Support H.R. 822, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011

[John Canuck]

Really? IN NV it doesn't.

Good. I'm glad to hear it. I see what I typed wasn't exactly what I meant. I'll correct it. Thanks.

 

[Wc]

No Way!!! Aren't you out of your minds?!?

I prefer the states to work this out; i.e. just like the driver's license reciprocity. There are only handful of states that don't honor mine. The feds don't need to be involved in this.

Started in July 1989, all local governments including States are prohibition to rules and regulations the Interstate, intrastate, vehicles, highway, road, taxes and fees without an approved from Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC). In May 1995, ICC had been abolished and it is transfers half to U.S. DOT and other half to Surface Transportation Broad (STB) included ships for both taxes and fees. Once again, nothings by the States, counties and cities without approved from Federal preemption laws.

Reason, due to undue burden from State to State, or counties and/or cities.

For example, your vehicle can't have four head lights when cross the State line, must have three mirrors, wrong color of school bus is on field trips may also need to be cover the School Bus signs, etc, etc and etc. Think about it, trucker from NYC to LA... how many States road taxes, counties, cities tags fees and how many paper works for driver before crossing? Plus! How many books of rules and regulations the driver have to carry it or how much minds can you remember it???

Not to be confusing with Federal Interstate Commerce is still alive for both business and individual person problem. For example, the person from Texas couldn't rent apartment in San Diego because she isn't from local area and/or not work here.

HEY YOU! This isn't about the feds?!? It about our freedom movement under our U.S. Constitution and which parts you don’t understands the 14th Amendment? Without this, your State cans outright ban on firearms and regardless about you and your family and friends' life. Unless you are an State's law enforcement.

 

[wrightme]

Started in July 1989, all local governments including States are prohibition to rules and regulations the Interstate, intrastate, vehicles, highway, road, taxes and fees without an approved from Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC). In May 1995, ICC had been abolished and it is transfers half to U.S. DOT and other half to Surface Transportation Broad (STB) included ships for both taxes and fees. Once again, nothings by the States, counties and cities without approved from Federal preemption laws.

Reason, due to undue burden from State to State, or counties and/or cities.

For example, your vehicle can't have four head lights when cross the State line, must have three mirrors, wrong color of school bus is on field trips may also need to be cover the School Bus signs, etc, etc and etc. Think about it, trucker from NYC to LA... how many States road taxes, counties, cities tags fees and how many paper works for driver before crossing? Plus! How many books of rules and regulations the driver have to carry it or how much minds can you remember it???

Not to be confusing with Federal Interstate Commerce is still alive for both business and individual person problem. For example, the person from Texas couldn't rent apartment in San Diego because she isn't from local area and/or not work here.

HEY YOU! This isn't about the feds?!? It about our freedom movement under our U.S. Constitution and which parts you don’t understands the 14th Amendment? Without this, your State cans outright ban on firearms and regardless about you and your family and friends' life. Unless you are an State's law enforcement.

Er, what?

Most of your post is incomprehensible.

 

[Wc]

WOW! I still don't get it... there is no common sense here all.

It's still only 2.

The entire "We the People" scheme has been perpetrated by Obama and his Democratic WH on the masses to say, "See? There's only two of you. You can't even get 5 signatures, much less 5,000. You're all alone. No one else agrees with you. We'll not be acting on this as you obviously don't have anywhere near the following to be anything more than a flash in the pan."

So, don't buy into it. DO NOT PLAY THEIR GAME. Even if a few of you do, they can always point to lower numbers than expected. If NO ONE bits, they'll not be able to draw conclusions at all, and the system will go bye-bye.

Let me put this in more succinct terms: It's a ploy. It's a scheme. It's a sucker-punch. It's media manipulation at its worst. It's a lost cause, a lost hope, a bear trap.

Am I making myself clear, here?

This is one carrot you DON'T want to bite, as it will only lead to destruction.

That aside, one of their principle goals is to make you think this is the only way you can convey your thoughts as citizen of the United States to those who can make a difference.

Not So!

Just write your Congressman. Don't let Obama be the spokesperson for your vote!

Look, we don't needs your analytics here and you are trying to scaring us for not to vote.

Obama or staff didn't posted it, pro-firearms did, and is need 150 signatures before in order to be publicly searchable on WhiteHouse site.

Maybe you're hurting the fly.

Bottom line is just won't hurting you to sending a message of supporters at largest.

Make your voted is counting of our rights and no matter what's happened. Get it?

That's all folks!

 

[thebigsd]

Look, we don't needs your analytics here and you are trying to scaring us for not to vote.

Obama or staff didn't posted it, pro-firearms did, and is need 150 signatures before in order to be publicly searchable on WhiteHouse site.

Maybe you're hurting the fly.

Bottom line is just won't hurting you to sending a message of supporters at largest.

Make your voted is counting of our rights and no matter what's happened. Get it?

That's all folks!

As I noted in the other thread, read this out loud. It doesn't make sense.

We do not want the federal government involved in our gun rights. Leave it to the states. One bad federal law can hurt us all. A couple bad states do not taint everyone.

 

[Wc]

You got it backward

As I noted in the other thread, read this out loud. It doesn't make sense.

We do not want the federal government involved in our gun rights. Leave it to the states. One bad federal law can hurt us all. A couple bad states do not taint everyone.

Federal Government wasn't involved our 2A but some judges and mobs agenies did.

The States did disregarding the 14A for our Bill of Rights and some States did following it.

You are right about "A couple bad states do not taint everyone" ???... just likes in California or DC didn't taint anyone?

Oh, come on!?!:banghead:

 

[tim12232]

Look, we don't needs your analytics here and you are trying to scaring us for not to vote.

Obama or staff didn't posted it, pro-firearms did, and is need 150 signatures before in order to be publicly searchable on WhiteHouse site.

Maybe you're hurting the fly.

Bottom line is just won't hurting you to sending a message of supporters at largest.

Make your voted is counting of our rights and no matter what's happened. Get it?

That's all folks!

English......HOLY CRAP!!!!!!! You are not getting it, your writing skills are that of a foreigner 7 year old.

 

[wrightme]

Your posts are simply not comprehensible.

To put it plainly, your sentences do NOT make sense. I suggest that you tell someone else what you are trying to say, and have THEM put sentences together for you. Because, your meaning isn't getting into your posts.

Federal Government wasn't involved our 2A but some judges and mobs agenies did.

The States did disregarding the 14A for our Bill of Rights and some States did following it.

You are right about "A couple bad states do not taint everyone" ???... just likes in California or DC didn't taint anyone?

Oh, come on!?!:banghead:

 

[okboomer]

(Shhh... I know, I'm trying to getting them to paying attention)

Insulting, dishonest, and generally stupid move on your part.

 

[okboomer]

Look, we don't needs your analytics here and you are trying to scaring us for not to vote.

Look, this is the second time you have said for someone to not comment on a topic.

I don't know who you think you are, but this is a member's only forum and everyone has the right to voice their opinion about anything posted here.

I am not a moderator, but if I see you tell anyone else to "shut up" I will flag your posts for moderator investigation which could lead to expulsion for you.

If you don't like someone's opinion, then take your own advice and move on without comment, or be an adult about it and have a debate/discussion about the merits of the differing points of view.

 

[thebigsd]

Federal Government wasn't involved our 2A but some judges and mobs agenies did.

The States did disregarding the 14A for our Bill of Rights and some States did following it.

You are right about "A couple bad states do not taint everyone" ???... just likes in California or DC didn't taint anyone?

Oh, come on!?!:banghead:

I said "do not taint EVERYONE". For example: The negative laws of California do not apply to me in Virginia. A negative federal law would affect me.

It appears that you have just as much trouble reading as you do writing.

 

[mrjam2jab]

HAHAHAHAHA......nope! I believe if the state has no conceal carry at all, they wont have the right, same as Hawaii I believe.

IL will be the only state where carry would be prohibited. DC as well, but that's another issue.

I don't support a national standard for anything. Things are getting better for carriers without the feds involvement. Lets just keep things going and leave the feds out; they screw up most things in the long run. If congress wants to help Lawful carriers, they can eliminate the GFSZ illegal infringement and prohibition on bearing arms.

That would be HR 2613...needs sponsors.

To a degree, yes. Just look at how they abandoned OC in Florida this past year. Or how they generally support legislation that requires training; training that very often benefits the NRA. Now they do some good for advancing the 2A, but it generally only promotes the 2A in ways that help their business.

.

and they completely trashed NH's castle doctrine.

I prefer the states to work this out; i.e. just like the driver's license reciprocity. There are only handful of states that don't honor mine. The feds don't need to be involved in this.

My LTCF is only good in 26 states...so I could use all the help I can get.

 

[Redbaron007]

Started in July 1989, all local governments including States are prohibition to rules and regulations the Interstate, intrastate, vehicles, highway, road, taxes and fees without an approved from Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC). In May 1995, ICC had been abolished and it is transfers half to U.S. DOT and other half to Surface Transportation Broad (STB) included ships for both taxes and fees. Once again, nothings by the States, counties and cities without approved from Federal preemption laws.

Reason, due to undue burden from State to State, or counties and/or cities.

For example, your vehicle can't have four head lights when cross the State line, must have three mirrors, wrong color of school bus is on field trips may also need to be cover the School Bus signs, etc, etc and etc. Think about it, trucker from NYC to LA... how many States road taxes, counties, cities tags fees and how many paper works for driver before crossing? Plus! How many books of rules and regulations the driver have to carry it or how much minds can you remember it???

Not to be confusing with Federal Interstate Commerce is still alive for both business and individual person problem. For example, the person from Texas couldn't rent apartment in San Diego because she isn't from local area and/or not work here.

HEY YOU! This isn't about the feds?!? It about our freedom movement under our U.S. Constitution and which parts you don’t understands the 14th Amendment? Without this, your State cans outright ban on firearms and regardless about you and your family and friends' life. Unless you are an State's law enforcement.

Blah..blah...blah!!!

Interstate commercial activities are different than personal. Truckers are licensed under a CDL. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) dictates this.

That's about the only thing I can make out of your gibberish.

 

[Wc]

What's National Standards?

Blah..blah...blah!!!

Interstate commercial activities are different than personal. Truckers are licensed under a CDL. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) dictates this.

That's about the only thing I can make out of your gibberish.

Wrong, two years before July 1989, a warning notice from ICC to all local governments included States. ICC is a king of the roads to enforce them to cleaning up their messing by start using the "National Standards" rules for everyone a rights to sharing the road under the equal protection clause from "14th Amendment".

All vehicles, not just the commercial (I didn't used that word) and the drivers' following the same rules of law in all States.

Meaning the same DMV book for any class of driver's exam and test, same VC and only one licensed from any State. And not per State.

All LEO will following the same VC.

Which part do you don't understands on FMCSA? The answer is CarriER are not dictates the master road. Only DOT and STB can... all under the FHWA.

Aircraft isn't handle by the States, only FAA can is a "Federal" licensed also for train and ship.

Now, the same situation for CCW have to be done by "National Standards" for all States' to working together for the final H.R.822 draft under both 14A and all Amendments included the Bill of Rights.

Of course I don't like this because of our 2A rights is under the 14A and which is NO different than our 1A.

Remember, there is no Amendment for the aircraft, ship, train and vehicles.

But our 2A can do, by that words and anywhere in U.S.A. for both CCW and LOC.

 

[Daylen]

Wrong, two years before July 1989, a warning notice from ICC to all local governments included States. ICC is a king of the roads to enforce them to cleaning up their messing by start using the "National Standards" rules for everyone a rights to sharing the road under the equal protection clause from "14th Amendment".

All vehicles, not just the commercial (I didn't used that word) and the drivers' following the same rules of law in all States.

Meaning the same DMV book for any class of driver's exam and test, same VC and only one licensed from any State. And not per State.

All LEO will following the same VC.

Which part do you don't understands on FMCSA? The answer is CarriER are not dictates the master road. Only DOT and STB can... all under the FHWA.

Aircraft isn't handle by the States, only FAA can is a "Federal" licensed also for train and ship.

Now, the same situation for CCW have to be done by "National Standards" for all States' to working together for the final H.R.822 draft under both 14A and all Amendments included the Bill of Rights.

Of course I don't like this because of our 2A rights is under the 14A and which is NO different than our 1A.

Remember, there is no Amendment for the aircraft, ship, train and vehicles.

But our 2A can do, by that words and anywhere in U.S.A. for both CCW and LOC.

The second Amendment has nothing to do with permits or licensing. Permits and licenses are for privileges, not rights. Keeping and bearing arms is not a privilege, it is a right. Any involvement of the federal government in such a right would be detrimental right now because it is not well established that the feds can not infringe upon such a right. This bill is like trying to hire someone who is mugging you to be your body guard when you go to dinner later.

 

[Redbaron007]

The second Amendment has nothing to do with permits or licensing. Permits and licenses are for privileges, not rights. Keeping and bearing arms is not a privilege, it is a right. Any involvement of the federal government in such a right would be detrimental right now because it is not well established that the feds can not infringe upon such a right. This bill is like trying to hire someone who is mugging you to be your body guard when you go to dinner later.

Very well stated!

My main concern is this bill does treat our 2A as a privilege, not a right.

Thx!

 

[mrjam2jab]

Very well stated!

My main concern is this bill does treat our 2A as a privilege, not a right.

Thx!

But it does treat it more of a right than many states are.

 

[Daylen]

But it does treat it more of a right than many states are.

No it treats it as a privilege as opposed to a dirty crime.

 

[John Canuck]

But it does treat it more of a right than many states are.

It does no such thing. Sticking the word "right" in the bill's title does nothing to advance the actual right to bear arms.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I agree strongly with xdshooter. Let's keep trying to bring the states together with more and more reciprocity or recognition agreements. At some point, the crazyquilt can be fixed by the states, just like drivers licences were. I agee we HAVE to keep the feds out of this. They cannot be trusted with such an important freedom. History has shown that it only takes one really anti administration, and the "National Standards" quickly can become "National Millstones". Sorry, not for me!