Trump on 2A

[ShoreShooter]

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/second-amendment-rights

He advocates a national carry permit recognized in every state.

Go Trump. Hopefully others will take up that same banner.

 

[AACo]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/11/24/republican-donors-operative-fueling-new-anti-trump-ad-blitz.html

It's a shame the GOP donors are trying to run him out. Their top candidate to boot!

Love his view on 2A issues.

 

[danb]

Like Hogan, Trump cannot do much without Congress getting behind it. He cannot do this by executive order. Conversely, if the house/senate actually passed something, any
of the current field of candidates would sign it.

 

[Armati]

Yes, just when are the Gops in Congress going to start pushing National Reciprocity?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[Brooklyn]

Yes, just when are the Gops in Congress going to start pushing National Reciprocity?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

They can't. If they do..our right flank will eat them alive.. moreover no one wants it..the gun Friendly states are afraid it will be Christmas treed into a must kill bill.. they are right.

We have f.led ourselves by eating our young. And we deserve it.

 

[Armati]

They can't. If they do..our right flank will eat them alive.. moreover no one wants it..the gun Friendly states are afraid it will be Christmas treed into a must kill bill.. they are right.

We have f.led ourselves by eating our young. And we deserve it.

I'm confused by this. Why would we not want National Reciprocity?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[HauptsAriba]

Like Hogan, Trump cannot do much without Congress getting behind it. He cannot do this by executive order. Conversely, if the house/senate actually passed something, any
of the current field of candidates would sign it.

Hogan can't do it, this is true. But would he even if he could? He wants to get re elected and lending an ear to the gun community might hamper that if the left spun it the right way. He's so popular right now, I think he could get away with it, were it possible.

In regards to Trump, something tells me that little would constrain him from doing what he set out to do. I think he would find a way to MAKE it happen.Also, he would be fulfilling a campaign promise, not pushing the envelope, like Hogan might be doing. You do not get to where he is by shrugging shoulders and saying......the regs stopped me.

I would love to see him get the chance to show us.....

 

[BeoBill]

Yes, just when are the Gops in Congress going to start pushing National Reciprocity?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

When we get a non-RINO GOP majority.

 

[danb]

Yes, just when are the Gops in Congress going to start pushing National Reciprocity?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

They can't. If they do..our right flank will eat them alive.. moreover no one wants it..the gun Friendly states are afraid it will be Christmas treed into a must kill bill.. they are right.

We have f.led ourselves by eating our young. And we deserve it.

No: When this comes up, we have about 57 votes. http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/113/senate/1/100

And, it does come up repeatedly.

A republican president is not sufficient, we also need 3 more senators in the bag.

Hogan can't do it, this is true. But would he even if he could? He wants to get re elected and lending an ear to the gun community might hamper that if the left spun it the right way. He's so popular right now, I think he could get away with it, were it possible.

In regards to Trump, something tells me that little would constrain him from doing what he set out to do. I think he would find a way to MAKE it happen.Also, he would be fulfilling a campaign promise, not pushing the envelope, like Hogan might be doing. You do not get to where he is by shrugging shoulders and saying......the regs stopped me.

I would love to see him get the chance to show us.....

Hogan cannot do it without support from the Attorney General (Frosh), the legislature (super-majority Dem), or a court order.

Neither can any President. Any executive order imposing law on states would be challenged by anti-gun states, and they would win.

Every President is constrained by this thing called the constitution.

 

[HauptsAriba]

No: When this comes up, we have about 57 votes. http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/113/senate/1/100

And, it does come up repeatedly.

A republican president is not sufficient, we also need 3 more senators in the bag.



Hogan cannot do it without support from the Attorney General (Frosh), the legislature (super-majority Dem), or a court order.

Neither can any President. Any executive order imposing law on states would be challenged by anti-gun states, and they would win.

Every President is constrained by this thing called the constitution.

I don't recall saying he would use an ( executive order ) did I? I said he would find a way. For someone like him that usually means wheel and deal. At this time there are no States that outright ban carry, so to get nationwide reciprocity if other things were offered is not impossible. Who knows what those other things might be, money for roads, education etc.

Aside from that, States do have rights, but they do NOT have the right to infringe upon the Bill of rights, which is clear. Both the State AND the Federal Goverment absolutely have the right to nullify an un Constitutional law if/when citizens rights are being crushed.

Sure, it would create a great deal of hub bub and law suits etc, so did integration. But People were being denied their rights by the State, the Federal Goverment intervened and won.

Why is this subject, in theory, any different?

 

[HauptsAriba]

Every President is constrained by this thing called the Constitution?

Are the States not as well? What does the ( Constitution ) say about the right to bear arms?

As far as the States winning in court goes, clearly, it would go to SCOTUS. How DId SCOTUS rule on the last two major cases in 2008 and 2010?

An executive order by a Republican President might be what is needed to force SCOTUS to take the matter once and for all. Providing the body of the court does not change, and knowing the change in climate from an R administration, it's pretty clear how they would rule.

 

[danb]

I don't recall saying he would use an ( executive order ) did I? I said he would find a way. For someone like him that usually means wheel and deal. At this time there are no States that outright ban carry, so to get nationwide reciprocity if other things were offered is not impossible. Who knows what those other things might be, money for roads, education etc.

Aside from that, States do have rights, but they do NOT have the right to infringe upon the Bill of rights, which is clear. Both the State AND the Federal Goverment absolutely have the right to nullify an un Constitutional law if/when citizens rights are being crushed.

Sure, it would create a great deal of hub bub and law suits etc, so did integration. But People were being denied their rights by the State, the Federal Goverment intervened and won.

Why is this subject, in theory, any different?

"Find a way" means what, exactly? The choices are mostly: Executive order forcing states (unconstitutional), or congressional action (including withholding funding unless states comply). See above, we already have 57+ votes. Appointing justices is another possibility, will take years.

Any of the candidates on stage will sign this if congress sends it. If Trump is the nominee and Clinton wins, not so much.

 

[CurlyDave]

...He advocates a national carry permit recognized in every state.

Go Trump. Hopefully others will take up that same banner.

Actually he advocates nationwide reciprocity on the driver license model, which is much different (and better) than a national carry permit.

The problem with a national carry permit is that the requirements would be dominated by the wimps from CA, NY, NJ, MD, and other populous states. This would easily become a very restricted permit.

OTOH, nationwide reciprocity means that all states must honor permits from any other state. No matter how much it gets their local panties in a wad. Shall-issue states can keep their rules and other states must honor them. Not to mention the exploding heads in DC...

Plus, the concept of a bunch of uncouth westerners carrying in NY and NJ while their own locals can not would bring matters to a head in restrictive states pretty quickly.

 

[kcbrown]

Plus, the concept of a bunch of uncouth westerners carrying in NY and NJ while their own locals can not would bring matters to a head in restrictive states pretty quickly.

No, it wouldn't. Why?

Because concealed means concealed. Something that is concealed cannot be seen. If it cannot be seen, it is not something that the general population will be concerned about. They will not even know that people from outside the state are carrying in their midst. And a matter cannot come to a head if the people who would bring it there are hardly aware of the matter.

It would be a different story if we were talking about open carry permits, but we're not.

 

[ericahls]

No, it wouldn't. Why? Because concealed means concealed. Something that is concealed cannot be seen. If it cannot be seen, it is not something that the general population will be concerned about. They will not even know that people from outside the state are carrying in their midst. And a matter cannot come to a head if the people who would bring it there are hardly aware of the matter. It would be a different story if we were talking about open carry permits, but we're not.

You are forgetting about social media. Everyone in New York or New Jersey would know that people from other states are carrying in their state. Think of everyone bragging about on Facebook and the like.

 

[Armati]

National Reciprocity is just that. If you have a CCW in one state, all other states must honor it. Its that simple.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[press1280]

No: When this comes up, we have about 57 votes. http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/113/senate/1/100

And, it does come up repeatedly.

A republican president is not sufficient, we also need 3 more senators in the bag.



Hogan cannot do it without support from the Attorney General (Frosh), the legislature (super-majority Dem), or a court order.

Neither can any President. Any executive order imposing law on states would be challenged by anti-gun states, and they would win.

Every President is constrained by this thing called the constitution.

3 of the no votes were replaced by GOP ERS who are almost certainly yes votes. One pitfall may be if any of the yes Dems were fake votes or their arms will be twisted off if they cast a deciding vote.

 

[BeoBill]

National Reciprocity is just that. If you have a CCW in one state, all other states must honor it. Its that simple.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

OK, what about non-resident permits?

 

[Armati]

OK, what about non-resident permits?

Yes, by definition. If you hold a CCW from any state it must be recognized by all states.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[Minuteman]

F-it. Trump for president!

I especially like this part of what Trump said:

MILITARY BASES AND RECRUITING CENTERS. Banning our military from carrying firearms on bases and at recruiting centers is ridiculous. We train our military how to safely and responsibly use firearms, but our current policies leave them defenseless. To make America great again, we need a strong military. To have a strong military, we need to allow them to defend themselves.