NY Atty Gen 'warns' about national CCW reciprocity

Dave Workman · Oct 20, 2011

He's not too pleasant about it, either.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/...-schnederman-concealed-weapons_n_1021800.html

And this character weighs in:

NY Atty General blasts, misrepresents CCW Reciprocity bill

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-...ral-blasts-misrepresents-ccw-reciprocity-bill

tombrewster421 · Oct 20, 2011

Good breakdown Dave. I have a feeling that he probably does know and doesn't care.

DCKilla · Oct 20, 2011

"CCW reciprocity" sounds like a state issue. Feds should keep their hands off. The right to carry is already set in a constitutional amendment anyways.

Grapeshot · Oct 20, 2011

tombrewster421 said:
Good breakdown Dave. I have a feeling that he probably does know and doesn't care.

+1

Oh I think he does know and does care.

He "know"s and he "care"s very much..........about control.........of the little people.

Ask him if he is protected by guns and how many?

FMCDH · Oct 20, 2011

Wow, this AG is really gambling with that bald face lie about which states law must be followed. My guess is he banking on people taking him at his word, at-least, in his own state and others like it.

Still, to intentionally mis-represent the wording of the proposed law is ballsy. Dumb, but ballsy.

I hope SAF and NRA crucify him on that "slip".

Grapeshot · Oct 21, 2011

FMCDH said:
Wow, this AG is really gambling with that bald face lie about which states law must be followed. My guess is he banking on people taking him at his word, at-least, in his own state and others like it.

Still, to intentionally mis-represent the wording of the proposed law is ballsy. Dumb, but ballsy.

I hope SAF and NRA crucify him on that "slip".

What he said was:

"Specifically, it would force nearly every state in the Union -- including those, like New York, with reasonable restrictions on firearm ownership and transport, that are essential to public safety -- to abandon its own gun laws by allowing out-of-state visitors to carry concealed firearms based on their home state's less safe laws, rather than those of the state they are entering."

I think he refers to the permitting process/laws only, but he really muddied up the water good and likely intentionally. Most people will read and interpret his words just as you imply.

thebigsd · Oct 21, 2011

Grapeshot said:
SNIP What he said was:

"Specifically, it would force nearly every state in the Union -- including those, like New York, with reasonable restrictions on firearm ownership

I would love to hear his definition of reasonable....

TechnoWeenie · Oct 21, 2011

thebigsd said:
I would love to hear his definition of reasonable....

I would like to hear his definition of 'less safe'..

WA, OR,ID, and MT all have lower crime rates, and much looser firearms laws. To equate 'less safe' with lawful gun ownership is outright retarded, when statistics show the exact opposite to be true.

amlevin · Oct 21, 2011

it would increase the threat of gun violence against New Yorkers,

It might also give visitors the ability to defend themselves when a "New Yorker" who doesn't give a rip about any laws tries to threaten them with violence.

Here's just one such incident http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-04-24/news/29484693_1_cell-phone-brooklyn-street-cousin

Here are NYC's crime Stats http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/crime_statistics/cscity.pdf

38,498 Murders, Rapes, Robberies, and Felonious Assaults in 2010 and that's just in NYC. 105 major crimes against people every day. (sure makes me want to visit NYC "unarmed")

You bet the "politicians" in NY know what's best for their people. Apparently they feel they should be left defenseless.

As for an increase in gun violence against "New Yorkers", they seem to be doing quite well against themselves. Maybe when they take on a few tourists that are legally able to defend themselves some of the "offenders" might be history.

BigDave · Oct 21, 2011

This is normal of the anti gun group to muddy the waters since they do not have a solid foundation to oppose the legislation.

Hopefully our legislatures can read beyond the lies and b.s., even though we have anti senators here in Washington State I still remind them they represent us and we want less restrictions.

Metalhead47 · Oct 22, 2011

DCKilla said:
"CCW reciprocity" sounds like a state issue. Feds should keep their hands off. The right to carry is already set in a constitutional amendment anyways.

Trouble is, several states are ignoring or blatantly defying that constitutional amendment. I see this as one step towards the federal government enforcing that amendment upon the states, as it should.

Grapeshot · Oct 22, 2011

Metalhead47 said:
Trouble is, several states are ignoring or blatantly defying that constitutional amendment. I see this as one step towards the federal government enforcing that amendment upon the states, as it should.

They are not calling for adherence to the 2A.

They are pushing for control of a papered privilege. Once controlled they can change, modify or delete any part thereof..........and they will.

sudden valley gunner · Oct 22, 2011

Grapeshot said:
They are not calling for adherence to the 2A.

They are pushing for control of a papered privilege. Once controlled they can change, modify or delete any part thereof..........and they will.

Exactly my fear too.

Now if only the Feds would just stick to the numerated powers granted them.

amlevin · Oct 22, 2011

sudden valley gunner said:
Now if only the Feds would just stick to the numerated powers granted them.

The Fed's think they are. The issue is nobody seems to agree just exactly what the "enumerated" powers are. They are subject to interpretation and every Court seems to take a different meaning from whatever one is in question.

The wording may have been adequate at a time when the only people actually reading the Constitution were the relatively few who actually had an education. Today we have far more educated people, with differing views of what the "enumerated powers" actually are--or aren't.

protias · Oct 22, 2011

amlevin said:
It might also give visitors the ability to defend themselves when a "New Yorker" who doesn't give a rip about any laws tries to threaten them with violence.

Here's just one such incident http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-04-24/news/29484693_1_cell-phone-brooklyn-street-cousin

Here are NYC's crime Stats http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/crime_statistics/cscity.pdf

38,498 Murders, Rapes, Robberies, and Felonious Assaults in 2010 and that's just in NYC. 105 major crimes against people every day. (sure makes me want to visit NYC "unarmed")

You bet the "politicians" in NY know what's best for their people. Apparently they feel they should be left defenseless.

As for an increase in gun violence against "New Yorkers", they seem to be doing quite well against themselves. Maybe when they take on a few tourists that are legally able to defend themselves some of the "offenders" might be history.

I don't even like being in Milwaukee (even when armed), I surely have no desire to visit NY.

sudden valley gunner · Oct 23, 2011

amlevin said:
The Fed's think they are. The issue is nobody seems to agree just exactly what the "enumerated" powers are. They are subject to interpretation and every Court seems to take a different meaning from whatever one is in question.

The wording may have been adequate at a time when the only people actually reading the Constitution were the relatively few who actually had an education. Today we have far more educated people, with differing views of what the "enumerated powers" actually are--or aren't.

Disagree, because they are numerated and specifically spelled out. And if any one would use their education to actually read the other writing the intent is all there spelled out. It doesn't take a higher education to understand the constitution. It does seem that the "educated" don't like the simplicity of the constitution and how it disagrees with their fascist/socialist desires.

You can't have a differing view of what is specifically spelled out. It is not a "living breathing" document. But you see the "conservatives" don't want it to mean what it is supposed to mean either or their brand of fascism/socialism is exposed for what it is.

And on education I again disagree, people are not educated about the constitution and what it means. They are educated to buy the bullcrap people pass of as "rights" of the government (government has no rights). They are hence uneducated I for my part do all I can to point younger generation into the right direction. Thankfully we have folks like Ron Paul who are doing the same.

Difdi · Oct 23, 2011

Grapeshot said:
What he said was:

"Specifically, it would force nearly every state in the Union -- including those, like New York, with reasonable restrictions on firearm ownership and transport, that are essential to public safety -- to abandon its own gun laws by allowing out-of-state visitors to carry concealed firearms based on their home state's less safe laws, rather than those of the state they are entering."

I've always wondered how one reasonably restricts exercise of an unalienable right.

lockman · Oct 23, 2011

DCKilla said:
"CCW reciprocity" sounds like a state issue. Feds should keep their hands off. The right to carry is already set in a constitutional amendment anyways.

UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE. I.
Section. 10.

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

Emphasis is mine

If Congress wants to nullify reciprocal carry agreements between the states it has the authority granted by the people to do so.

lockman · Oct 23, 2011

Grapeshot said:
What he said was:

"Specifically, it would force nearly every state in the Union -- including those, like New York, with draconian restrictions on firearm ownership and transport, that are detrimental to public safety -- to abandon its own gun laws prohibiting out-of-state visitors to carry concealed firearms based on their host state's less safe laws."

I fixed the State Attorney General's statement to reflect the truth, and the simple answer Mr. State Attorney General, is a resounding YES!

Grapeshot · Oct 23, 2011

Originally Posted by Grapeshot

What he said was:

"Specifically, it would force nearly every state in the Union -- including those, like New York, with draconian restrictions on firearm ownership and transport, that are detrimental to public safety -- to abandon its own gun laws prohibiting out-of-state visitors to carry concealed firearms based on their host state's less safe laws."

lockman said:
I fixed the State Attorney General's statement to reflect the truth, and the simple answer Mr. State Attorney General, is a resounding YES!

Now that says what most (all?) here were thinking when we read his unadulterated statement. :lol:

NY Atty Gen 'warns' about national CCW reciprocity

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Opt-Out Members

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

State Researcher

State Researcher

Legendary Warrior