Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,728
    If they had any balls they would make any cop personally liable for an arrest and deny any municipal government all federal funding for systematic violations.

    Choirboy

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by choirboy View Post
    If they had any balls they would make any cop personally liable for an arrest and deny any municipal government all federal funding for systematic violations.

    Choirboy

    And pay any misconduct settlements out of the police pension fund and not put the burden on the taxpayers.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    878
    Quote Originally Posted by CR Williams View Post
    Even if this were to pass and become law I will expect NY, NJ, and CA at least to continue to jack you up at every opportunity that can get. They don't think they have to pay attention to federal law as it is.
    Don't worry: if this passes both chambers and becomes law, the antis will fight it tooth and nail in the courts for years.... But, hopefully, the courts will allow the uncontested parts to be implemented immediately.

    Regardless, the longer we wait, the longer it will be until we win. And we WILL win as long as Trump and Pence are in office since RBG and Breyer are getting old and RBG is in bad health (and Kennedy is thought to be retiring this coming June). All we need is one more Scalia clone, like Gorsuch, on the Court and it's game over for the antis!

    Quote Originally Posted by psalms23dad View Post
    Let me ask this.
    Do you see a down side to the feds having a say in states laws for CCW? If they get their hands in it how much control will they take? I understand the 2nd amendment is a right not a privilege and everyone has the right to carry period. What I'm concerned about is how the feds, who currently don't have a say in free states, are going to control those whom already have this freedom recognized. I'm not assuming anything, just asking what you all think. Is National reciprocity going to force states to recognize the 2nd amendment or is this going to create a federal oversight for all of us?
    First off, the only "free states" are the dozen ConCarry states, everybody else is "permitted" to carry by a state.

    No, this bill does NOT "hav[e] a say in states (sic) laws for CCW." It just requires them to recognize each other's CCWs, the same way they do drivers licenses and marriage certificates.
    Last edited by paladin4christ; 11-30-2017 at 10:01 PM.
    "Diversity" is what causes civil wars.

    NRA Benefactor Life Member; NRA-ILA

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by choirboy View Post
    If they had any balls they would make any cop personally liable for an arrest and deny any municipal government all federal funding for systematic violations.

    Choirboy
    Yeah. Like criminally liable. Denial of civil rights under color of law.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Southeast TX/Gulf Coast
    Posts
    7,526
    Dont turn this into a cop bashing thread.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Jon Payne
    Ambassador, Suarez Group of Companies
    Suarez International Law Enforcement Instructor

    The Two Most Dangerous Places in Today's World:
    1.) A Gun Free Zone
    2.) Your Comfort Zone

    TRAIN WITH PAYNE 2018

    ​CRG-1 Orange TX January 20-21, 2018

    CRG-2 Orange TX March 10-11, 2018

    Shotgun Gunfighting San Antonio TX April 14-15, 2018

    GS-1 (modified) Kirbyville TX May 19-20, 2018





  6. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    394
    Quote Originally Posted by Jon Payne View Post
    Don’t turn this into a cop bashing thread.
    Agreed, where the heck did all of that come from anyway? And what does it have to do with national reciprocity?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Central Mississippi
    Posts
    849
    From Congressman Thomas Massie facebook page:
    http://www.facebook.com/RepThomasMas...43059172384905

    ALERT: Feinstein/Schumer sponsored gun legislation that amends the “Brady bill” will be added to Concealed Carry Reciprocity bill (HR 38) in the House this week.

    As Chairman of the Second Amendment Caucus, I’m blowing the whistle on the swamp. Last week, Republicans in the House fast tracked through committee HR 4477, a gun bill titled “fix-NICS.” The Senate version of this bill is cosponsored by Senator Dianne Feintstein and Senator Chuck Schumer and it will send $625 million over 5 years to states to expand the national background check database. The bill will also advance former President Obama’s agenda of pressuring every branch of the administration (such as the Veteran’s Administration) to submit thousands of more names to the NICS background check database to deny gun purchases. The House bill is identical in every way to the Senate bill except the House bill will also commission a study on bump-stocks.

    What you don’t know, and what virtually no one in Washington wants you to know, is that House leadership plans to merge the fix-NICS bill with popular Concealed Carry Reciprocity legislation, HR 38, and pass both of them with a single vote. Folks, this is how the swamp works. House leadership expects constituents to call their representatives demanding a vote on the reciprocity bill, when in fact the only vote will be on the two combined bills.

    How fast did Fix-NICS, HR 4477, move through the Judiciary Committee? This bill broke the previous records for fast track legislation. It was voted out of committee within hours of being introduced in the House. Check the dates on this link: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-...bill/4477/text . That means the text of the bill wasn’t even discoverable by the public on congress.gov until after the bill passed out of committee! The text was however available over in the Senate where you will find Senator Diane Feinstein and Senator Chuck Schumer are cosponsors. https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-...135/cosponsors

    If that’s not odd enough, consider this: the fix-NICS bill was introduced in the House by a Democrat two weeks ago. https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-...bill/4434/text . But, in a very unusual move, the bill was re-introduced verbatim by a Republican two weeks later, with language added to it to commission a bump-stock study. Six Republicans in Judiciary Committee weren’t persuaded by the switcheroo, and voted No. However, because every Democrat voted yes and some Republicans voted yes at the urging of the Chairman, the bill made it out of committee. The deed will be complete this week when the bill is quietly added to the Reciprocity bill, HR 38, and passed without the knowledge of those who would oppose the legislation if they knew what was in it.

    To recap, what are some clues that you should be concerned with the fix-NICS bill?

    (1) The first sentence after the title of the bill reads “Section 103 of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (34 U.S.C. 40901) is amended…”
    (2) Senators Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer are cosponsors in the Senate.
    (3) It’s being rammed through, without a hearing, in a very non transparent process, and it will be passed by attaching it to the popular concealed carry reciprocity bill which already has enough votes to pass on its own.
    (4) It spends over half a billion dollars to collect more names to include in a list of people who will never be allowed to own a firearm.
    (5) It compels administrative agencies, not just courts, to adjudicate your second amendment rights.

    In my opinion, #5 is the biggest problem. The bill encourages administrative agencies, not the courts, to submit more names to a national database that will determine whether you can or can’t obtain a firearm. When President Obama couldn’t get Congress to pass gun control, he implemented a strategy of compelling, through administrative rules, the Veterans Administration and the Social Security Administration to submit lists of veterans and seniors, many of whom never had a day in court, to be included in the NICS database of people prohibited from owning a firearm. Only a state court, a federal (article III) court, or a military court, should ever be able to suspend your rights for any significant period of time.

    Does the NICS background check system have problems? Yes, it results in tens of thousands of unjustified denials of gun purchases every year. But like many bills in Congress, the fix-NICS doesn’t live up to its name – it will likely do the opposite. It throws millions of dollars at a faulty program and it will result in more law-abiding citizens being deprived of their right to keep and bear arms.

    If we continue to give the executive branch more money and encouragement to add names to the list of people prohibited from buying a firearm (without a day in court) and if the gun banners achieve their goal of universal background checks, one day, a single person elected to the office of President will be able to achieve universal gun prohibition.

    House leadership should immediately de-couple the fix-NICS legislation from the concealed carry reciprocity legislation. People hate it when Washington combines bills like our leadership plans to do this week.

    A few have speculated that the House is combining the bills to ensure reciprocity will pass in the Senate. I have some news for them: Senators Feinstein and Schumer aren’t going to vote for reciprocity even if it contains the fix-NICS legislation they support for expanding the background check database. If someone is nave enough to think that’s going to work, and they’re willing to accept fix-NICS to get reciprocity, then they should ask the Senate to go first with the combined bill.

    Here’s a dangerous scenario that’s more likely to play out: The House uses the popularity of reciprocity (HR 38) to sneak fix-NICS through, while the Senate passes fix-NICS only. The Senate and the House meet at conference with their respective bills, with the result being fix-NICS emerges from conference without reciprocity. Fix-NICS comes back to the House and passes because all of the Democrats will vote for it (as they just did in Judiciary Committee) and many Republicans will vote for it. Because Republicans already voted for it once as part of the reciprocity deal that never came to pass, they won’t have a solid footing Senators Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer are cosponsors in the Senate. for opposing fix-NICS as a standalone bill. Then we’ll end up with fix-NICS, which is basically an expansion of the Brady Bill, without reciprocity.

    If our House leadership insists on bringing the flawed fix-NICS bill to the floor, they shouldn’t play games. We should vote separately on HR 38, the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Bill, and HR 4477, the fix-NICS bill. And we should be given enough time to amend the fix-NICS bill, because it needs to be fixed, if not axed.

    What a crock.
    .
    Monte

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Havana on the Willamette
    Posts
    1,135
    There are so many ways that states could monkey around with people if this went Federal. With all of the places you can or can't carry depending on jurisdiction and the political leanings of the DA (regardless of where the signs are posted), this just seems like a recipe of disaster.

    I just want a Federal law that says that if you are traveling to Florida from New Hampshire and your plane gets delayed in New York City for a day, that when you return to the airport, with your luggage and your legally owned firearm from your home in a free state, you can't be arrested for being in possession of an illegal/unlicensed firearm. A little traveling mercy on the form of the airport being "international waters" when it comes to just getting to your destination with your firearm would be nice.

    I'll worry about the concealed part while i'm wherever I am or wherever I am going, because big boy rules apply.
    Masters in Warfare-OEF Class of 2002-2003, 2006-2007
    Majors: Offensive Terminal Ballistics and Overseas Bovine Scatology

    An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.
    Robert Heinlein




  9. #19
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    735
    IMO, we need a third party maybe called AMERICA FIRST or CONSTITUTION FIRST to put these entrenched politicians on the run.
    Not living in fear, just ready!!!



  10. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,094
    Quote Originally Posted by Huntindoc View Post
    Agreed, where the heck did all of that come from anyway? And what does it have to do with national reciprocity?
    Choirboy can speak for himself, and I certainly respect what most officers do on a daily basis.

    However, unconstitutional gun confiscations which are already happening, the infamous video of the old lady getting roughed up by a couple of Steriod enhanced thugs in badges from CA during Katrina, the Sanctuary City fiasco, these are all the results of institutional corruption of law enforcement by communist politicians in the coastal states in particular and elsewhere.

    While perhaps not optimally phrased, Choirboy's suggestion that LE's which enable constitutional shredding behaviors being held responsible for their actions, is not without merit for consideration IMHO.

    YMMV.
    In order for the underprivileged and inept to feel adequate, the skilled and capable must be made stupid by decree.

    - Gabe Suarez, 12/13/2011

    If a broad ban on firearms can be upheld based on conjecture that the public might feel safer (while being no safer at all), then the Second Amendment guarantees nothing.

    - Justice Clarence Thomas

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •