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; I have been pa-rousing through these up to 60-plus posts and there are those that think this H.R. 822 gun bill is and those that ...

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 95
Like Tree47Likes

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

  1. #61
    Senior Member Array zamboni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    North of the Line
    Posts
    1,167
    I have been pa-rousing through these up to 60-plus posts and there are those that think this H.R. 822 gun bill is and those that think it is not a good thing, yet most of us here all think that the Second Amendment Should Be Upheld As It Is, as I strongly do too

    I can't believe that this Country of Ours which, wait, why is it called The United States of America? Are we not suppose to be United? And all abide by the United States Constitution/United States Bill of Rights ... as it was said, let it be written ... as it was meant to be?

    Not just pick and choose which Amendments someone likes so those are the only ones we will only allow the Citizens of the United State' that they live in, Their United State', to ONLY abide by?

    Because I do not like guns so you can not own one ... unless I feel like letting you {but not everyone just those I feel like letting and me too of course! I do not think you should carry one so I will not let you ... unless I feel like it {but not everyone just those I feel like letting and me too of course! It's Great To Be Dah

    I don't care what that Old United States Constitution/United States Bill of Rights has written in it, if I don't like it our United State' is not going to follow it! Is it not a Contract Kinda Thing that once you sign it and become Apart of The United States of America, a United State', you are suppose to be bound by it's language to follow too?

    I can't believe that the Second Amendment throughout our Country goes; from States that do not even requiring you to have a permit to CCW's and/or let you only open carry with or without a CCWP, to those that may issue, to those that shall issue, to those that will not issue, to those States that feel sorry for those that can not get a CCWP in their Home State where they live, so they set up hoops of fire for them to jump through so they can get a Non-Residents CCWP which may or may not be honored in other States they don't live in either.

    Poppycock!

    Then there are those States who honor other States CCWP depending on if their State honors their CCWP and some States that you don't even have to live in to get a CCWP will or might not honor it and as long as it is OK for you to buy a firearm in "Your Home State" you do not need a permit while visiting their State and some will even let you "Open Carry" with or with out a CCWP?

    Who the hell can keep track of all this mesh-mosh

    I started to read this crazy bill and after a paragraph or two I got a throbbing in my head and had to stop! Maybe like you after trying to follow all of this

    H.R. 822 started out maybe on a good idea to try and in a nutritive way to try and make the Second Amendment a little more user friendly, when dealing with Us Law Abjuratory Citizens, whom have a CCWP/CWOFL/CHL/CWP/CFL or what ever your Home State has titled their permit/license to carry a firearm legally open or concealed, and while visiting or driving through another State, but what has become the American Political Correct Way's of drafting such a bill or any other you ask? It starts out friendly and once everyone that has a Political Agenda gets done with it, its own Mother wouldn't recognize it.

    More Poppycock

    MAYBE if some States wouldn't just let their Licenses just pay a fee, sit in a class and listen to someone Yahtzee on about firearm stuff for two-hours, take a 10 question true or false test, shoot one-round on a supplied gun, send in two pictures of them self with a set of finger prints, and a notarized application with the required fee, pass their background check and get an ID/License in the mail eight-days later and not even be a resident of that State. MAYBE the States that make you do all that and you have to live really there, and they make you bring a revolver and/or a semi-auto to qualify with, and take a 3-day class, and then take a real test, they would honor other States CCWP's.

    Gez Moe! You have to go to a web site like Handgunlaw.us to just plan a trip to see which States honor your States CCWP's and which States will let you CCW's into a rest stop bathroom so you don't get "Jacked" by some passing through BG, this is crazy **** man! Hey Mo ... Nuck Nuck Nuck

    MAYBE if every State had the same requirements to get a Permit/License To Carry A Firearm Legally, kinda like we do to drive, which is a whole other subject to rant-off on ... where I live stop-signs and red-lights are only a suggestion ... and you had to be a resident too boot, then life could be a little simpler ... ya think??

    BUT DO NOT DISMISS THE SECOND AMENDMENT FROM LETTING US, THE AMERICAN CITIZENS OWN KEEP AND BEAR ARMS AND IT SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED UPON

    Now I'm not in favor that EVERY FIREARM BE REGISTERED like some States are required, like having to go to your Local Law Enforcement Station and get a permit to buy a firearm, then take said permit to the LGS and buy whatever-firearm, then take that said-firearm to the LLES and let them do what ever it is they feel necessary they need to do with it before they give it said-firearm back to you, and then when they feel it's time and you've waited long enough, they call you to come pick your said-firearm up, and now it is yours to take home. OK, why am I not in favor of that? Because someday they may feel the need to come collect all those why? Just because they feel like it, and/or just because they can.

    Like some other foreign countries have in the past because their leaders didn't feel comfortable about the way things were going between them and their subjects throughout thy kingdom ... It's Great To Be

    But if you can pass a thorough BGC so we know your not a goofy bad guy with a criminal record that will misuse a firearm, take a class to learn how to respect and learn the laws and be a responsible firearm's owner, and show you know which end of the opening that said firearm spits out a projectile so you don't hurt yourself, a loved one, or an innocent bystander in the apartment next-door. Then why not let us Responsible Citizens of these United States of America excessive Our Second Amendment Rights. JUST KEEP IT ALL WITH IN A REASONABLE PROCESS

    And allow The Castle Doctrine/Stand Your Ground Laws to stand too. Why is it some areas like Chicago, Illinois where they have the strongest gun laws still have gun problems?

    Not saying that places that are a bit more eased don't, but, not as bad I'm guessing. And those States wouldn't have as much of a problem if they would enforce the laws they do have as pertaining to the criminals they may know are breaking the law.

    There's a State that had State Gun Law's in place and not only each County, but each City/Municipality also had their own Gun Law Amendments that were in conflict with said State's Gun Laws and Not Legal, within their own State-Border. So That Said State's Legislature after about some years of abuse of its respectable law abiding residents, finally put their foot-down and gave them all something like 90-days or something like that ... whatever ... to knock it off and get inline because the State Law Trumps All. And if they get caught deviating anymore they could lose their appointed position and be given a hefty fine. So all these "NO GUNS ALLOWED SIGNS" started to disappear around this said State.

    So I've vented enough for now and if you understand all of this ranting-and-raven then you must be a Politician. And at this point I really do not know what to make of this Whacked-Out Bill. But once you put five Politicians in a room, your going to end-up with 28 different opinions

    IN CLOSING: FINALLY ... If you were able to under-stand all this jibber-jabber then not only could you maybe make sense of the H.R. 822 Bill in its current form, but which if it does someday pass, you will not recognize it, because it will probably ... no IT WILL have some changes by time it flops onto the El-Presidential Desk for the stroke of the pen to become A United States of America Law. Also, who knows what it will read like years from now?????????

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #62
    Senior Member Array mrreynolds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    613
    Sturm College of Law Document: David B. Kopel H.R. 822

  4. #63
    Distinguished Member
    Array phreddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Spartanburg, SC
    Posts
    1,952
    A good quote for the brieg linked above.

    Congress can instead choose to enact H.R. 822, which is significantly less intrusive than the other alternatives. H.R. 822 puts no new federal officials into the states, does not force any state officials to do anything, and imposes no new federal criminal penalties on anyone. H.R. 822 simply requires that state and local officials not interfere with the lawful defensive carrying of handguns by interstate visitors, provided that in carrying, the visitors follow precisely the same laws about the manner and places of carrying that are applicable to residents of the host state.

  5. #64
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,163
    Quote Originally Posted by mrreynolds View Post
    Sturm College of Law Document: David B. Kopel H.R. 822

    Thank you for posting that. It is long, too long, but a great thing to read. Very well done.

    I appreciate your taking the time to put that up here.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  6. #65
    Distinguished Member Array noway2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,757
    I agree with Hopyard. I read it today. A very interesting and enlightening read that gives a lot of historical perspective on interstate commerce regulation and the division of authority between congress and SCOTUS.

  7. #66
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,426
    Sorry if I'm wrong.... BUT ..... someone posts something on the forum with the name "CPBAMA" ... think about that, and has a total of 10 posts.....

    and then there are pages of posts about it......

    I call it a "TROLL".......

    1. Don't believe it just because it's on the internet.
    2. Do your own research, pull up the bill and actually read it.
    3. Then decide what you think of it.... and always look for what's NOT said in the bill.

    But, I agree on one thing with them, I"m not in support of HR 822, because I don't trust that the politicans in Wash DC will leave it alone in the future and not turn it into a national registration, start messing with CC requirements to standardize them and make them much more restrictive, etc. Just like the ATF started out with the only objective of collecting taxes on alcohol.
    I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts. --- Will Rogers ---
    Chief Justice John Roberts : "I don't see how you can read Heller and not take away from it the notion that the Second Amendment...was extremely important to the framers in their view of what liberty meant."

  8. #67
    VIP Member
    Array ksholder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,694
    It was, in fact, a good read. Thanks for posting. It also provides more complete context of the Heller and McDonald cases quoting other cases that allow strictures on CC. These are only constitutional if OC is allowed when CC is disallowed.
    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.

  9. #68
    Senior Member Array zamboni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    North of the Line
    Posts
    1,167
    How about this one ...

    http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/pdf/112hr822.pdf

    It seems if this does pass, even though you have a permit from a State that does issue a permit at whatever title level, (shall, may, non-resident) and you travel to say Illinois your held to follow their laws. So since they don't issue you can't carry even though you have a permit from Your Home State or as a Non-Resident.

    But States that do issue permits, which it seems to me there are maybe only two or so left that do not, if this bill does pass they will all have to honor every other States permits regardless of if they are issued as a State Resident or Non-Residenr, where now they, each State, can desire what State's permits they want to honor?

    Today. Some States will not honor other States permits because they do not honor theirs. Some honor all and some honor none.

    Am I missing something here with this bill?? It seems to me, that is the reciprocity issue it is trying to address, and it will expand to all States honoring all other State's permits, in all States that do allow some sort of carry?

    Beyond that I'm kinda fuzzy what else it seems to be trying to expand or detract from our Second Amendment Rights??

  10. #69
    Senior Moderator
    Array limatunes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    4,247
    Honestly, some of you sound like my grandmother.

    Just after the WI CCW bill was passed my grandmother just about had a seizure in fear of "what might happen." She went on and on about bar fights and traffic accidents and how even the police don't want concealed carry in WI all of the things that COULD happen that were desperately blown out of proportion.

    I wouldn't be surprised to find out she's hiding underneath of her kitchen table this very moment waiting for any newly licensed WI CCWers to come busting through her door.

    Now, I don't know what might come out of this bill.. everything is speculation... just like it is with the antis who say the streets will run red with blood if citizens can carry on their persons. COULD that actually happen? SURE it could.. but it hasn't.

    COULD there be amendments passed on this bill later? Sure. Could some states stop issuing permits all together to keep their states "carry free zones?" Sure.

    Is it going to happen? Who here has that crystal ball?

    I've been standing by and watching this bill from a far and thinking of the pros and possible cons and I'm still not sure exactly how I feel about it but so far I find myself shrugging and thinking.. why not?

    All this frantic and fearful hypothesizing combined with the virtual ringing of the hands just makes me think of my grandmother and her fearful shutters and how unreasonable they are in the grand scheme of things.

    Laws can't just be turned on and off like water hoses.

    IF states like CA, NJ, HI, etc, want to pull their carry legislation so that outsiders do not carry in their states they will have to go through the correct legislative channels just like everyone else. And as stated already, there will probably be some wealthy and/or influential people who would have to give up their carry permits if they allowed that to happen. Some judges, lawyers, celebrities and politicians who enjoy arming themselves or having legally armed body guards for themselves and their families are not going to want to give that up for the sake of keeping other carriers out of their states.

    Not to mention the fact that if armed citizens from other states are coming and going through these states unobstructed and peacefully, it could give the natural citizens of those states more ground to stand on when they fight for more lenient gun laws.

    Also, if any amendments to the bill are proposed then those have to go through the proper channels as well and can be voted against.

    Again, I haven't made up my final mind about this bill and there are a few things that still make me scratch my head but if I were to put a ratio on my feelings it would probably be 75 For : 25 Against at this moment.

    I don't see the point in getting all worked up over some of these "what ifs." I know it's hard because we have no record to go on about this kind of a thing but we also have no hard evidence to prove the doom and gloom is coming either.

  11. #70
    VIP Member Array MitchellCT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    I don't post here anymore...Sorry
    Posts
    2,333
    Most of the opposition I see to this bill is a misunderstanding of the limits of constitutional rights and a misunderstanding of the federal governments power to influence intra-state actions.

    No rights are unlimited. Not the 1st, 4th, 5th...or the 2nd. They are all subject to limitations. It sucks, but that's what it is. You can jump on the "Shall not be infringed" argument that everyone chest thumped about Pre-Heller, but we are in a Post-Heller world now, and the constitutional RKBA is gonna be treated like all the others:

    Given court protection and enforcement, but subject to the same limitations as other fundamental rights.

    As to the fed's power RE: inter-state activities: Wickard v. Filburn (Read the brief Wickard v. Filburn – Case Brief Summary & the case FindLaw | Cases and Codes )

    Yes, their has been some limitations on this issue, but the basic ruling still holds.

    Congress has the authority to enact HR 822.

    Stomping your feet and saying it doesn't will not make it so.

  12. #71
    Senior Member Array zamboni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    North of the Line
    Posts
    1,167
    So if someone could please clear this up for me, as it seems to me that the main objective of this bill is for all states to allow those with a permit to carry within their state, as long as you abide by their State's Carry Laws?

    Each state will have to honor all other states permits?

    Where now, as of today, that isn't the way it is working. Some states do not honor other states permits?

  13. #72
    Member Array mrjam2jab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Levittown, PA
    Posts
    427
    Quote Originally Posted by zamboni View Post
    So if someone could please clear this up for me, as it seems to me that the main objective of this bill is for all states to allow those with a permit to carry within their state, as long as you abide by their State's Carry Laws?

    Each state will have to honor all other states permits?

    Where now, as of today, that isn't the way it is working. Some states do not honor other states permits?
    Your thinking is correct. As of right now, of the 6 states that border PA, only WV honors my license. I live 4 miles from NJ with several relatives living there. I can not carry in NJ. If this bill passes, I will then be able to carry in every state except IL.

  14. #73
    Member Array bolocanolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Miami Lakes Fl
    Posts
    138
    While we have been discussing this topic since October 26th, the administration and our Sect. of State, have been quietly working in joining the UN, in signing the "SMALL ARMS TREATY". Does anyone have any thoughts about what happens with H.R. 822 if in fact, our leaders commit our country to this treaty? The junior senator from Kentucky (not allowed to mention the name here) has been leading the charge to make gun owners aware of this treaty. Thoughts anyone?

  15. #74
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,163
    Quote Originally Posted by bolocanolo View Post
    While we have been discussing this topic since October 26th, the administration and our Sect. of State, have been quietly working in joining the UN, in signing the "SMALL ARMS TREATY". Does anyone have any thoughts about what happens with H.R. 822 if in fact, our leaders commit our country to this treaty? The junior senator from Kentucky (not allowed to mention the name here) has been leading the charge to make gun owners aware of this treaty. Thoughts anyone?
    Yes, I have a thought on this. What happens if the UN does something? Absolutely nothing at all. First off, the Senate likely would never ratify such a treeaty. Second, although our constitution clearly states that treaties are the supreme law of the land, our Supremes have previously sliced and diced that a bit and they get a thumbs up or a thumbs down. All this talk about what the UN might do is just scary talk by nervous Nels. Sleep well and fergetaboutit.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  16. #75
    Member Array bolocanolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Miami Lakes Fl
    Posts
    138
    So you feel this is all hogwash!!! and the administration is playing to its base to pacify them, and be able to claim they tried to do something about gun control. They can later use it as a campaign talking point and accuse the right, of "clinging to their guns"?

Page 5 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.