SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    LAPD Chief warns of Apocalypse if National Concealed Carry passes-
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
LAPD Chief warns of Apocalypse if National Concealed Carry passes- Login/Join 
Not really from Vienna
Picture of arfmel
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Flashlightboy:
quote:
Originally posted by braillediver:
To think gangbangers get Concealed Carry permits is the stupidest thing I ever heard.

If you've never been fingerprinted for a crime you don't voluntarily give the police a unique identifier- your fingerprint.


You're making a very wrong assumption that all gangbangers have been fingerprinted. Where do understand that to be true? Is that some sort of universal truth where you're from?


Maybe he means that "gangbangers" who get concealed handgun permits are fingerprinted as part of the licensing procedure. Fingerprinting is part of the process here in Texas.
 
Posts: 26904 | Location: Jerkwater, Texas | Registered: January 30, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Sigforum K9 handler
Picture of jljones
posted Hide Post




www.opspectraining.com

"It's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it works out for them"



 
Posts: 37117 | Location: Logical | Registered: September 12, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Little ray
of sunshine
Picture of jhe888
posted Hide Post
Despite this prediction being made in every place that has passed a shall-issue statute, it has never come to pass.




The fish is mute, expressionless. The fish doesn't think because the fish knows everything.
 
Posts: 53122 | Location: Texas | Registered: February 10, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Gracie Allen is my
personal savior!
posted Hide Post
That's OK. Now there is hard, unquestionably relevant data to prove the prediction is nonsense. Every time someone makes that prediction now, they're basically putting a baseball on top of one of those tall yellow tees and telling us to whack it out of the park.
 
Posts: 27293 | Location: Deep in the heart of the brush country, and closing on that #&*%!?! roadrunner. Really. | Registered: February 05, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of sgalczyn
posted Hide Post
Every Cali politician should be absolutely "petrified" the constituents they've screwed for decades could now be legally armed......accountability is a bitch!


"No matter where you go - there you are"
 
Posts: 4577 | Location: Eastern PA-Berks/Lehigh Valley | Registered: January 03, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Tinker Sailor Soldier Pie
Picture of Balzé Halzé
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Flashlightboy:
The key problem, as you know, is that CA is one of only a couple of states that doesn't have the right to bear arms in their state consitution and hell would freeze over before something like ever happened here.


I've never quite understood how this squares with the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution. I get the idea of federalism and State's rights and all but...ok, never mind, I don't really get it.

How is it that the right to bear arms isn't guaranteed in the State of California? I'm sure it's written down somewhere, but I'm just not in the mood to go find it at this time of night.


~Alan

Acta Non Verba
NRA Life Member (Patron)
God, Family, Guns, Country

Men will fight and die to protect women... because women protect everything else. ~Andrew Klavan

"Once there was only dark. If you ask me, light is winning." ~Rust Cohle
 
Posts: 30408 | Location: Elv. 7,000 feet, Utah | Registered: October 29, 2012Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Gracie Allen is my
personal savior!
posted Hide Post
It's guaranteed under the US Constitution to the degree the 2d Amendment applies (sigh - is applied by the courts). State constitutions provide another layer of controls on activity by the state government beyond what the US Constitution provides - or not, if the state constitution is silent.
 
Posts: 27293 | Location: Deep in the heart of the brush country, and closing on that #&*%!?! roadrunner. Really. | Registered: February 05, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Move Up or
Move Over
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Flashlightboy


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Can't see the forest for the trees... in spite of multiple studies with irrefutable evidence you still spout the party line. I've got a lot of friends and co-workers in whackyland and they all spout the nonsense of the brainwashed.

Mark
 
Posts: 4954 | Location: middle Tennessee | Registered: October 28, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Irksome Whirling Dervish
Picture of Flashlightboy
posted Hide Post
My perceptions and thoughts come from living here and seeing the nonsense spouted everyday. There is no towing the brainwashed party line as you suggest but instead, life is different than you think it is in LA.

On a working note, once the salivating stops from the idea of national reciprocity, it quite simply possesses hurdles that are not overcome by votes in Washington. What is the compelling federal interest, expressed in constitutional terms, that prempts to the states from enacting their own laws on which states to recognize for CCW?

This isn't a 2d A issue but rather where in the Constitution does it preempt the states from acting on this issue? If you can give me the path I'll certainly listen but I doubt there is an overt one.

Seems that this more of a state's rights issue left to the states more than anything else. Awfully convenient to have a national reciprocity law but I don't know where the feds are given that power.
 
Posts: 4076 | Location: "You can't just go to Walmart with a gift card and get a new brother." Janice Serrano | Registered: May 03, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Ammoholic
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by arfmel:
quote:
Originally posted by Flashlightboy:
quote:
Originally posted by braillediver:
To think gangbangers get Concealed Carry permits is the stupidest thing I ever heard.

If you've never been fingerprinted for a crime you don't voluntarily give the police a unique identifier- your fingerprint.


You're making a very wrong assumption that all gangbangers have been fingerprinted. Where do understand that to be true? Is that some sort of universal truth where you're from?


Maybe he means that "gangbangers" who get concealed handgun permits are fingerprinted as part of the licensing procedure. Fingerprinting is part of the process here in Texas.

What he means is that if you are a gangbanger who has *not* been printed and you have a brain, you may not be anxious to get printed as part of the process of getting a CCW. Flashlight boy appears to have misread.
 
Posts: 6919 | Location: Lost, but making time. | Registered: February 23, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Irksome Whirling Dervish
Picture of Flashlightboy
posted Hide Post
Wouldn't be the first time and if so, as it appears, I do apologize.
 
Posts: 4076 | Location: "You can't just go to Walmart with a gift card and get a new brother." Janice Serrano | Registered: May 03, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I've got my CCW in NorCal - an 8 hour class and a quick qualification at the range. My county has handed them out fairly easy and painless by CA standards. In neighboring Sacramento county, the previous sheriff was stingy. He was succeeded by the new sheriff who handed out permits like candy - something like 4000 in his first term. Oddly enough Sac Co hasn't experienced horrific crime from CCW holders. Odd uh.

I see flashlightboy's points as a fellow CA.

Beck is a total tool. He's a bureaucrat through and through.


P229
 
Posts: 3825 | Location: Sacramento, CA | Registered: November 21, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
I believe in the
principle of
Due Process
Picture of JALLEN
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Flashlightboy:
My perceptions and thoughts come from living here and seeing the nonsense spouted everyday. There is no towing the brainwashed party line as you suggest but instead, life is different than you think it is in LA.

On a working note, once the salivating stops from the idea of national reciprocity, it quite simply possesses hurdles that are not overcome by votes in Washington. What is the compelling federal interest, expressed in constitutional terms, that prempts to the states from enacting their own laws on which states to recognize for CCW?

This isn't a 2d A issue but rather where in the Constitution does it preempt the states from acting on this issue? If you can give me the path I'll certainly listen but I doubt there is an overt one.

Seems that this more of a state's rights issue left to the states more than anything else. Awfully convenient to have a national reciprocity law but I don't know where the feds are given that power.


Enforcing a fundamental Constitutional right. The BOR applies to the states via the 14th Amendment.

Pretty straight forward.




Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me.

When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson

"Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown
 
Posts: 48369 | Location: Texas hill country | Registered: July 04, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Little ray
of sunshine
Picture of jhe888
posted Hide Post
The second amendment applies to the states. As with all the rights, the 2d amendment right isn't completely unfettered (there are even limits on the 1st amendment), so the states can regulate firearms to some degree. Some might choose to regulate more than others, and as long as they don't cross the 2d amendment line, they can.

The question with reciprocity is a different question. It is a full faith and credit clause question. In general the states have to respect the acts of other states. But that doesn't mean the states have to have the exact same laws. So, if you are married in Texas, it counts in Maine. But Maine could legalize weed and Texas doesn't have to. With firearms permits, it is more like driver's licenses. Texas doesn't make you have a Texas driver's license if you are temporarily in Texas, but if you stay here, you have to get one. But, being the Federalist that I am, I don't think the feds should force the states to observe each other's CCL laws. I think the states know best how to regulate for themselves.

That doesn't mean I think New York's CCL laws pass muster under the 2d amendment. But that isn't the same question.




The fish is mute, expressionless. The fish doesn't think because the fish knows everything.
 
Posts: 53122 | Location: Texas | Registered: February 10, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Irksome Whirling Dervish
Picture of Flashlightboy
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by jhe888:
The second amendment applies to the states. As with all the rights, the 2d amendment right isn't completely unfettered (there are even limits on the 1st amendment), so the states can regulate firearms to some degree. Some might choose to regulate more than others, and as long as they don't cross the 2d amendment line, they can.

The question with reciprocity is a different question. It is a full faith and credit clause question. In general the states have to respect the acts of other states. But that doesn't mean the states have to have the exact same laws. So, if you are married in Texas, it counts in Maine. But Maine could legalize weed and Texas doesn't have to. With firearms permits, it is more like driver's licenses. Texas doesn't make you have a Texas driver's license if you are temporarily in Texas, but if you stay here, you have to get one. But, being the Federalist that I am, I don't think the feds should force the states to observe each other's CCL laws. I think the states know best how to regulate for themselves.

That doesn't mean I think New York's CCL laws pass muster under the 2d amendment. But that isn't the same question.


That's exactly my point. Each state may enact their own laws to achieve compliance with a federal law or the constitution but the laws in each state don't have to be the same so long as the overall general scheme or law is recognized. That's why I don't think a national reciprocity bill will work or can pass consitutional muster.

The national reciprocity idea is a furtherance of many similar ideas - national recognition of gay marriage is one such area.
 
Posts: 4076 | Location: "You can't just go to Walmart with a gift card and get a new brother." Janice Serrano | Registered: May 03, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Peace through
superior firepower
Picture of parabellum
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Flashlightboy:
The national reciprocity idea is a furtherance of many similar ideas - national recognition of gay marriage is one such area.
Good grief. Man, I just don't know about you sometimes.


____________________________________________________

"I am your retribution." - Donald Trump, speech at CPAC, March 4, 2023
 
Posts: 107576 | Registered: January 20, 2000Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Irksome Whirling Dervish
Picture of Flashlightboy
posted Hide Post
Well as jhe said, it's a full faith and credit argument and that's the same argument made with national recognition of gay marriages from a handful of states.


We're not ever going to date each other because you just don't get me. It's OK that we're not muy sympatico.
 
Posts: 4076 | Location: "You can't just go to Walmart with a gift card and get a new brother." Janice Serrano | Registered: May 03, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Ammoholic
posted Hide Post
I really like the idea of all states recognizing all other states Carry Permits like they do Drivers Licenses. I'm not so hot about the Federal government being involved in forcing that recognition.
 
Posts: 6919 | Location: Lost, but making time. | Registered: February 23, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Political Cynic
Picture of nhtagmember
posted Hide Post
the 'Chief' doesn't get out much - they probably keep him pretty close to home being a political hack...he must be absolutely terrified if he ever travels to Nevada or Arizona...all those guns...

yet he's never been shot, and all the hand-wringing and doom and gloom predictions have never come to pass

hey Chief, here's a piece of advice for ya...there are about 225 million guns in this country with about a trillion rounds of ammo - if we were a problem you would know it by now.

suck it up snowflake



[B] Against ALL enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC


 
Posts: 53177 | Location: Tucson Arizona | Registered: January 16, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Tinker Sailor Soldier Pie
Picture of Balzé Halzé
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by nhtagmember:

...there are about 225 million guns in this country ...


That number sounds very low.


~Alan

Acta Non Verba
NRA Life Member (Patron)
God, Family, Guns, Country

Men will fight and die to protect women... because women protect everything else. ~Andrew Klavan

"Once there was only dark. If you ask me, light is winning." ~Rust Cohle
 
Posts: 30408 | Location: Elv. 7,000 feet, Utah | Registered: October 29, 2012Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3 4 5 6  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    LAPD Chief warns of Apocalypse if National Concealed Carry passes-

© SIGforum 2024