CCW Reciprocity Amendment - Please support(merged) - Page 5

jcheinaman · May 14th, 2008, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tally XD

While I like the idea of being able to conceal carry where ever I go, I am not sure the government needs to dabble into our rights any more than they already have? I fear something like this might affect the current carry laws in states such as Florida and Texas, who have very good concealed carry laws, by making them less friendly in order to comply with a majority of other states inorder to recieve reciprocity.

What if something like this took away the individual states ability to set its own carry laws?

I don't think this will make a difference the same as states making up their own driving laws... You have to obey the law of the state you are visiting. Simple as that.

njeske · May 14th, 2008, 11:42 PM

doesn't matter anymore. it failed.

Chevy-SS · May 15th, 2008, 08:00 AM

Thanks to all who participated.

Looks like this is a dead issue for now. Too bad.

Again, many thanks........................

-

Delta Force · May 15th, 2008, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MitchellCT

It died.

GovTrack: Senate Vote #127 (May 14, 2008)

That doesn't look like the same bill to me.BTW my Senator sent me back an email.

xwarp · May 16th, 2008, 12:11 AM

GovTrack: S.Amdt. 4757 to H.R. 980 -- 110th Congress

if i read this correctly,

H.R. 980: Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act of 2007 (GovTrack.us)

this is where it stands:

Motion to Table Agreed to 55-42, 3 not voting

Henry · May 16th, 2008, 12:14 PM

I've sent an e-mail to GOA to find out. I can't tell if its dead, or alive still.

njeske · May 17th, 2008, 01:22 AM

the motion to table (kill) the amendment passed 55-42. it's dead.

kpaul · May 17th, 2008, 04:40 AM

Sent one to both of my MN Senators

Would sure be nice if it goes through

FN1910 · May 17th, 2008, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcheinaman

I don't think this will make a difference the same as states making up their own driving laws... You have to obey the law of the state you are visiting. Simple as that.

Not necessarily, therefore the reason for the Federal CDL. Types of DL and restrictions on those still vary from state to state and sometimes may be covered or not. I don't know of any examples right off hand because I haven't run into it in years. One similar example is that in SC there is no process for registering boat trailers but the boat must be registered with numbers on the side and registration carried with you at all times. In NC the emphasis is much more on the trailer than the boat. SC does issue a trailer license in certain cases for people who do a lot of traveling to states that require registration. To say that you have to follow the laws of the state you are in isn't always exactly correct, especially in the Feds are involved.

I think it is on this fourm that someone posted a method of getting a CCW for NC before turning 21 by getting non-resident permits from states with reciprocity. NC requires you to be 21 to have a NC CCW but will honor one from other states even if you are younger than 21.

Henry · May 23rd, 2008, 04:20 PM

I got the following response to my e-mail to GOA. We need to keep plugging this amendment, it seems to be well written and does not override the state's laws and rights.

Quote:

Thank you for the note.

I regret the delay in answering but my PC crashed over last weekend and we finally got it up and running again today.
The "Vitter" Amendment is not dead. It has not come up yet.

Robert E. Duggar
Public Liaison

May 14th, 2008, 11:42 PM	#42
njeske Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Reno, NV Posts: 285	doesn't matter anymore. it failed. __________________ Bob Barr - 2008 What The Toast!?!

May 15th, 2008, 08:00 AM	#43
Chevy-SS Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Rhode Island Posts: 98	Thanks to all who participated. Looks like this is a dead issue for now. Too bad. Again, many thanks........................ - __________________ I am aware of many things, especially my own ignorance...............

May 17th, 2008, 01:22 AM	#47
njeske Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Reno, NV Posts: 285	the motion to table (kill) the amendment passed 55-42. it's dead. __________________ Bob Barr - 2008 What The Toast!?!

May 17th, 2008, 04:40 AM	#48
kpaul Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: MN Posts: 23	Done Sent one to both of my MN Senators Would sure be nice if it goes through __________________ K.Paul Semper Fi

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

May 16th, 2008, 12:11 AM	#45
xwarp Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Southern Arizona Posts: 16	GovTrack: S.Amdt. 4757 to H.R. 980 -- 110th Congress if i read this correctly, H.R. 980: Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act of 2007 (GovTrack.us) this is where it stands: Motion to Table Agreed to 55-42, 3 not voting

May 16th, 2008, 12:14 PM	#46
Henry Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Indiana Posts: 53	I've sent an e-mail to GOA to find out. I can't tell if its dead, or alive still.