Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Persephone View Post


    Harper: Guns important for 'safety' in rural homes far from 'immediate police assistance'

    http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/harpe...ance-1.2277304
    Thanks.
    The First Amendment applies to SMS, Emails, Blogs, online news, the Fourth applies to your cell phone, computer, and your car, but the Second only applies to muskets?

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
      Reciprocity laws are pretty simple. One state makes allowances for residents of another state obeying what they believe is the law as written in their own state.

      For example, if I go to California in my truck with windows with "limo" tint on them and tinting on the driver and passenger window and parts of the windshield as allowed by Arizona and am pulled over there because California doesn't allow window tint like that the ticket gets tossed.

      I can also drive pretty freely through California red light and speed cameras because they only photograph the front of the vehicle. Arizona does not require a front license plate on a vehicle, California does.

      The same should apply to CC / gun ownership. I apply Arizona's law properly. The state I am in honors that to the extent they can. At worst, if they don't want me armed they ship my weapon etc., to my home or a law enforcement agency in my state for me to recover the weapon when I get home. No legal action is taken and the state that doesn't want me armed pays to have the weapon removed to my state. That seems perfectly fair.
      But then, and this might risk derailing the thread, but isn't the same logic used regarding gay marriage? That if X state gives a marriage license to a gay couple, then said license has to be respected in all 50 states, right?

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
        But then, and this might risk derailing the thread, but isn't the same logic used regarding gay marriage? That if X state gives a marriage license to a gay couple, then said license has to be respected in all 50 states, right?
        No real problem with that. I think though that one's sexual choice and that is what gay is a choice is a matter for society to decide, not the courts. But that is for another thread.

        That said, it's fine if the gay couple is visiting that state. It is another matter they decide to move there permanently. If I move to California per my earlier example with motor vehicles, then I would be required to remove my tint and get a California license plate.

        Visiting is one thing. Moving there permanently is another.
        Last edited by T. A. Gardner; 14 Mar 15, 20:42.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
          But then, and this might risk derailing the thread, but isn't the same logic used regarding gay marriage? That if X state gives a marriage license to a gay couple, then said license has to be respected in all 50 states, right?

          As creator of thread...you have my permission to expand the topic.
          "Stand for the flag ~ Kneel for the fallen"

          "A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer." ~ Bruce Lee

          Comment

          Latest Topics

          Collapse

          Working...
          X