National call to action S.845

[Dispatcher]

imported post

milkmanjoe wrote:

And I will quote my father from forty years ago when he said:

"Joey, always remember, if the Federal Government ran the Sahara Desert there would be a shortage of sand".

I have believed this since I was eight years old and it keeps ringing true. I am against the fed taking over concealed permits. They will find so many ways to gather information and not issue permits to current holders. Once they get our medical records most of us won't be able to carry. Any little divot in our lives and permits will be revoked or not issued. The current system works fine, other states will come on board as people fight for their rights, and most of us will never, ever need to carry in all 50 states.

Congress will not be "taking over" CCW permits. All they are doing is forcing states to recognize the permits issued lawfully by other states.

This isn't another gimmick law hiding behind the specter of interstate commerce. Congress has full constitutional authority to pass this law as well they should.

States have differing traffic laws and differing requirements for getting drivers licenses yet they are forced to recognize each others' licenses and you do not even have a "right" to drive a car.

You have the right to carry a loaded firearm for protection so why should states not be forced to recognize right-to-carry permits?

 

[glocknroll]

imported post

mark edward marchiafava wrote:

All this talk about CC permits on a site titled open carry.
What is needed is not MORE "laws," but fewer "laws."

I'll go along with that. What would be best would be for all of the states to just the recognize the Constitution as the supreme law of the land and leave lawful gun carriers alone.

I would like for it to pass if for no other reason than to prevent my paranoia meter from pegging every time I drive across the Potomac River bridge to visit my wife's family (and because I would get to watch my super liberal in-laws choke when they found out that I was legally carrying a firearm in their "safe" state.)

Something to think about: if the "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution will now apply to concealed carry, won't it also apply to marriage liscences? Yes I know, it already does, unless the marriage is between those of the same sex. The Defense of Marriage Act would, by default, be unconstitutional. Understand that I am straight, and really don't care if people of the same sex can claim to be married. It won't change my marriage to my wife one iota. But are ya'll prepared for your state to be required to recognize gay marriage?


Edit: for the sake of clarity, my wife's family lives in the People's Republik of Maryland

 

[milkmanjoe]

imported post

Dispatcher wrote:

milkmanjoe wrote:

And I will quote my father from forty years ago when he said:

"Joey, always remember, if the Federal Government ran the Sahara Desert there would be a shortage of sand".

I have believed this since I was eight years old and it keeps ringing true. I am against the fed taking over concealed permits. They will find so many ways to gather information and not issue permits to current holders. Once they get our medical records most of us won't be able to carry. Any little divot in our lives and permits will be revoked or not issued. The current system works fine, other states will come on board as people fight for their rights, and most of us will never, ever need to carry in all 50 states.

Congress will not be "taking over" CCW permits. All they are doing is forcing states to recognize the permits issued lawfully by other states.

This isn't another gimmick law hiding behind the specter of interstate commerce. Congress has full constitutional authority to pass this law as well they should.

States have differing traffic laws and differing requirements for getting drivers licenses yet they are forced to recognize each others' licenses and you do not even have a "right" to drive a car.

You have the right to carry a loaded firearm for protection so why should states not be forced to recognize right-to-carry permits?

"Forcing" a state to recognize permits will produce all of the bad feelings we don't need. Everyone here has watched states come on board on their own and watch their permits become valid in more and more states. And I will never, ever compare a driver's license to a weapon license. I would rather see states that don't test and issue come on board on their own and begin to work within the existingsystem. I can't wait to see who Obama will appoint as a "concealed weaponczar". The right to pass this law is one thing, if it will have a positive effect is another.

 

[IDAHO COWBOY]

imported post

Dispatcher wrote:

IDAHO COWBOY wrote:

National Park Carry not set to happen until FEB 2010, Congress could change something before then to stop or limit this carry. This current National Carry will pass no doubt now then in the future the feds will change it making it more restrictive for states like MT ID WY UT SD ND etc to be more like the Eastern Block Commie States and the Commie Left West Coast or just prohibit conceal carry all together by the feds like he says he can give and he can take away, remember changing speed limits, remember seat belt laws - the feds just threaten to not to give the states fed funds for highways until they changed their state laws of course of the states governors, attorney generals, legislator bowed down to the feds and changed the state laws. Both of these Bills were attached to something or another to pass - it's all a big game and part of the big plan.

Another part of the plan the Governor's Association just told the feds they do not need another stimulus package now, but they did not say they would not need one later.

Another part of the plan was that 33 State Attorneys supported the NRA in the SCOTUS case, all fluff, all show, all as some of you say "eye candy". Just like National Park Carry and National Carry is just "eye candy'.

Another part of the plan, yes the so-called National Health will be passed.

So what do the democrat and spineless republicans get out of these two bills of National Carry and National Park Carry ? SOTOMAYOR in the SCOTUS, then these democrat and spineless republicans have a majority on the SCOTUS, then anytime on the future from SEP 2009 & on they can drop the Carry Nationwide and in the Parks (the vote for SOTOMAYOR is in AUG 2009).

Also remember, Congress can pass it, but the President can Veto it. So Congress passes it then SOTOMAYOR is approved by Congress then President just veto's it or let's it become law to later modified or stop the law ---- guess how - the SCOTUS with SOTOMAYOR on it declares National Park and National Carry UN-constitutional.

then the Gun Carry People have nothing and democrats / spineless republicans have a majority on the SCOTUS which is why ? they are all (democrats / spineless republicans) worried about the latino/mexican/brown (these are the words SOTOMAYOR uses Capt Crunch) votes in the elections of 2010 and 2012

Think about Now who is in Power and who Controls the Admin Branch and Congress plus will soon control SCOTUS, figured the answer out yet ? So why would they give us National Park and Nation Carry ? as above it is all a big game and part of the big plan.

From the letters received back from Senators in even WY ID MT in the last few days by several of us, SOTOMAYOR will be approved for the SCOTUS, it is cut and dry.

NRA, SAF, GOA - will shortly look like hero's "to you" for the National Park and Nation Carry laws, but this will go away in the near. Plus they get to keep fighting supposedly for us - their job security.

As far as I am concerned State's Rights are being lost and the feds are becoming more powerful - which as our Founder's would tell us is not a good thing.

So supporters of this, you will go quietly into the night like sheep lead by the Judas Goats that speak with a Forked Tongue of a Snake. Many on here say they support the 2A but then they themselves want restrictions on the 2A. Just like the feds lied to the Indians in the past.

Tinfoil hat.

Dispatcher let me guess you work a govt job and you live NORTHERN VA not SOUTHERN VA, and you are somewhere's below 30 years old.

Your two words show your lack of experience and history of knowledge.

1930's, the govt was suppose to be afraid of poachers so we do not have silencers today but around the world silencers are as a legal as 22 LT bolt rifle bought at gun show here. PS the NRA supported this too.

Prior to 1968, as a just turned teenage I could buy rifles shotguns and pistols in a hardware store with no paperwork. PS the NRA supported this too.

then some more laws in the 1980's, 1990's. How old were you when the AWB was passed in 1994, 15 years ago ?

All of this is PC crapola and deals under the table.

*************************

So why would a DEMOCRAT controlled Congress with a DEMOCRAT President support, pass, and make into lawthis Bill or Amendment ?

To protect the 2A, to protect the People, make gun owners happy ? No.

It is part of a bigger plan.

**************************

Are you a troll ?

 

[IDAHO COWBOY]

imported post

milkmanjoe wrote:

And I will quote my father from forty years ago when he said:

"Joey, always remember, if the Federal Government ran the Sahara Desert there would be a shortage of sand".

I have believed this since I was eight years old and it keeps ringing true. I am against the fed taking over concealed permits. They will find so many ways to gather information and not issue permits to current holders. Once they get our medical records most of us won't be able to carry. Any little divot in our lives and permits will be revoked or not issued. The current system works fine, other states will come on board as people fight for their rights, and most of us will never, ever need to carry in all 50 states.

My Great Grand Father, My Grand Father, and My Father all said the samething, "always remember, if the Federal Government ran the Sahara Desert there would be a shortage of sand".

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana, The Life of Reason, Volume 1, 1905

Just repeal all PEOPLE (GUN KNIFE) Control laws except the SECOND AMENDMENT, we need no more laws, then we can get rid of ATF and the IRS too, crime rate will drop then send all the Peace Officers to SEAL the borders.

 

[IDAHO COWBOY]

imported post

Dispatcher wrote:

milkmanjoe wrote:

And I will quote my father from forty years ago when he said:

"Joey, always remember, if the Federal Government ran the Sahara Desert there would be a shortage of sand".

I have believed this since I was eight years old and it keeps ringing true. I am against the fed taking over concealed permits. They will find so many ways to gather information and not issue permits to current holders. Once they get our medical records most of us won't be able to carry. Any little divot in our lives and permits will be revoked or not issued. The current system works fine, other states will come on board as people fight for their rights, and most of us will never, ever need to carry in all 50 states.

Congress will not be "taking over" CCW permits. All they are doing is forcing states to recognize the permits issued lawfully by other states.

This isn't another gimmick law hiding behind the specter of interstate commerce. Congress has full constitutional authority to pass this law as well they should.

States have differing traffic laws and differing requirements for getting drivers licenses yet they are forced to recognize each others' licenses and you do not even have a "right" to drive a car.

You have the right to carry a loaded firearm for protection so why should states not be forced to recognize right-to-carry permits?

Driver's License are agreements between the states and has nothing to do with the feds and driver's licenses is about money $$$ and the economy.

So yes State agreements work for guns too, we need no feds mettling in State Rights business.

 

[IDAHO COWBOY]

imported post

"Remember that a government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take away everything you have."

This quote has also been attributed to Davy Crockett and is consistent with his very-limited-government philosophy.

In opinion he is the best Congressman there ever has been. Research the internet for yourself.

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

IDAHO COWBOY wrote:

"Remember that a government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take away everything you have."

This quote has also been attributed to Davy Crockett and is consistent with his very-limited-government philosophy.

In opinion he is the best Congressman there ever has been. Research the internet for yourself.

Problem is Davy lost his job and therewith his ability to speak for the people or have any meaningful input into the process.

It is a shame but that's the way it happened.

Yata hey

 

[old dog]

imported post

I like this but it does put me in something of a quandary. When I think of the people in New York or Detroit or Philadelphia I don't care much for the idea of them coming down here armed -- oh hell, truth be told I don't think much of the idea of them coming down here at all.

 

[Elkad]

imported post

Alexcabbie wrote:

Brady Campaign "According to a coalition of gun-violence prevention groups, there have been three confirmed mass shootings carried out by people who had concealed-carry permits. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence reports there have been at least 19 shootings around the country involving such permit holders"

Methinks the Brady Bunch is using righteous shoots in their stats. Anyone here care to root out the lies here? We are dealing with some really common low-down skunks. Truly.:cuss:

Full brady release
http://www.bradycampaign.org/blog/?p=717

The real world is different. The fact is that too many gun owners with concealed carry permits are not "law-abiding citizens" at all.

* For example, there is Richard Poplawski, the white supremacist armed with an AK-47 who allegedly murdered three Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania police officers this past April on his front porch. Poplawski has been charged with three counts of homicide, aggravated assault, and a weapons violation. He was a concealed carry permit-holder.

* Perhaps you also recall Michael McLendon. He was the "suicide shooter" who went on a rampage through the small towns of Kinson and Samson, Alabama this past March, murdering 10 people before killing himself. He too was a concealed carry permit-holder.

* You likely do not know the name Michael Iheme. A year ago, he was charged with first-degree murder in the shooting death of his wife, Anthonia, in St. Louis Park, Minnesota. This past February, he was found guilty of second-degree murder. Anthonia Iheme had an active restraining order against her husband due to an alleged history of domestic abuse. After shooting his wife, Michael Iheme called 911 and said, "I have killed the woman that mess my life up [sic]…." He was a concealed carry permit-holder, as well.

* Then there is James Patrick Wonder. Wonder was charged last August with the first-degree murder of Donald Pettit – a federal agent with U.S. Customs and Border Protection – in Pembroke Pines, Florida. Wonder reportedly shot Pettit in the head in front of Pettit’s twelve-year-old daughter. Wonder was also a concealed carry permit-holder.

* And according to reporting released just today, there is the case of Darryl Inman who pleaded guilty to felony charges of pointing a handgun at fellow motorists during a road rage incident in Edmond, Oklahoma. Inman has been ordered to pay his victims $500 to cover counseling costs and lost wages, and is reportedly serving a 10-month deferred sentence with anger management classes. He has also been ordered to forfeit his firearms, as well as his permit to carry a concealed handgun for life.

Don't remember the exact details of any of those cases, so no idea how accurate it is. Like all good arguments, you take a truth and twist it to your own ends. 19 illegal shoots by permit holders, over a bunch of years. Vs millions of gun crimes by people prohibited from even owning one.

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

Elkad wrote:

Don't remember the exact details of any of those cases, so no idea how accurate it is. Like all good arguments, you take a truth and twist it to your own ends. 19 illegal shoots by permit holders, over a bunch of years. Vs millions of gun crimes by people prohibited from even owning one.

Don't forget the 2 - 2.5 MILLION defensive use of guns each year - most without firing a shot.

That translates to a defensive gun use once every 13 seconds !!!

In 79.7% of these gun defenses, the defender used a concealable handgun. A quarter of the gun defenses occurred in places away from the defender's home.

http://www.pulpless.com/gunclock/noframedex.html

The Brady figures pale in comparison.

Yata hey

 

[milkmanjoe]

imported post

old dog wrote:

I like this but it does put me in something of a quandary. When I think of the people in New York or Detroit or Philadelphia I don't care much for the idea of them coming down here armed -- oh hell, truth be told I don't think much of the idea of them coming down here at all.

I was born in New Jersey, and understand the "attitude" quite well. Yes, and it is widespread up there, a tough guy/kick your ass attitude. I would worry about some of them having firearms, but only cause this attitude is more pronounced in mass up there. We have tough guys here in South Carolina and Florida too, just not as dense a population of them. Exactly two weeks ago, at a gas station in Central Florida, two guys with heavy Jerseyaccents driving atricked outLexus were being very loud in the convenience store and stepped in front of me in line to pay and turned to me and grinned. Then they asked where the nearest "booze store" wasso they could buy beer for the "rest of their ride to Miami". I could only hope that they couldn't pass the requirement for firearm licensing, but then again, we can't pass judgement based on attitude. There is alot of stress in the New Jersey/New York metro area, legal guns would test that stress, but a Constitutional Right must be honored.

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

milkmanjoe wrote:

old dog wrote:

I like this but it does put me in something of a quandary. When I think of the people in New York or Detroit or Philadelphia I don't care much for the idea of them coming down here armed -- oh hell, truth be told I don't think much of the idea of them coming down here at all.

I was born in New Jersey, and understand the "attitude" quite well. Yes, and it is widespread up there, a tough guy/kick your ass attitude. I would worry about some of them having firearms, but only cause this attitude is more pronounced in mass up there. We have tough guys here in South Carolina and Florida too, just not as dense a population of them. Exactly two weeks ago, at a gas station in Central Florida, two guys with heavy Jerseyaccents driving atricked outLexus were being very loud in the convenience store and stepped in front of me in line to pay and turned to me and grinned. Then they asked where the nearest "booze store" wasso they could buy beer for the "rest of their ride to Miami". I could only hope that they couldn't pass the requirement for firearm licensing, but then again, we can't pass judgement based on attitude. There is alot of stress in the New Jersey/New York metro area, legal guns would test that stress, but a Constitutional Right must be honored.

If I see or know of someone drinking and driving on our highways, can you guess what obligation I feel?

Are you saying that legally CCing guns by honest citizens would somehow spark and explosion of violence?

This proposed amendment does not allow all of the citizen's of NJ & NY to carry a handgun - their state law would still prevail for them. It would however allow the good citizens from other states who have a permit to legally CC with a permit in NJ & NY.

Yata hey

Yata hey

 

[vbnative73]

imported post

The Senate Judiciary Subcommitee on Crime and Drugs will be having a hearing on this on Thursday at 10:30am EDT. The following Senators are on the commitee. If one of them is your senator, contact them and let them know what you think.

Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) - Chairman

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) - Ranking Member

Sen. Benjamin Cardin (D-MD)

Sen. Thomas Coburn (R-OK)

Sen. Russell Feingold (D-WI)

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) :banghead:

Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA)

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT)

Sen. Edward Kaufman (D-DE)

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)

Sen. Herbert Kohl (D-WI)

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY)

Sen. Jefferson Sessions (R-AL) :celebrate

Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA)

 

[IDAHO COWBOY]

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

IDAHO COWBOY wrote:

"Remember that a government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take away everything you have."

This quote has also been attributed to Davy Crockett and is consistent with his very-limited-government philosophy.

In opinion he is the best Congressman there ever has been. Research the internet for yourself.

Problem is Davy lost his job and therewith his ability to speak for the people or have any meaningful input into the process.

It is a shame but that's the way it happened.

Yata hey

No, it is not shame.

It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.
George S. Patton

David Crockett was his own man, could not be bought for office or money by anyone including Jackson. He stood up for what is right against any odds.

Be always sure you are right - then go ahead.

Heaven knows that I have done all that a mortal could do, to save the people, and the failure was not my fault, but the fault of others.

I have suffered my self to be politically sacrificed to save my country from ruin and disgrace and if I am never a gain elected I will have the gratification to know that I have done my duty.

I would rather be beaton and be a man than to be elected and be a little puppy dog.

I would rather be politically dead than hypocritically immortalized.

We have the right as individuals to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right to appropriate a dollar of the public money.

Be always sure you are right - then go ahead.

 

[Alexcabbie]

imported post

AND lest we forget Davy Crockett's last words to the Congress before he left:

"YOU CAN ALL GO TO HELL. I AM GOING TO TEXAS."

 

[IDAHO COWBOY]

imported post

NRA ILA,GOA, and SAF you have done some good
things over the years, but many times you have lost your
way and again you have lost your way !
Take the TROJAN HORSE BILL you are pushing on
National Right to Carry and shove it along with
you reforming ATF and Firearms Modernization.

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=5063
National Right-To-Carry Reciprocity Amendment

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=4951
and others like reforming the ATF and Firearms Modernization

If you want to do something worth doing for the USA, Constitution,
Bill of Rights, Second Amendment, and the PEOPLE, then REPEAL
not add more laws to the patchwork quilt we have now, repeal the
1968 Gun Control Act, the 1930's restrictions on Machine Guns and
Silencers all of which the NRA directly supported, in fact repeal every
gun and knife (ARMS) laws on the books at every level of government
except the Second Amendment.

We know you need something to do to justify your jobs and salary for
you and your families ! No problem with that, just do what you should
- REPEAL not to build houses of mirrors and smoke screens ! and quit
cutting deals on the side like you did on this one - Congress give us
National Carry then we will give you SOTOMAYOR and the ATF
reforms the GOVT wants.

 

[44Brent]

imported post

Idaho Cowboy appears to not be an Idaho Cowboy, but someone from the Brady group.

 

[Freeflight]

imported post

44Brent wrote:

Idaho Cowboy appears to not be an Idaho Cowboy, but someone from the Brady group.

Naw... He's Saying to Get rid of ALL GUN LAWS... Not something a Brady would say...

 

[sprat]

imported post

44Brent wrote:

Idaho Cowboy appears to not be an Idaho Cowboy, but someone from the Brady group.

I don't care where he is from, I am getting tired off it. he had made his point.

I travel a fair bit and would love to see this bill pass its a small step

how did davey crockett or patton get in this

sprat