More on Defeating HR 822

[mikeb302000]

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-10-17/news/chi-111017wagner_briefs_1_gun-laws-laws-and-honor-speed-limit">Karen Wagner, Rolling Meadows, had this to say:

We don't allow visitors who may come from a state with a higher speed limit to ignore Illinois' speed limit. Imagine if we extended "home state" rules concerning divorce and medical marijuana to visitors to our state?

This bill should not become law. Proponents of relaxed gun laws are usually staunch supporters of states' rights. They should be consistent. Each state should have the right to demand that all visitors obey its particular laws, unless they are superseded by federal laws.]/div]

How many times have we heard those bogus, biased gun-rights boys compare Concealed Carry reciprocity to driving licenses being honored in other states than your own?

Well, Karen Wagner shut that one right down. As usual the pro gun crowd try to slip nonsensical arguments into the mix. The proper comparison is what she pointed out that your home speed limits are not honored when you visit another state with your driver's license.

And better yet is what she pointed out about the hypocritical flip-flopping they do with regards to states' rights.

What's your opinion? Are we going to have any trouble defeating HR 822?

Please leave a comment.
http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/">(cross posted at Mikeb302000)

[Rene Descartes]

1. "Proponents of relaxed gun laws are usually staunch supporters of states' rights."

They should be consistent. Each state should have the right to demand that all visitors obey its particular laws, unless they are superseded by federal laws.

Proponents of relaxed gun laws should know that states do not have rights--they have powers.

On the other hand, those who oppose relaxed gun laws should know that states do not have the power to prohibit their citizens 2nd Amendment rights.

[Hoyt]

29. Yep, if they are in a militia.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

30. Still working with that huh hoyt?

You realize that whole bullshit interpretation has been totally put to rest by Heller and McDonald, right?

No - of course you don't. Reality does not seem to ever enter your mind..

[Hoyt]

32. Yep, me and the ACLU and plenty of legal scholars. Those addicted to their guns feel differently.

http://www.aclu.org/racial-justice_prisoners-rights_drug-law-reform_immigrants-rights/second-amendment

[We_Have_A_Problem]

33. Reading your own links is a good idea

From your link:

"The ACLU disagrees with the Supreme Court's conclusion about the nature of the right protected by the Second Amendment. We do not, however, take a position on gun control itself. In our view, neither the possession of guns nor the regulation of guns raises a civil liberties issue."

What that basically means is, the ACLU really doesn't give a shit.

[Hoyt]

34. Not exactly, It means gunners' assertion that guns should be considered a civil liberty is BS.

Now, try rereading the 2nd Amendment as well in a different context. Then, run out and buy some more guns and bury them so that when the majority of people get tired of people toting guns in parks, restaurants, churches, bars, on campus, etc., you'll still have a readily available cache.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

35. That is merely the ACLU's opinion.

The fact is, the USSC (which means the final word on the subject in case you missed your civics classes) has said it is an individual and civil right.

The ACLU is nothing but a private organization. Their opinion carries zero legal weight.

As far as re-reading in a different context, what context would that be? Recognizing that it is a restriction upon GOVERNMENT, not upon the individual, the end result is the same. There is no other possible meaning unless one completely disregards logic and grammar.

[mikeb302000]

37. nothing's been put to rest

by the slimmest of margins, one single vote, those cases were won. What will happen if they're reversed in a few years with a differently balanced Supreme Court? Will you say that's right then?

[We_Have_A_Problem]

38. You keep wanting to ignore...

...the fact (and it is a fact) that all 9 justices held that it is an individual right.

That and the fact that the Supreme Court almost never reverses itself - especially on an issue that is so cut and dried.

[friendly_iconoclast]

41. I guess the USSC is blocked from the World Food Program's computers.

That might be why he hasn't read it...

[jmg257]

40. You are right - it's about the Militia...can I buy my M16 NOW?? nt

[LAGC]

44. Heller and McDonald won't be reversed.

Its settled law. Deal with it.

[rl6214]

51. The Supreme court dosen't reverse itself.

It's settled law.

[jmg257]

31. Most of us are in The Militias...so we can buy M16s, M4s & M9s now? nt

[gejohnston]

48. you can buy an M-9

pistol, it is simply a Beretta 92S.

[jmg257]

49. Been there done that....Not all are so lucky...or free... to do so.

Then there are those darn mag limits.

[GreenStormCloud]

47. You can quite beating that dead horse. It won't get up. N/T

[ileus]

2. Safety shouldn't stop at the state line.

[PavePusher]

3. What you ignore, because it doesn't support your narrative....

is that a CCW holder from Arizona would have to follow all New York laws when in New York.

The proposed bill does nothing to 'extent "home state" rules' to other states.

Were you confused, or trying to be purposefully misleading?

[beevul]

4. What unthinking toolish comments from Karen wagner.

"We don't allow visitors who may come from a state with a higher speed limit to ignore Illinois' speed limit. Imagine if we extended "home state" rules concerning divorce and medical marijuana to visitors to our state?"

I'm quite sure their license to drive is honored, however.


"How many times have we heard those bogus, biased gun-rights boys compare Concealed Carry reciprocity to driving licenses being honored in other states than your own?"

Whats bogus or biased about such comparisons? It is a DIRECT parallel. Or did you just mean bogus and biased becaue just such parallels go against your against your views?

Why should they honor one license but not the other mikey?

That IS what youre supporting here, isn't it?

[jmg257]

5. Hmm...if HR822 passes, wouldn't IT be a federal law that supersedes state laws?

At which point she would apparently be OK with it.

BTW, has she actually read it?

"...
‘Sec. 926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms
‘(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, related to the carrying or transportation of firearms, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and who is carrying a government-issued photographic identification document and a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, in any State, other than the State of residence of the person, that-
‘(1) has a statute that allows residents of the State to obtain licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms; or
‘(2) does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the State for lawful purposes.

‘(b) A person carrying a concealed handgun under this section shall be permitted to carry a handgun subject to the same conditions or limitations that apply to residents of the State who have permits issued by the State or are otherwise lawfully allowed to do so by the State.

‘(c) In a State that allows the issuing authority for licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms to impose restrictions on the carrying of firearms by individual holders of such licenses or permits, a firearm shall be carried according to the same terms authorized by an unrestricted license or permit issued to a resident of the State.

‘(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt any provision of State law with respect to the issuance of licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms.
..."


What exactly is she (and you) yapping about??

Wondering - does section (c) have her(and you) worked up for some reason? Hmmm...then it may seem that Karen is fine having certain speed limits set for certain people, while others are subject to different limits? Makes ya wonder - why would anyone want such a system? (cough*elitism*cough*corporate-controlled state*cough*corruption*cough*controlthepeople*cough).


"This bill would force local authorities to know every other state's laws and honor them when coming into contact with out-of-state residents."

Calling QUITE OBVIOUS bullshit, and fear-mongering bullshit at that, on this right here..try reading the law!! It is pleasantly simple to understand.



Anway, this type of bill has never passed before, so I don't think the odds are that good it will pass this time.

[Glassunion]

7. I disagree...

"Anway, this type of bill has never passed before, so I don't think the odds are that good it will pass this time."

If I'm not mistaken the last time a similar bill was up it missed by only two votes. This time around there are more co-sponsors to the bill than votes needed for it to pass.

[jmg257]

10. Thanks for the heads up - we can hope! nt

[-..__...]

12. Actually, it did receive a majority vote in favor (in the Senate),...

however, by Senate rules agreed to at the time, the bill needed 60 votes to pass, and fell short there by a small number of votes.

Usually in a situation like that, the deck is stacked so that a Senator can vote against the party line, and still appease his/her constituents and say at least they tried.

We shall see how it goes this time around.

[GreenStormCloud]

50. Actually, there were sufficient votes for it to pass, but not enough to override a filibuster.

The bill in the House has over half the house as co-sponsors. Passage in the House should be assured. The new balance in the Senate should give it the 60 vote needed there. The only question would be Obama's signature. Likely it will be added as a rider to something that Obama wants badly enough that he will accept this rider as part of the package.

[Glassunion]

6. Holy fuck! The article is so full of bullshit... And the post is a dupe.

Karen Wagner did not shut shit down. Let's take a look at the details in the article.

A bill is being proposed in Congress that would force states to allow Americans crossing state lines to carry their home state's gun laws with them, ignoring the gun laws in the visited state.
Actually the exact fucking opposite is true. When crossing a state line the individual will HAVE TO abide by that state's laws. Their home state's laws DO NOT follow the individual.

This bill would force local authorities to know every other state's laws and honor them when coming into contact with out-of-state residents.
No it does not. Local authorities have NOTHING more to do.

We don't allow visitors who may come from a state with a higher speed limit to ignore Illinois' speed limit. Imagine if we extended "home state" rules concerning divorce and medical marijuana to visitors to our state?
And the same would hold true for those carrying firearms... They WILL HAVE TO abide by the state laws of the state they are in.

This bill should not become law. Proponents of relaxed gun laws are usually staunch supporters of states' rights. They should be consistent. Each state should have the right to demand that all visitors obey its particular laws, unless they are superseded by federal laws.
I will use Karen's own words here... "Each state should have the right to demand that all visitors obey its particular laws, unless they are superseded by federal laws." If HR822 passes, this is EXACTLY what each state can expect.


On a side note... Illinois does not allow CCW so any other state's licenses would be no good in the state and visitor's CAN NOT carry their firearms as their license is no good there. The author should have don herself a favor and actually read the bill she is complaining about.

"Are we going to have any trouble defeating HR 822?" What's this "we" crap? And yes folks will have trouble defeating it considering that it can pass based on the number of co-sponsors alone.

"The proper comparison is what she pointed out that your home speed limits are not honored when you visit another state with your driver's license." If your statement matched the facts of the bill you would have a point. But since it does not, you do not. If another state has a law surrounding the carrying of a firearm, ALL visitors to that state will HAVE TO abide by that law. Their home state's laws are NOT in effect.

What I really like is that this is categorized as "News" and not "Opinion". It looks more like a letter to the editor IMO.

[abogado]

8. I see the Black Knight is still mewling

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Knight_%28Monty_Python%29

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mikeb302000]

13. More on Defeating HR 822

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-10-17/news/chi-111017wagner_briefs_1_gun-laws-laws-and-honor-speed-limit">Karen Wagner, Rolling Meadows, had this to say:

We don't allow visitors who may come from a state with a higher speed limit to ignore Illinois' speed limit. Imagine if we extended "home state" rules concerning divorce and medical marijuana to visitors to our state?

"This bill should not become law. Proponents of relaxed gun laws are usually staunch supporters of states' rights. They should be consistent. Each state should have the right to demand that all visitors obey its particular laws, unless they are superseded by federal laws.

How many times have we heard those bogus, biased gun-rights boys compare Concealed Carry reciprocity to driving licenses being honored in other states than your own?"

Well, Karen Wagner shut that one right down. As usual the pro gun crowd try to slip nonsensical arguments into the mix. The proper comparison is what she pointed out that your home speed limits are not honored when you visit another state with your driver's license.

And better yet is what she pointed out about the hypocritical flip-flopping they do with regards to states' rights.

What's your opinion? Are we going to have any trouble defeating HR 822?

Please leave a comment.
http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/">(cross posted at Mikeb302000)

[ileus]

14. Italy has the same named bill in the works?

[Atypical Liberal]

15. If I can legally carry a concealed weapon in Texas, why not anywhere else?

If I have been vetted by the State of Texas to carry a concealed weapon in public, surrounded by hundreds of my fellow citizens, and the statistics show that I am less likely to be involved in any kind of crime, let alone firearm-related crime, than a citizen without such a permit, why should I behave any differently in another state?

[Glassunion]

16. Holy fuck! The article is so full of bullshit.

Karen Wagner did not shut shit down. Let's take a look at the details in the article.

A bill is being proposed in Congress that would force states to allow Americans crossing state lines to carry their home state's gun laws with them, ignoring the gun laws in the visited state.
Actually the exact fucking opposite is true. When crossing a state line the individual will HAVE TO abide by that state's laws. Their home state's laws DO NOT follow the individual.

This bill would force local authorities to know every other state's laws and honor them when coming into contact with out-of-state residents.
No it does not. Local authorities have NOTHING more to do.

We don't allow visitors who may come from a state with a higher speed limit to ignore Illinois' speed limit. Imagine if we extended "home state" rules concerning divorce and medical marijuana to visitors to our state?
And the same would hold true for those carrying firearms... They WILL HAVE TO abide by the state laws of the state they are in.

This bill should not become law. Proponents of relaxed gun laws are usually staunch supporters of states' rights. They should be consistent. Each state should have the right to demand that all visitors obey its particular laws, unless they are superseded by federal laws.
I will use Karen's own words here... "Each state should have the right to demand that all visitors obey its particular laws, unless they are superseded by federal laws." If HR822 passes, this is EXACTLY what each state can expect.


On a side note... Illinois does not allow CCW so any other state's licenses would be no good in the state and visitor's CAN NOT carry their firearms as their license is no good there. The author should have don herself a favor and actually read the bill she is complaining about.

"Are we going to have any trouble defeating HR 822?" What's this "we" crap? And yes folks will have trouble defeating it considering that it can pass based on the number of co-sponsors alone.

"The proper comparison is what she pointed out that your home speed limits are not honored when you visit another state with your driver's license." If your statement matched the facts of the bill you would have a point. But since it does not, you do not. If another state has a law surrounding the carrying of a firearm, ALL visitors to that state will HAVE TO abide by that law. Their home state's laws are NOT in effect.

What I really like is that this is categorized as "News" and not "Opinion". It looks more like a letter to the editor IMO.

[spin]

23. If you love gun control it is not necessary to state truth ...

Just make up crap and the main stream media will happily publish it and never challenge what you say. The linked article is a great example of that fact.

Currently Floria has reciprocity with a large number of other states but on the Florida web page that deals with this subject there is this statement:

Concealed Carry Reciprocity

***snip***

It is important for license holders to understand that when they are traveling in or through another state they are subject to the firearm laws of that state. We have provided links to the state laws or to the licensing authorities' Web page of each of our reciprocity states so that licensees can do the necessary planning and research when preparing to travel.
http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/news/concealed_carry.html

For example my Florida's concealed weapons permit allows me to carry stun guns, knives, and billy clubs concealed. Many other states would allow me only to carry a firearm.

[burf]

17. How many times are you gonna

post a thread with the same title?

[We_Have_A_Problem]

18. The big lie theory....

...tell a lie often enough, and eventually people believe it.

I think he's going the same route.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

19. I don't understand this OP

Imagine if we extended "home state" rules concerning divorce

Um. Does that mean people skipping out on child-support due in other states are granted safe haven in IL?

This bill should not become law. Proponents of relaxed gun laws are usually staunch supporters of states' rights. They should be consistent. Each state should have the right to demand that all visitors obey its particular laws,

OK, and until this bill does pass out of state permits will not be recognized and if the bill does pass IL's laws will still be obeyed.

This isn't even a cogent argument on its own terms.

[rl6214]

20. Why would WE care about defeating potential laws in italy?

Really I don't care but I think italians should have the same gun rights we have in Texas. Do you have dual citizenship since you left the US 20+ years ago and why do you care what gun laws italy has. For that matter what do you care what gun laws we have here in the US since you are/were an illegal gun owner here and then fled the country?

Hmmmmm, inquiring minds want to know.

[jmg257]

21. Hmm...if HR822 passes, wouldn't IT be a federal law that supersedes state laws?

At which point she would apparently be OK with it.

BTW, has she (and you) actually read it? Or is she just a bit...dim?

"...
‘Sec. 926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms
‘(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, related to the carrying or transportation of firearms, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and who is carrying a government-issued photographic identification document and a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, in any State, other than the State of residence of the person, that-
‘(1) has a statute that allows residents of the State to obtain licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms; or
‘(2) does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the State for lawful purposes.

‘(b) A person carrying a concealed handgun under this section shall be permitted to carry a handgun subject to the same conditions or limitations that apply to residents of the State who have permits issued by the State or are otherwise lawfully allowed to do so by the State.

‘(c) In a State that allows the issuing authority for licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms to impose restrictions on the carrying of firearms by individual holders of such licenses or permits, a firearm shall be carried according to the same terms authorized by an unrestricted license or permit issued to a resident of the State.

‘(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt any provision of State law with respect to the issuance of licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms.
..."

So what exactly is she (and you) yapping about??

Wondering - is it section (c) that has her (and you) all worked up over nothing? Hmm..."individual restrictions"...if so, then it seems that Karen is fine having certain speed limits set for certain people, while others are subject to different limits? Makes ya wonder - why would anyone want such a system? (cough*elitism*cough*corporate-controlled-state*cough*corruption*cough*controlthepeople*cough).


"This bill would force local authorities to know every other state's laws and honor them when coming into contact with out-of-state residents."

Calling QUITE OBVIOUS bullshit (and fear-mongering bullshit at that) on this right here..try reading the law!! It is pleasantly simple to understand.



Anway, I first posted in your other thread that this type of bill has never passed before, so I don't think the odds are that good it will pass this time...but I have since been informed that there is a really good chance it might, so we shall see.

[SteveM]

22. Buy 1 spam, get 2 for free! nt

[ileus]

25. free and worth twice the price...

[spin]

24. I keep seeing posts that say that while in the United States ...

you were an illegal gun owner.

What's the real deal on this?

If true, it somewhat hinders serious consideration of your position on gun control although people do change often for the better over the years.

I am more interested in your side of the story rather than using it against you. It sounds like a fascinating part of your life.

[rl6214]

52. He will not talk about his illegal gun ownership

If you ask about it he says you are harrassing him.

Facts are:

He was a self admitted illegal gun owner

He works out of the UN world food program office

He hasn't lived in the US for 20 years

He trolls the farious gun boards spewing his hatred for guns and is considered a laughing stock on those forums

[Straw Man]

45. Karen Wagner is a fool.

How many times have we heard those bogus, biased gun-rights boys compare Concealed Carry reciprocity to driving licenses being honored in other states than your own?

How, pray tell, is it different? Different states have different licensing procedures, yet they recognize each others' licenses. Check. Visitors to a state are expected to follow that state's laws -- speed limits and carry conditions. Check. Seems like a pretty sound analogy to me.

Now tell me about the justice and fairness of a situation in which you can become a felon by making a wrong turn in your car:

Now where was that turn? OK, there's a sign up ahead: WELCOME TO MASSACHUSETTS. Uh-oh... Congratulations. You are now a felon. Better make a U-turn fast.

More bullshit polemics. Highly unrecommended. Next?

[petronius]

46. To be fair to Ms. Wagner and her ill-informed LTTE, the line you quote is the OP's

contribution, not hers (the OP messed up the HTML a bit)...

[beevul]

26. There is an E and a space in the first word of the thread title that don't belong there. N/T

[Katya Mullethov]

28. Bada BING !

http://instantrimshot.com/

[Callisto32]

27. Just fucking imagine...

if we let people who aren't hurting anybody (like pot smokers, and gay couples, and armed folks) just go on not hurting anything! Why, it would be pandalerium!

[mikeb302000]

36. you've got to be kidding

"pot smokers, and gay couples, and armed folks"

Is this one of those college entrance tests? Which one of the three items doesn't belong in the group.

[jmg257]

39. Hmmm..."Pot smokers" doesn't belong, 'cause pot smoking is illegal??? nt

[We_Have_A_Problem]

42. Currently....

the pot smokers are the oddball since their actions are illegal. With luck, that will change.

However, exclusive of the legality, in all three cases, nobody is harming anyone and they are simply making their own choices in life. Why should that be a problem for you?

[LAGC]

43. If this bill passes, will you promise to stay in Italy and never come back?

:evilgrin:

[RSillsbee]

53. Is it possible

That his criminal past is why he's in Italy? In which case he can't ever come back?