The way the law is written it doesn't let you carry in states that don't allow it. It just makes it so that States who have similar laws don't require permit holders to reapply in each state.
Yeah, I know!! Sux!! You moved from one extreme to the other!!
Originally Posted by dwkfym
Yeah, I know it was different, I just thought it was interesting and a little similar. The way the state and federal laws over lap and seperate is pretty wierd if you ask me. I personally think the laws should be a little more together. I remember people telling me that when they drove through Virginia, there would be cops pulling out of state cars over and giving tickets for having radar detectors. That's pretty shitty to me.
Combatives training log.
Gezere: paraphrase from Bas Rutten, Never escalate the level of violence in fight you are losing. :D
kettlebell workouts give you “cardio
without the dishonour of aerobics”.
I think the gun laws should be a bit more unified, through means other than a federal legislative mandate. For example, I think the supreme court should just rule on the issue of availability of carry permits for citizens, to get rid of "may issue" states that are effectively almost 'no issue.'
The radar detector thing is pretty shitty, but it goes along with my ideologies of holding up the US constitution, as it falls under traditional police powers of the state.
A lot of states do have pre-emption laws like Florida, including California.
From what I've gathered this includes 49 states except for DC and Illinois. i.e. all other states are considered to have "similar laws."
Originally Posted by WhiteShark
Which means it is going to force a state like California to let me carry with my Florida permit. A permit would not be issued to be in California, as they have vastly different requirements than Florida (Over here, its effectively impossible to get one for most people). Therefore, if this law passes, California's law would magically pre-empted by the federal law not apply to me while it does to all California residents. So California effectively would not be able to govern people with out-of-state permits because of a federal law, of a function that constitutionally falls under a state's exclusive power.
Once I get a permenant job it'll be a lot clearer whether I'm a CA or FL resident; at that point, I personally don't even know if my FLCWP would be good anyhow.
I'm ambivalent, too. We do already have FOPA which overrides local and state laws if you're traveling from a place where you can legally carry to another place where you can legally carry. But it is a very restrictive law. On the other hand, I do favor federalism and think locales should be able to make their own laws consistent with the constitution.
The law would help me personally. The current situation is a pain in the ass for me--I live in Connecticut, which has pretty good carry laws (once they give you damn permit). In fact, the CT permit is a "carry" permit, not strictly a concealed carry permit. But I live close to the border with New York and I work in Manhattan (fat chance getting a permit). That means, basically, never carry and nothing in the car.
Of course, it's basically a moot point. There's zero chance President Zero would sign such a law.
Pres. Zero. lol
every time I use the word "federalism" i feel like I have to explain it.
Anyways, my carry gun I left in Florida for my in-laws to use.
Are you saying the Second Amendment is a state granted right?
Originally Posted by dwkfym
No. I'd love to elaborate but no time right now. Please read my 4th post up.
Basically, its not up to fed. legislation to enforce 2A rights. Its up to the supreme court when it gets challenged through the court system.
Also, basically, I'm saying if you want to rely on the US constitution to say 2nd amendment rights are to be protected, you can't ignore the rest of the constitution which also says states police themselves and not the feds. What US consitution does allow for is challenging unconstitutional laws through the judicial system, but not through legislative system.
Thanks for the clarification. How would you address the rights of citizens engaged in interstate travel?
I don't really know. My personal take is that if a person is going to go through a certain state, they need to respect the laws of that state just as you have to respect the laws of the state you live in. Inconvenient but that is how it is. Just like how I have to pay state income tax in California now, but I didn't in Florida. In other words, what right?
Thats besides my other personal belief that all states really should allow concealed carry to appropriate citizens of that state and not just a select few.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO