Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: The double standard

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

    Cool The double standard

    Why is there such an uproar about the confusion that would be caused by a few States having slightly different laws concerning illegal immigration enforcement, but not a care in the world about the myriad gun laws that exist in the 50 States? With the millions of different gun laws, you are breaking the law in one State, but not breaking it in another. This exists in almost all States, Counties, Municipalities. Let's work towards getting a good (excellent) National Gun law that recognizes open carry, concealed carry, etc. The only exception I can think of is if an owner of private property posts a sign prohibiting firearms in his establishment. He has the right to post the sign and we have the right to picket. See how easy it is?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Goldsboro, NC
    Posts
    160
    I'm all for all states to recognize the constitution for what it says and allow everyone to keep and bear arms. However to force all states into one national gun law and regulation removes the states rights argument. That's honestly the major problem with the immigration talks. It's the National Government tryint to tell the State what they are doing is wrong. If I were the gov. of Texas/Arizona/New Mexico/California I'd tell Obama and his cronies on camera to **** off.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Uber_Olafsun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    585
    In the gun case it would not be the Feds telling the states it would be the constitution telling them which they are supposed to listen to. Immigration is a federal thing but the Feds have not only dropped the ball but forgotten what sport they are playing.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Goldsboro, NC
    Posts
    160
    Just because it's a federal thing doesn't mean in CAN'T be a state thing. The nation says 21 is the drinking age, but it's the state that enforces it. When you become a national citizen, you become a citizen of said state you got citizenship in.

    National Guard is actually the State Guard, and the Gov. of each state can call them in to do whatever work he deems appropriate. I'm willing to call the border a state of emergency...

    Illegals, GTFO!

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    If you think about it, you understand why there are so many that do not want a national firearms carry law. Amomg other things, the feds are just not known to be your friend regarding anything, and especially not about guns.

    I'll deal with the major and minor differences between the various laws across the states, thank you very much. At least that way the folks who live there have a chance to say something about them without the interference of all the folks from the other 56 states. While people who own guns may be a significant portion of the population they are by no means the majority, and the number who are actively involved in either fighting against further encroachment of our rights or actually regaining some of those rights currently encroached against is a monority of the total number of gun owners.

    More importantly, I do not want the majority of peoplefrom some place like California telling me what to do here where I live in "not-California".

    So, please, stop asking for federal firearm laws. Look at what we have gotten by that route so far and explain why any of it is good.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  6. #6
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,627
    Quote Originally Posted by Brion View Post
    .....snip.....
    When you become a national citizen, you become a citizen of said state you got citizenship in.
    You may be a citizen by birth or by legal process of the United States. There is no "citizenship" of any state.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  7. #7
    Regular Member OldCurlyWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    912
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    You may be a citizen by birth or by legal process of the United States. There is no "citizenship" of any state.
    Maybe not Virginia, it is a Commonwealth, but say that in many states further west and it could quite possibly end with your person leaking some blood in a non fatal way. It is not an opinion I recommend being vocal about.
    I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do those things to other people and I require the same of them.

    Politicians should serve two terms, one in office and one in prison.(borrowed from RioKid)

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran Schlitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,567
    Quote Originally Posted by fjpro2a View Post
    Let's work towards getting a good (excellent) National Gun law that recognizes open carry, concealed carry, etc.
    We have one.
    “The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.”
    [Miller vs. U.S., 230 F. Supp. 486, 489 (1956)]
    “There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of constitutional rights.”
    [Sherar vs. Cullen, 481 F2d. 946 (1973)]

  9. #9
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by OldCurlyWolf View Post
    Maybe not Virginia, it is a Commonwealth, but say that in many states further west and it could quite possibly end with your person leaking some blood in a non fatal way. It is not an opinion I recommend being vocal about.
    Seriously? I am a citizen of the United States that happens to live in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Before I moved here, I resided in the State of Maryland. Where I live does not make me a citizen of that jurisdiction, because I am a citizen of the United States. I may be subject to my current jurisdiction's laws, but my rights as a citizen devolve from the U.S Constitution. When I travel in Europe, my passport says that I am a United States citizen, not a Virginian.

    Make no mistake -- I am very happy residing in Virginia, especially as that residency gives me more freedom concerning my right to keep and bear arms compared to my former residence... but no matter where I live in this great country, I am, first and foremost, a U.S. citizen.

  10. #10
    Regular Member OldCurlyWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    912
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby View Post
    Seriously? I am a citizen of the United States that happens to live in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Before I moved here, I resided in the State of Maryland. Where I live does not make me a citizen of that jurisdiction, because I am a citizen of the United States. I may be subject to my current jurisdiction's laws, but my rights as a citizen devolve from the U.S Constitution. When I travel in Europe, my passport says that I am a United States citizen, not a Virginian.

    Make no mistake -- I am very happy residing in Virginia, especially as that residency gives me more freedom concerning my right to keep and bear arms compared to my former residence... but no matter where I live in this great country, I am, first and foremost, a U.S. citizen.
    ROTFLMAO. I was stating something so different from what you read, it is nearly on a different planet.

    You have absolutely ZERO understanding of the people who live in the western (not the Left Coast) states. I suggest you go back and re-read both the post I quoted and what I wrote. You should probably do it very S L O W L Y. Possibly only one word at a time.

    I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do those things to other people and I require the same of them.

    Politicians should serve two terms, one in office and one in prison.(borrowed from RioKid)

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    You are both right - or at least you are both correct.

    One of the great tests of citizenship is - or used to be - the franchise to vote. Because you are a citizen of the nation you get to vote in the national elections. Because you are a citizen of the state* you get to vote in the state elections. Because you are a citizen of the municipality you get to vote in their elections.

    * At one time "the state" (emphasis on the small-"s"-ness of "state") used to be the defining issue as these were the United states. Nowadays the emphasis seems to be on the plurality of the United States. We can thank, among many others, Mr. Lincoln for not preserving but actually creating the Union we now have, as opposed to the union we used to enjoy.

    Yes, some of the states located West of New Yawk City are putting a lot more emphasis on the 10th Amendment than it used to get. But how all that ties in with whether or not we want a national handgun carry permit, based on a national law, often escapes me. The best I can come up with in tying the two together is that each state asserting its own soverignty while at the same time equally respecting the soverignty of all the other states should, at least in theory, give us coast-to-coast carry based on the permit our home state issued to us. Heck, they do it with drivers licenses and automobiles kill and maim more people each year than do all non-military/non-LEO firearms. (I started to write "civillian" but LEO falls under that heading, doesn't it?)

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  12. #12
    Accomplished Advocate user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Virginia
    Posts
    2,373
    Quote Originally Posted by OldCurlyWolf View Post
    ROTFLMAO. I was stating something so different from what you read, it is nearly on a different planet.

    You have absolutely ZERO understanding of the people who live in the western (not the Left Coast) states. I suggest you go back and re-read both the post I quoted and what I wrote. You should probably do it very S L O W L Y. Possibly only one word at a time.

    Well, Maryland is another planet, isn't it? The problem, I think, is that Maryland culture isn't the same as Virginia culture, and people raised in one place have trouble adapting to life in the other. Sort of like moving from Scotland to Wales - they have things in common, but they're worlds apart, culturally.

    I've always seen myself as a citizen of the U.S. by reason of my Virginia citizenship, not the other way around. Virginia is my native land. The United States is a legal abstraction. And Maryland is another planet.
    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    By the way, nothing I say on this website as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice, merely personal opinion. Everyone having a question regarding the application of law to the facts of their situation should seek the advice of an attorney competent in the subject matter of the issues presented and licensed to practice in the relevant state.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Freedom First's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Kennewick, Wa.
    Posts
    850
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    You are both right - or at least you are both correct.

    One of the great tests of citizenship is - or used to be - the franchise to vote. Because you are a citizen of the nation you get to vote in the national elections. Because you are a citizen of the state* you get to vote in the state elections. Because you are a citizen of the municipality you get to vote in their elections.

    * At one time "the state" (emphasis on the small-"s"-ness of "state") used to be the defining issue as these were the United states. Nowadays the emphasis seems to be on the plurality of the United States. We can thank, among many others, Mr. Lincoln for not preserving but actually creating the Union we now have, as opposed to the union we used to enjoy.

    Yes, some of the states located West of New Yawk City are putting a lot more emphasis on the 10th Amendment than it used to get. But how all that ties in with whether or not we want a national handgun carry permit, based on a national law, often escapes me. The best I can come up with in tying the two together is that each state asserting its own soverignty while at the same time equally respecting the soverignty of all the other states should, at least in theory, give us coast-to-coast carry based on the permit our home state issued to us. Heck, they do it with drivers licenses and automobiles kill and maim more people each year than do all non-military/non-LEO firearms. (I started to write "civillian" but LEO falls under that heading, doesn't it?)

    stay safe.
    Good stuff Skid,

    The farther the authority resides from the people, the less power those in authority should hold over the people. And DC is a long way from my house.
    Freedom can never be lost, only given away by ignorance, by choice, or at the point of a gun. Here in America we can still choose.

    Freedom First 1775

    "I aim to misbehave..." Malcolm Reynolds

  14. #14
    Regular Member hammer6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,169
    Quote Originally Posted by fjpro2a View Post
    Why is there such an uproar about the confusion that would be caused by a few States having slightly different laws concerning illegal immigration enforcement, but not a care in the world about the myriad gun laws that exist in the 50 States? With the millions of different gun laws, you are breaking the law in one State, but not breaking it in another. This exists in almost all States, Counties, Municipalities. Let's work towards getting a good (excellent) National Gun law that recognizes open carry, concealed carry, etc. The only exception I can think of is if an owner of private property posts a sign prohibiting firearms in his establishment. He has the right to post the sign and we have the right to picket. See how easy it is?
    it's because the federal government recognizes the immigration law, but not the 2nd amendment. (by recognize immigration law i mean: they don't want anyone to do anything about it on their own)

    technically, states can't make a law that overrides federal law, because the constitution is supreme. but on the other hand, no one cares about the RKBA, so the states do what they wish...

    IF however, each state freely allowed one form of carry: unlicensed CC or OC, and then regulated the other, then that would be in compliance. right now, i think there's only 12 or 13 that do that....
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    doubt is a distraction from reality. fear is acknowledging doubt as reality.

    it's time to tap in to a higher reality; the one you were made for.

  15. #15
    Regular Member OldCurlyWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    912
    Skidmark understands.
    I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do those things to other people and I require the same of them.

    Politicians should serve two terms, one in office and one in prison.(borrowed from RioKid)

  16. #16
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Brion View Post
    I'm all for all states to recognize the constitution for what it says and allow everyone to keep and bear arms. However to force all states into one national gun law and regulation removes the states rights argument.
    When you go back and read the contemporary writings of those who had a say in the contents of our Bill of Rights, you find that their intent was indeed to prevent the states from disarming the people. Our Founding Fathers realized that some state governments were ok with an armed citizenry so long as the need for one was immediate, but preferred a disarmed populace at all other times. The FF knew that a disarmed citizenry would lead to increased crime, government abuses, greater likelihood of attack, and civil unrest. Thus, back in the day when Senators were appointed by state legislatures, they amended our Constitution such that Congress would no longer be able to infringe on the right to keep and bear arms. They hoped the states would follow suit, and many did, with nearly identical verbiage in their own constitutions.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SEMO, , USA
    Posts
    578

    The Justice Dept. is against ineffective laws?

    A federal judge just suspended an AL immigration law. The link is to an AP story. The Justice Dept. is one group who has filed suit against the law. One of the points of contention is the fact that the law would require proof of citizenship before a child could enroll in school. What caught my eye was the last line of the story. "Officials say it wouldn't prevent illegal immigrants from attending public school".

    If officials of the Justice Dept. are so concerned about laws that won't prevent what they are intended for, why are they not fighting all the gun control measures on the books?



    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...08-29-15-04-10
    AUDE VIDE TACE

Posting Permissions

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