Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Good idea or not?

  1. #1
    Regular Member fjpro2a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    300

    Question Good idea or not?

    This has always frustrated me, but I do not know if it would help or cause more harm. As you all know, there are millions of conflicting gun laws in various cities within a State, in various Counties within a State, and among the States. Would it be a good idea if, say, 10, 15, or 20 States that are gun-friendly come up with standard rules and regulations that apply to all the counties and towns within those States so we the people don't have to continually decide whether or where something is legal or not? If something like this were passed, additional States could join. Am I oversimplifying?

  2. #2
    Regular Member Shovelhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    NO VA, ,
    Posts
    355
    "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
    If they can't agree to THAT "rule", they need to be tossed out on their ear.
    Last edited by Shovelhead; 02-13-2011 at 02:49 PM.
    Assault Weapon (N) “Any firearm whose design disturbs the sleep of progressive politicians.”.

  3. #3
    Regular Member fjpro2a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    300

    Basic Rules

    Open and concealed carry without a permit anywhere, including post offices, government buildings, police stations, etc. Educating all law enforcement about the law, and no frivolous stops without RAS. Any home owner or business owner, however, would have the right to prohibit firearms, if they wish. We would have the right NOT to frequent any place who imposes these restrictions. Even if 10 States initially passed this type law that would be recognized in all 10 States, others could join as statistics would show an overall benefit. As more States join, more would. I know there would be a few States (maybe 7) that would resist, but at least we would feel more comfortable in the States that joined. I realize this may be a "pipe dream," but would it make sense to get started?

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    States are sovereign, hence the variation in laws between them. Within a State, preemption laws that prohibit localities from passing their own laws that might restrict a right make good sense to protect travelers exercising their rights.

    That being said, a set of proposed laws that do not infringe on the RKBA that States could voluntarily subscribe to, in full or in part, would not cut into that sovereignty. This has actually been done in other areas of regulation and law, such as building codes, whereby States and localities subscribe to standard codes.

    There would be a lot of debate on what laws would infringe on the RKBA and what laws would not. Positions would range from any-weapon-any-place-any-time to only-those-weapons-allowed-by-the-State-in-places-and-at-times-allowed-by-the-State, including what the Framers intended, which lies somewhere in between.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Uniform Commercial Code exists in the business world for just this purpose. Uniform "Carry" Code anyone?

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunslinger View Post
    Uniform Commercial Code exists in the business world for just this purpose. Uniform "Carry" Code anyone?
    Not in this or any other lifetime!

    I'm all for state preemption laws that stop localities from creating a patchwork of laws that can turn one from law-abiding to fleeing felon by crossing some line on the map. But I'm leery of a state trying to go much beyond setting down in print the list of things that disqualify one from receiving an otherwise shall-issue permission slip/tax receipt. Once they start messing with that by adding stuff they are just back to trying to make sure only the "right" kind of folks can have guns.

    What folks refer to as "constitutional carry" is what I'd like to see. A clear declaration by the State that the right of an individual to keep and bear arms is something the state can only take away through the most extreme judicial action based on clearly stated reasons enumerated in that declaration. Charge an administrative fee only large enough to cover the cost of creating the document (let's call it a state carry permit) so if you go to some state where they don't do things that way you can show them your state trusts you.

    stay safe.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Not in this or any other lifetime!

    I'm all for state preemption laws that stop localities from creating a patchwork of laws that can turn one from law-abiding to fleeing felon by crossing some line on the map. But I'm leery of a state trying to go much beyond setting down in print the list of things that disqualify one from receiving an otherwise shall-issue permission slip/tax receipt. Once they start messing with that by adding stuff they are just back to trying to make sure only the "right" kind of folks can have guns.

    What folks refer to as "constitutional carry" is what I'd like to see. A clear declaration by the State that the right of an individual to keep and bear arms is something the state can only take away through the most extreme judicial action based on clearly stated reasons enumerated in that declaration. Charge an administrative fee only large enough to cover the cost of creating the document (let's call it a state carry permit) so if you go to some state where they don't do things that way you can show them your state trusts you.

    stay safe.
    I would also greatly prefer the 2A means what it says, call it "constitutional carry" or horseradish. But as an interim: nation-wide, agreed upon regulations such as CO, VA, NH or other of the 'freeist' states have would be a victory. And the plain fact is that this would be a far more obtainable reality than con carry and could be enforceable on the slave states' subjects whether their masters liked it or not.

  8. #8
    Regular Member fjpro2a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    300

    Basic rules RESTATED

    Gunslinger, I like your reply to my original request. If you read my 2/13/11 @ 4:42 PM message, I said the basic rules would be open and/or concealed carry without a permit anywhere including post offices, government buildings, police stations, etc. No frivolous stops by LEO, and an education requirement that must be taken and passed by all LEOs. Even if only 10 States joined initially (I think that is a real possibility,) other States that currently have somewhat similar laws could be persuaded to join in. As more join in, more will want to join in. After a couple of years of tremendous statistics, a few more would join in. I know there will be a few States that resist to the very end, but all in all, not too bad. I know this may be a "pipe dream," and I do have reservations about - the best of intentions - syndrome. However, I believe if pursued vigorously, it would be a good idea.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by fjpro2a View Post
    Gunslinger, I like your reply to my original request. If you read my 2/13/11 @ 4:42 PM message, I said the basic rules would be open and/or concealed carry without a permit anywhere including post offices, government buildings, police stations, etc. No frivolous stops by LEO, and an education requirement that must be taken and passed by all LEOs. Even if only 10 States joined initially (I think that is a real possibility,) other States that currently have somewhat similar laws could be persuaded to join in. As more join in, more will want to join in. After a couple of years of tremendous statistics, a few more would join in. I know there will be a few States that resist to the very end, but all in all, not too bad. I know this may be a "pipe dream," and I do have reservations about - the best of intentions - syndrome. However, I believe if pursued vigorously, it would be a good idea.
    I agree. Have to start somewhere and create a template for others to follow. Education of cops in and of itself would be fantastic--including the slave states most of all.

Posting Permissions

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