View Poll Results: Do you ;want Alabama to be a "Shall Issue" state?

Voters
21. You may not vote on this poll
  • YES

    21 100.00%
  • NO

    0 0%
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: NRA-ILA

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Huntsville, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    56

    Post imported post

    To all of those who wish Alabama to become a "Shall Issue" state, I request your assistance. I read an article today in the NRA's "America's 1st Freedom where the NRA-ILA succeded in getting Iowa to sign legislation to become a "Shall Issue" state. I called the office of the Alabama representative (800-672-3888) for the NRA-ILA to request their help in doing the same for us. I was told that they did not expect anything to be brought up in this next legislative session. My suggestion is that we bombard them with emails and phone calls (www.nrapvf.org(contact us)), and request their help. Just one person will not do it, but I have led from the front and started the influx of requests. Perhaps if we submit enough TACTFUL requests, they will respond. I believe this was the case for the residents of Iowa. The perverbial squeaky wheel gets the grease. Please help me with this and follow through. It would be nice to put an end to the Fifedoms the Alabama Sheriffs are residing in at the current time.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Madison County, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    Request sent:



    I recently read an article in the NRA's "America's 1st Freedom” where the NRA-ILA succeeded in its efforts to see Iowa sign legislation to become a "Shall Issue" state. I am curious to know if the NRA is working on similar legislation in other states, specifically Alabama.

    Currently, Alabama is a “may issue” state, placing the burden on the citizen to provide justification for, and prove their worthiness to, exercise our constitutional right to bear arms. Being a “may issue” state, allows the local Sheriffs (permit issuing authorities) too great an authority to potentially deny permits to otherwise law abiding citizens in the pursuit of concealed carry permits. This allows the local issuing authorities the ability to use these permits as leverage preventing citizens’ full participation in our local political processes.

    As a member of the NRA, I would ask that the organization help pass legislation in Alabama similar to that passed in Iowa in order to insure that all of our law abiding citizens are able to exercise our Second Amendment rights.


  3. #3
    Regular Member AL Ranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Huntsville, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    238

    Post imported post

    That's what alabamaopencarry.com is all about. You guys need to get with us to make these things happen. Alabamaians need to take care of our state. The NRA works the national stage and won't waste money where it appears there won't be a victory. They come in after the ball has already started rolling. If you want the NRA to show you, you have to make it worth their while. So, help us to get the ball rolling and the NRA will show up.
    Check out my home page @ www.alabamaopencarry.com and Carry On!

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Madison County, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    AL Ranger wrote:
    That's what alabamaopencarry.com is all about. You guys need to get with us to make these things happen. Alabamaians need to take care of our state. The NRA works the national stage and won't waste money where it appears there won't be a victory. They come in after the ball has already started rolling. If you want the NRA to show you, you have to make it worth their while. So, help us to get the ball rolling and the NRA will show up.
    Gotta hit from both ends.

    Helping to make it a "shall issue" on the conceal permit, takes some of the leverage from the sherriff. He can no longer threaten the permit you need to transport in your vehicle in order to OC when you get where you are going.

  5. #5
    Regular Member AL Ranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Huntsville, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    238

    Post imported post

    That's what I mean...the NRA-ILA will not get involved until something starts moving in the state. 1) They will not spend the time or money getting anythin started on the ground-floor. The NRA is interested in getting their names involved with winning. That is why they stayed away from from the Heller decision until the last minute. 2) After the state starts working on something and it looks like a win for gun-owners (shall-issue, carry in vehicles, etc.)the NRA will come in LATER and support it.
    Check out my home page @ www.alabamaopencarry.com and Carry On!

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by AL Ranger View Post
    That's what I mean...the NRA-ILA will not get involved until something starts moving in the state. 1) They will not spend the time or money getting anythin started on the ground-floor. The NRA is interested in getting their names involved with winning. That is why they stayed away from from the Heller decision until the last minute. 2) After the state starts working on something and it looks like a win for gun-owners (shall-issue, carry in vehicles, etc.)the NRA will come in LATER and support it.
    They did the same thing with McDonald v Chicago. This time it may have been a good thing. Reading the oral argments, ( http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_a...ts/08-1521.pdf ) the court seemed hostile to Alan Gura's (SAF) "privledges and immunities" argument, and very open to the NRA (Paul Clements) "due process" argument. But watch the media get it wrong tomorrow (06-28-2010) when the decision is announced, by saying that it was the NRA that brought the McDonald case.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Huntsville, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    63
    Vondelta, that NRA site doesn't seem to work. Can you give it another try, please?

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnH View Post
    They did the same thing with McDonald v Chicago. This time it may have been a good thing. Reading the oral argments, ( http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_a...ts/08-1521.pdf ) the court seemed hostile to Alan Gura's (SAF) "privledges and immunities" argument, and very open to the NRA (Paul Clements) "due process" argument. But watch the media get it wrong tomorrow (06-28-2010) when the decision is announced, by saying that it was the NRA that brought the McDonald case.
    ????

    Not exactly. They also had their own lawsuit. They didn't just "jump in with someone else."

    NRA v Chicago
    Last edited by wrightme; 07-04-2010 at 02:00 PM.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •