National Reciprocity Bill Makes its Way to Congress

Republicans would not go Nuclear over something as silly and inconsequential as CCW reciprocity.

and if they can't get their own party to support the bill, that means it was meant to die.

and FYI, every bill in the Senate now requires 60 votes to end debate.

its become routine.

 

They would never go nuclear over this. That is laughable

 

Today, many Conservatives have made some very rude and hateful remarks in this forum when I mentioned that Trump wants to cut aid for the poor in housing, heating oil aid, and healthcare.

with that, why should I or ANY Democrat care about CCW reciprocity?

 

They shouldn't

 

Ron, given this example to you before and I'll give it again.
I hope the irony is not lost on you, but it fascinates me how the left says that voter ID laws are only to "hinder" the RIGHTS are minorities, and yet here you are wanting to "hinder" the RIGHTS of the 2nd Amendment.

And seem to be more than okay with it.

 

Yes...

How about CCW that doubles as a voter id? Works for me....LOL

 

Or visaversa?

 

We should hinder some rights at time. We also hinder speech religion assembly at times

 

I'm not sure why he wants to disenfranchise minorities when they can't afford a CCW to protect their own lives.

So sad.

 

We limit speech when it can cause harm to the public and religion when it causes harm to the public or implies that the government is taking a side in which religion(s) are preferred.

Not seeing the resemblance.

 

Very good point.

 

And we hinder gun rights when they pose a danger to the public

 

There are already laws for people that harm the public with items of all kinds.....not just guns.

It's called Murder, Assault, and many other variations of these. Once convicted of these, a person is no longer allowed to own a firearm.

 

There are many more laws than that that protect public safety

 

True, but the laws that hinder speech and religion (1st Amendment) are based on the Law which states innocent until proven guilty. Therefore the laws are applied when the wrong doing occurs. The laws for firearms (2nd Amendment) should be the same, not presume guilt, therefore enacting laws to limit a persons RIGHTS.

 

There are many laws about possession of dangerous objects. You can't have chemical weapons in your basement or walk around the airport carrying a stinger missile. You may have done nothing wrong but you present a danger to the public

 

What does that have to do with the OP?

 

Nothing. You are right. This is a thread about CCW reciprocity. We should discuss that. See....we can even agree sometimes

 

this **** will be filibustered.

sorry guys, but its a bad bill.

 

"bad bill" = "good for gun owners". That's the only argument we've seen.

 

No reason to pass it. Probably will never even come up for a vote

 

You live anywhere near 5th Avenue? I'll wear a hat with my forum name on it when the law goes through and I take a trip to NY.

 

It will. Trump wants it and there is already support from some Dems. Whether it makes it through without a compromise, I.e. Minimum requirements, is another question.

 

Again, Democrats will benefit from National Reciprocity, as will the Security teams that protect them, there is no real reason to veto this Bill as it benefits everyone.

 

I still don't like the feds being involved with my ability to legally carry. How long will it be before they start mandating how states issue licenses or making it harder for citizens to get licenses? I know it's nothing but a "slippery slope theory", but I have no problem with my ability to legally carry as it is now.

We won't always have a 2A friendly administration and a nation wide carry program can be tampered with a lot easier than state programs.