Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't mind if it is reciprocated... but that means it would fall under some kind of interstate commerce, IE making it harder to carry a weapon between states so getting the said weapon and permits would be even harder.
No it wouldn't.
Quote:
Or some weapons not being allowed in states, like how cars have to pass certain smog regulations in California but not Kansas so the cars can pass through but not stay in state past a time period even if the drivers license is "valid".
That's mostly all that people are looking for. Being able to carry in California when visiting even though they have a permit issues in Kansas.
If any of you clowns on this forum think that I need the governments 'permission' to carry, after serving this country .. you are living in la la land.
I have and will continue to carry and I have NEVER applied for a permit to do so!
"PERMIT"?
The government gives me a "PERMIT"?
I don't think so!
Go and tell that to your daddy government!
I don't mind if it is reciprocated... but that means it would fall under some kind of interstate commerce, IE making it harder to carry a weapon between states so getting the said weapon and permits would be even harder.
Or some weapons not being allowed in states, like how cars have to pass certain smog regulations in California but not Kansas so the cars can pass through but not stay in state past a time period even if the drivers license is "valid".
I see this applying to jobs too, like medicine, where the doctors don't have to be "boarded" in individual states
And medical and recreational marijuana.
Unfortunately, immediately after the guns issue is approved, those same proponents will probably protest the MJ under "state rights."
I think it is an interesting issue. I can see the case for or against. Either way I would be fine with the ruling.
I would have also been fine if the court ruled individual states were not required to marry same sex couples but had to honor/recognize those marriages from other States.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
