• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

so, how about them Dems in Iowa?

Jared

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2006
Messages
892
Location
Michigan, USA
Directly regarding preemption, unless Clark County gets off their collective backsides and makes this happen, it will not be very likely. Unfortunately, the population center leaders DO have a large modicum of control at the state level. Other than in Clark County, statewide preemption is virtual fact. (a FEW very minor enclaves may remain).

As for Bernie Anderson, a recall or discharge would only have been possible if presented by his specific area. Many of us who butted heads at that are NOT in that area, so cannot provide effective change. He did completely sit upon good legislation in committee, in spite if VERY vigorous efforts to get the other committee members to override him. The unfortunate reality is that a committee chair has virtually unlimited power to either forward or squash legislation. I don't like it one bit, but we must work with the system we have; unless it can be changed.

Keep a close watch this year, a possible "sea change" is possible. The back-channel chatter is very heartening.

I understand that it may have been hard to overrule Backstabbing Bernie when he was comittee chair; however, there were other ways to achieve this. In Rhode Island, the general assembly has been known to assign bills to a committee that is completely unrelated to the actual bill, also, people in the Rhode Island general assembly have been known to lose their chairs if they didn't play ball.

I am curious, what is being proposed in Nevada? I'm aware of a stand your ground bill as well as another bill to enable a CHP holder to carry any semi-auto if they qualify with one.
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
The Committee Chair had the power to sit on our bills. He was supported by the leader of the assembly. They were Democrats, and bills just sat there. There was NO way to force it through, as it went the direction required. He was "playing ball" to avoid losing his chair.

I understand that it may have been hard to overrule Backstabbing Bernie when he was comittee chair; however, there were other ways to achieve this. In Rhode Island, the general assembly has been known to assign bills to a committee that is completely unrelated to the actual bill, also, people in the Rhode Island general assembly have been known to lose their chairs if they didn't play ball.

I am curious, what is being proposed in Nevada? I'm aware of a stand your ground bill as well as another bill to enable a CHP holder to carry any semi-auto if they qualify with one.
I know of at least one other bill, and since the text of them is as yet unavailable, it isn't clear. but it deals with "fees and other aspects of CCW." Knowing the bill presenter(sponsor), It isn't an anti-bill. :cool:
 

Slave

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
141
Location
Flint, Michigan, USA
Well if that is his position I have to agree DUH ! ! ! but the fact is he seams to be trying to take the "underdog" side of things as he see's it, And as I see it he has shown his hand as a full on Democratic supporter? Now just so we are clear I don't have a problem with anyone "picking" sides but and I certainly would never wish to strip anyone of their autonomy but when you step into a theater and shout fire you best know enuff to get the hell outta the way or your gonna get run over :0

Nah, I actually vote Red like 85% of the time :)

I just don't like who Republican politicians get a free pass on MY 2A rights, and good Dems are nearly automatically demonized.

Carry on guys.
 

wolverine1856

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
87
Location
Oakland County, Michigan, USA
Nah, I actually vote Red like 85% of the time :)

I just don't like who Republican politicians get a free pass on MY 2A rights, and good Dems are nearly automatically demonized.

Carry on guys.

That only happens in the made up world in that little head of yours. I love how you think you are some enlightening messiah of political savvy this board.

Here a clue for you:
We don’t need your help; we are all smart enough to think for ourselves regardless of what you believe.

You must know what is better for me than me. Gee sounds like typical liberal rhetoric to me. Go post on a political forum or piss up a rope your choice.
 

Slave

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
141
Location
Flint, Michigan, USA
That only happens in the made up world in that little head of yours. I love how you think you are some enlightening messiah of political savvy this board.

Here a clue for you:
We don’t need your help; we are all smart enough to think for ourselves regardless of what you believe.

You must know what is better for me than me. Gee sounds like typical liberal rhetoric to me. Go post on a political forum or piss up a rope your choice.

COMMENTS REMOVED BY MODERATOR: Personal attacks
 

wolverine1856

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
87
Location
Oakland County, Michigan, USA
Are you stalking me now loser?

I don't think I am political messiah, and it's funny how much politics are discussed on this board.

It's also funny you think I would use "typical liberal rhetoric" or if I was even a liberal. I hate liberals as much as I hate conservatives.

It's even more funny when someone points something out that you don't like, you insult me directly. You are a pathetic, said, loser Wolverine1856. Grow up a little bit, little man.

You might want to talk to a professional about all the hate you have. You also might want to rethink carrying a firearm with all that pent up hate. It would be horrible for us non hating folks to be lumped into a category with you when you make a horrible error in judgment because of your self-proclaimed hate.

There is nobody else to insult for posting up the garbage you continue to post. What don’t you get about "this is not a political forum"?

Why do you insist on posting the same garbage over and over and over again?

In case you did not hear everyone who told you multiple times already; WE GOT IT THE FIRST TEN TIMES YOU POSTED IT!!!!!
 

Big Gay Al

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
1,944
Location
Mason, Michigan, USA
Did any of you clamoring to move Iowa's laws here, read the part where they JUST changed the law to shall issue? We've had it since 2001, they are just now getting it. Maybe they've learned from the mistakes we and other states have gone through, but I still would not give the last 9 years we've had shall issue state wide. Maybe our CCW laws aren't perfect, but I know of 2 states that have NO CCW laws, and several others that still issue when/if big brother decides to make it so.

And for those of you who didn't notice, our attempts to get PFZs reduced/eliminated (in addition to other desirable changes) were stopped by DEMOCRATS in our statehouse. They may have blue dogs in their legislature in Iowa, but I think it's pretty apparent which way most of the dems in this state lean.

As for right to OC, I suggest you check out the may on OCDO for the old laws that just got changed. Compare that to what we've had the past 9 years and tell me who's had it better all this time.
 

Slave

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
141
Location
Flint, Michigan, USA
You might want to talk to a professional about all the hate you have. You also might want to rethink carrying a firearm with all that pent up hate. It would be horrible for us non hating folks to be lumped into a category with you when you make a horrible error in judgment because of your self-proclaimed hate.

There is nobody else to insult for posting up the garbage you continue to post. What don’t you get about "this is not a political forum"?

Why do you insist on posting the same garbage over and over and over again?

In case you did not hear everyone who told you multiple times already; WE GOT IT THE FIRST TEN TIMES YOU POSTED IT!!!!!

It's funny. You insult me first, I get moderated, and you tell me I have the issue.

BigGayAl: Uh, yes. They are shall issue now, and they have many more less PFZ's, and the license they have covers any and all weapons. Even knives.

Michigan has horrible knife laws.

I also like the fact that you can have a beer with family, and not have to secure it in the car.

o.o8 BAC should be just fine, you can drink one with dinner, and then go maybe have a shot with friends with dessert.

Sounds good to me. I wouldn't drink at all, if I was carrying, but that is juts me.

I am also not talking about the past, I am talking about now. The last 9 years have no bearing on what I am saying, I want the CPL that they have NOW.
 
Last edited:

Big Gay Al

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
1,944
Location
Mason, Michigan, USA
It's funny. You insult me first, I get moderated, and you tell me I have the issue.

BigGayAl: Uh, yes. They are shall issue now, and they have many more less PFZ's, and the license they have covers any and all weapons. Even knives.

Michigan has horrible knife laws.
Actually, I understand their shall issue law doesn't take effect until next year. But, I can agree, I would like to see Michigan drop the PFZ's and the BAC limit should be the same as for driving, in my opinion.
 

Tucker6900

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
1,279
Location
Iowa, USA
Ex Michigander

I would just like to say that I am very pleased with the new shall issue law here in Iowa. Even though I will need a permit just to open carry, which Im still on the wall about, I can carry things other than a firearm. Our permits are titled "Non-professional permit to carry weapons." Another thing that Im on the fence about, is the lack of range training that comes with the new shall issue. There will be no requirment to shoot at a range to prove proficiency. Which some people will say "thats a good thing". Some will not. I for one believe that it should be an inital requirement for your first permit.

The sheriffs here had too much power when it comes to granting permits. The first time I applied, I was denied. The official denial letter stated that I did not have proper justification. A call to the sheriff gave me a different reason all together. He said "I dont know you". Basically stating that he had no idea who I was. I wasnt a "local", being a new resident if Iowa. And I have to say that severely pissed me off. A call to the state ombudsman started a chain of events that eventually led to my application being approved, and my recieving of my permit.

Now that they will have less authority to deny applications, it will be MUCH better.

Just my 2 cents. Have a good day!
 

Big Gay Al

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
1,944
Location
Mason, Michigan, USA
I would just like to say that I am very pleased with the new shall issue law here in Iowa. Even though I will need a permit just to open carry, which Im still on the wall about, I can carry things other than a firearm. Our permits are titled "Non-professional permit to carry weapons." Another thing that Im on the fence about, is the lack of range training that comes with the new shall issue. There will be no requirment to shoot at a range to prove proficiency. Which some people will say "thats a good thing". Some will not. I for one believe that it should be an inital requirement for your first permit.

The sheriffs here had too much power when it comes to granting permits. The first time I applied, I was denied. The official denial letter stated that I did not have proper justification. A call to the sheriff gave me a different reason all together. He said "I dont know you". Basically stating that he had no idea who I was. I wasnt a "local", being a new resident if Iowa. And I have to say that severely pissed me off. A call to the state ombudsman started a chain of events that eventually led to my application being approved, and my recieving of my permit.

Now that they will have less authority to deny applications, it will be MUCH better.

Just my 2 cents. Have a good day!
I think that's fantastic. I just hope they have some sort of reciprocity setup soon. Not that I have to visit Iowa, but, I think all states should honor each other's permits/licenses.

Just my 5 cents. (Inflation. ;) )
 

stainless1911

Banned
Joined
Dec 19, 2009
Messages
8,855
Location
Davisburg, Michigan, United States
The idea of training certainly sounds good, but its too much of a slippery slope. What if the antis got hold of the regulatory process (a prime target for them), the requirements would likely be set too high, or too expensive for people to pass.
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
The idea of training certainly sounds good, but its too much of a slippery slope. What if the antis got hold of the regulatory process (a prime target for them), the requirements would likely be set too high, or too expensive for people to pass.

How about if the training was required.

And free.

I suggest it be held as part of Home Economics or Shop class, 13-18 years old. :banana:
 

Darkshadow62988

Activist Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2010
Messages
238
Location
Iowa
Addressing a Few Things

The new shall issue law doesn't take effect until 1-1-11.
The training requirement does not require a shooting proficiency. Why? Because there is no evidence that requiring the test makes any difference on proficiency. The majority of people with permits do not carry all the time and those that do more often than not go to the range more often than most LEO's.
Starting 1-1-11 Iowa recognizes any permit issued by any state.
Sheriff's lose their biased discretion with this law, not total discretion. If a sheriff truly believe an individual should not have a permit, and can put into words what those reasons are, he can deny the permit. If it is appealed the denial can be sustained or overridden just like before. The only difference with this law is that the sheriffs are require to treat people fairly, without bias and not to restrict the permits(many sheriffs wrote restrictions on permits that made them invalid while doing anything other than what a person could already do without them).
 

Slave

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
141
Location
Flint, Michigan, USA
I feel like we should still have high school pistol teams.

Every citizen should get firearms training, and I feel like with all the stupid hand outs in this country, EVERY one should be able to buy a firearm, and get at least half of it paid back by either the state or the Feds.

That way we are all armed, and should we need to defend this nation from a foreign invader, then everyone has a weapon to fight with.

If the feds can subsidize sugar farmers, then they can make this happen.
 
Top