H.R. 822, the Trojan Horse gun bill, has reached the House floor.

This is a discussion on H.R. 822, the Trojan Horse gun bill, has reached the House floor. within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by bolocanolo Why should we trust the NRA to tell us the truth, when they supported the re-election of Harry Reid and other ...

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 95
Like Tree47Likes

Thread: H.R. 822, the Trojan Horse gun bill, has reached the House floor.

  1. #31
    Distinguished Member Array Stubborn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tampa Fl
    Posts
    1,530
    Quote Originally Posted by bolocanolo View Post
    Why should we trust the NRA to tell us the truth, when they supported the re-election of Harry Reid and other democrats, which helped the democrats retain control of the Senate.
    In as much as the NRA supports this bill, GOA and JPFO are DEAD set against it.
    I'm an NRA Life member, but they don't always take the "hard line" stand I'd like to see.
    IMHO HR 822 is bad legislation and drags the Fed into places where it should not be.

    HR 2900 introduced by Paul Broun of Georgia, has all of the good from 822 with none of the bad...I would be happy to support that bill. (link below)
    Common sense alternative to H.R. 822 (carry reciprocity)
    Last edited by Stubborn; October 27th, 2011 at 10:58 AM. Reason: add link
    jem102 likes this.
    "The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it".
    Thomas Jefferson

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    Member Array bolocanolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Miami Lakes Fl
    Posts
    137
    I can proudly say, I've never voted for a democrat in my entire voting life and never will. What good is the second amendment, if we dont have a country. A democrat that supports gun legislation, is also a democrat that supports legislation that will ultimately tear this country down. Pro-abortion, pro gays, pro higher taxes, pro bigger government, pro telling us what we can and can't eat....Need I say more? Keep thinking little picture, while the foundation crumbles below us. I wasn't born in this country, but I love it more than my own.
    Firearm.Fan.Girl likes this.

  4. #33
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    I see things happening:

    CA says we can't have all these cowboys from AZ, NV, NM, CO, etc coming into our state with concealed weapons so we are going to legislate the permits out of existence.... too bad so sad.

    NY says the same thing about southern state residents and does the same.......

    Other completely irrational states like NJ, CT, DE, HI, MA do the same.......

    and of course we all still cannot carry in IL.....

    So it will be the same as usual. I can carry already due to reciprocity with most free states.... as do most of you..... the only states I cannot are ones like CA who not only restrict my rights but the rights of their own citizens...

    So bill is passed, anti states go on legislation warpath and it is status quo for all of us except now some state residents are screwed. Only because of the way the bill is worded. if they changed it to make ALL states recognize not just states who issue permits then it would be a benefit to all.....

  5. #34
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    10,404
    Quote Originally Posted by Roon View Post
    When has the federal government getting involved in anything been for the better? When the federal government gets involved in something their involvement only GROWS over time. Take the income tax...started out at 1%...now look at it. Those of you who are so quick to take the NRA's word for something and jump on the bandwagon must have short memories. Its just silly to me that a site such as this where I would take a guess that we have quite a few SMALL government advocates would suggest it is a good idea for the fed's to get involved in gun rights.

    My .02.
    I advocate adherence to the United States Constitution. Your red herring is just that, no more and no less.

  6. #35
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1956 View Post
    I advocate adherence to the United States Constitution. Your red herring is just that, no more and no less.
    You, I, and anyone else has no idea where this is going to go, or if it is going to go anywhere at all.... only time will tell. Everything right now is speculation. Although I have a bad feeling about how this will eventually be "managed" in the future.. if it even does pass.

  7. #36
    Distinguished Member Array noway2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,875
    Here is another (different site, Library of Congress) link to the bill: Bill Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
    The bill is short and to the point. Paraphrasing: It states the interpretation that the 2nd-A includes self defense and says that if one has a carry permit that they shall be allowed to carry in any state that either has a carry permit program or allows carry without a permit, subject to the resident terms as an unrestricted permit in that state.

  8. #37
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    Ok so do I follow the firearm laws of that state or my state? What if I carry a G17 with 17+1.... did they spell that out or what? What of my firearm is not "CADOJ" approved.....

  9. #38
    Distinguished Member Array phreddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Spartanburg, SC
    Posts
    1,966
    Quote Originally Posted by azchevy View Post
    Ok so do I follow the firearm laws of that state or my state? What if I carry a G17 with 17+1.... did they spell that out or what? What of my firearm is not "CADOJ" approved.....
    You really should read the bill yourself.

    `(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.

  10. #39
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    This is such a bad idea.....

  11. #40
    Distinguished Member Array Stubborn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tampa Fl
    Posts
    1,530
    ^^^ Agreed. there's only one good thing that can come from this, but there is a whole lot of bad that can happen as a result of it.
    I don't like the odds, and I certainly don't like the odds of trusting the government and the politicians that feed the beast.
    "The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it".
    Thomas Jefferson

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  12. #41
    Member Array Roon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    265
    Quote Originally Posted by ksholder View Post
    Roon - I am a small federal government/states rigthts kind of guy. The problem with this issue is that the 2A clearly restricts what government can do vis-a-vis gun rights, but that has not stopped the states (some of them) from trying to eliminate essentially any right to use a gun to protect your home or yourself when out and about. Washington D.C. & Illinois are great cases in point and it looks like California is drifting back in that direction; there are others as well.

    Given that the people largely have no real ability to make certain states act Constitutionally, when the feds step in to do that, they are simply reminding the states of what they signed up for when they ratified the Constitution or joined the Union. If the feds don't have this power, or exercize it, of what value is the BOR?
    If you lack the ability to make states behave constitutionally what on earth makes you are going to be able to make the Federal government act constitutionally when its eventual 2a power grab begins?

    I understand the need to make states adhere to the constitution...but the Federal government is NOT the answer to that problem. People with a backbone is...a class action lawsuit brought to the SCOTUS is...we have options people just are apparently either lack the resources or the will to use them. The resource problem can however be fixed by a strong gun community willing to support each other.

    I just fear that we are advocating trading one bureaucrat that refuses to adhere to the constitution for a much LARGER and harder to control bureaucrat that refuses to do the same thing.

  13. #42
    Member Array Roon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    265
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1956 View Post
    I advocate adherence to the United States Constitution. Your red herring is just that, no more and no less.
    I advocate that same adherence....we just differ on the way we would like to go about it. The answer to government behaving unconstitutionally is not more government. That is just silly.

  14. #43
    Senior Member Array hayzor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    740
    In the last 40+ years that I've been on the planet, the Federal Govt has done very few things that I think are wise. I do not trust them to manage concealed carry wisely. I would expect them to eventually place more restrictions on it than already exist.
    I believe that the states manage these issues much better than the Feds - some better than others, but we are free to move to any state we please. Moving out of country when the feds screw it up is less than desireable , at least for me.

    If this passes, I think we are gaining some small freedoms with a risk of losing more freedoms down the road.
    Last edited by hayzor; October 27th, 2011 at 02:30 PM. Reason: typo
    Tzadik likes this.
    The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it. Albert Einstein

    "People in Arizona carry guns," said a Chandler police spokesman. "You better be careful about who you are picking on."

  15. #44
    VIP Member
    Array ksholder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,929
    Quote Originally Posted by Roon View Post
    If you lack the ability to make states behave constitutionally what on earth makes you are going to be able to make the Federal government act constitutionally when its eventual 2a power grab begins?
    That is a fair question.

    Quote Originally Posted by Roon View Post
    I understand the need to make states adhere to the constitution...but the Federal government is NOT the answer to that problem. People with a backbone is...a class action lawsuit brought to the SCOTUS is...we have options people just are apparently either lack the resources or the will to use them. The resource problem can however be fixed by a strong gun community willing to support each other.
    First, if the Federal government is not the answer, SCOTUS, being part of the federal government (1/3 of it actually and the self-appointed most important part) can't be the answer either. You are right, the people need to stand up and say enough is enough, but it is likely that such a stance will either be ignored by the ruling class or bloody. I would love to see this addressed at the ballot box, but getting good, qualified people to run is next to impossible due to the character assassination that the media puts people through, especially if they are conservative.

    The most expeditious manner will be to let the feds tell the states to abide by the Constitution. HR822 goes part of the way there. Could it be improved - sure it could and I like AZChevy's approach that the feds just tell the states that CCW permits (or whatever your state calls them) are valid nationwide, but that is not where this legislation is headed. Should it be amended to include that, I would like that, but I doubt it will be. I am surprised states like FL & UT have not thrown a fit as this will be a major negative to their cash flow if we don't need to buy multiple licenses.
    Firearm.Fan.Girl likes this.
    It's the Land of Opportunity, not the Land of Entitlements - Vote America!!!

    "When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson

    You are only paranoid until you are right - then you are a visionary.

  16. #45
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    Scotus ruled concealed carry is not protected under the second. Show of hands that they will overturn a previous courts ruling. They won't.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

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

Search tags for this page

current status of h.r. 822
,
current status of hr 822
,
did h.r. 822 pass
,
did hr 822 pass
,
did hr 822 pass?
,
h r 822 gun bill
,

h.r. 822 status

,
hr 822
,
hr 822 house vote
,
hr 822 nj
,
hr 822 senate vote date
,

hr 822 status

,
hr822 status
,
status of h.r. 822
,
status of hr 822
Click on a term to search for related topics.