause and consider what wonderful anti-RKBA company they are now keeping with the ABA.
