Can Trump make CCW in all 50 states?

[Defense Rifle]

Congress can pass a bill mandating that all states be Shall-Issue and President Trump will sign the bill. In fact, it should be a clause within the National Conceal Carry bill.

Because of Federal supremacy, federal laws override State laws and liberal Maryland, CA, NY, and NJ will succumb.

AWB bans and Gun Permit Requirements will be ruled unconstitutional by the SCOTUS.

 

[Haides]

Congress can pass a bill mandating that all states be Shall-Issue and President Trump will sign the bill. In fact, it should be a clause within the National Conceal Carry bill.

Because of Federal supremacy, federal laws override State laws and liberal Maryland, CA, NY, and NJ will succumb.

AWB bans and Gun Permit Requirements will be ruled unconstitutional by the SCOTUS.

That's how it should be. The Federal government regulating what the States can do in matters pursuant to the US Constitution.

But I'm in the camp that I'd rather have a supreme court decision. It's much more concrete, and if we jump the gun and enact national carry too soon, we lose opportunities to bring the issue to SCOTUS

 

[CrueChief]

I'll believe it when it happens.
Republican presidents tend to suck on gun issues.

As much as everyone bitches about Clinton, the God-forsaken AWB has expired (and GW Bush wanted to extend it but congress shot down the idea).

Reagan signed the '86 act. Now a $20 DIAS costs about $25,000 because of his signature.

And don't whine about the Hughes Amendement in the House. The damn bill passed the Republican-controlled Senate and was signed into law by a Republican president who had no problem banning new machine guns. You already know the infamous Reagan Quote: "There's no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons." He later supported the Brady Bill, loudly.

GWH Bush ordered a ban on semi-auto imports.

Nixon said on the record that if he had his way he'd ban handguns and would even license hunting rifles.

So we are supposed to believe Trump will be different?

Like I said, I'll believe it when it happens.

And if I'm wrong I'll be happy as a pig in $hit to admit it.

How I'd LOVE a repeal of the MG ban, and man do I want a CCW without having to move to the other side of the Potomac River.

I'm not trying to troll fellas, and I usually stay away from controversial subjects like politics, religion, and the abomination that goes by the name of the Designated Hitter (what's up with that, American League?).

But I am saying, if history is any guide, don't get your hopes up.

Put pressure on him, sure, but don't get your hopes up.

Oh, and Happy Birthday to my Brother Marines!


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

Trump is not your typical Republican.

 

[RoadDawg]

Oh, I know. You make a great suggestion to follow yourself.

Training may be standardized to be able to carry in all 50 states. Expecting some sort of background check is within reason also.

We all need to work together to keep the bar low, if those requirements get baked in to get some bedwetting democrats on board.

I refuse to give up a constitutional right that is being infringed... to gain a federally governed permission.

 

[Alea Jacta Est]

Trump can't, but the Republican led Congress can pass a bill and put it on his desk to sign. Presidents (except Obama) don't make laws, they sign them.

Obama didn't make laws

Obama in fact and deed broke laws by repeated unconstitutional use of presidential decision directives and executive orders. Furthermore, his executive branch overreach leveraged the federal government through implementation of federal regulations that circumvented Congress (not that those POSs didn't ask for AND deserve it given their own abdication).

 

[Biggfoot44]

What Ingoes said doesn't seem too bad, if you mumble it real fast.

But it ceedes the control of Carry to the Federal Gov't, and lets them set the standards for it. Might seem simple and non-intrusive initially, but at that point it will be a small matter to "update" the standards every few years.

Sure, for Maryland and 4-5 other state current conditions this would seem a leap forewards, but at the expense of throwing the 2A and the rest of the Country under the bus.

 

[woodstock]

Trump is not your typical Republican.

http://freebeacon.com/issues/guns-win-big-election-day/ just an interesting read.

 

[miles71]

Ok maybe I'm just stupid but........

Why not create a national ccw permit. Different requirements but if the applicant can meet the requirements they get a card that says they can carry in any state. States can't say no to the FBI or CIA or Marshalls or any other alphabet carrying agency, so why can't there be a national ccw permit?

TD

 

[JPG]

It would be great if the SCOTUS said everyone could carry anywhere. Continuing they should say If some place doesn't want to allow carry in their business then that business should provide a secure place to keep weapons. This would limit the places that wouldn't allow weapons.

 

[thomfantomas]

something huge will happen to all of us gun owners across this nation IN OUR FAVOR! for once

 

[press1280]

Ok maybe I'm just stupid but........

Why not create a national ccw permit. Different requirements but if the applicant can meet the requirements they get a card that says they can carry in any state. States can't say no to the FBI or CIA or Marshalls or any other alphabet carrying agency, so why can't there be a national ccw permit?

TD

I wouldn't leave that with the Feds. The reciprocity legislation keeps the Feds out except for enforcement of the law.

 

[BeoBill]

What Ingoes said doesn't seem too bad, if you mumble it real fast.

But it ceedes the control of Carry to the Federal Gov't, and lets them set the standards for it. Might seem simple and non-intrusive initially, but at that point it will be a small matter to "update" the standards every few years.

Sure, for Maryland and 4-5 other state current conditions this would seem a leap forewards, but at the expense of throwing the 2A and the rest of the Country under the bus.

I agree. For reference, see the "Interstate Commerce Stretch" circus, playing everywhere.

 

[swinokur]

What the Feds can giveth, they can also take away.

Don't let the camel get his nose under this tent.

 

[jeffie7]

I'm all for him making all states shall issue. Even if the law is changed in 4/8 years most states would just stay shall issue. The few that did change from GS to shall will have to debate on going back to GS. If crime happens to have dropped in the years leading up to it. They might think twice about it. If they change it back and crime goes back up they would get a lot of chit.

 

[thomfantomas]

I'm all for him making all states shall issue. Even if the law is changed in 4/8 years most states would just stay shall issue. The few that did change from GS to shall will have to debate on going back to GS. If crime happens to have dropped in the years leading up to it. They might think twice about it. If they change it back and crime goes back up they would get a lot of chit.

the libtards always have an invalid excuse....they'll use Trumps Presidential Election in 2018 for md governors race wait and see!

 

[thomfantomas]

I'm all for him making all states shall issue. Even if the law is changed in 4/8 years most states would just stay shall issue. The few that did change from GS to shall will have to debate on going back to GS. If crime happens to have dropped in the years leading up to it. They might think twice about it. If they change it back and crime goes back up they would get a lot of chit.

but again THIS IS A REALITY WE WILL SEE!

 

[Kharn]

I'm all for him making all states shall issue. Even if the law is changed in 4/8 years most states would just stay shall issue. The few that did change from GS to shall will have to debate on going back to GS. If crime happens to have dropped in the years leading up to it. They might think twice about it. If they change it back and crime goes back up they would get a lot of chit.

They wouldn't have to debate it, if a federal law blocked the application of G&S, and then the federal law went away, G&S would immediately spring back into force. It takes a court ruling to remove a law to the point that it must be passed again by the legislature.

 

[Haides]

It would be great if the SCOTUS said everyone could carry anywhere. Continuing they should say If some place doesn't want to allow carry in their business then that business should provide a secure place to keep weapons. This would limit the places that wouldn't allow weapons.

Or make them financially liable for death or injury if a crazy person comes in and shoots up the customers they forced to be unarmed.

 

[jeffie7]

They wouldn't have to debate it, if a federal law blocked the application of G&S, and then the federal law went away, G&S would immediately spring back into force. It takes a court ruling to remove a law to the point that it must be passed again by the legislature.

No doubt that is what they would plan to do. The question would be how much if any, did gun related issues go down or up. If they went down over the years only to spring back up it would put more pressure on them to allow it.

Maryland assumes shall issue will cause a massive spike in gun crime.

 

[rico903]

Or make them financially liable for death or injury if a crazy person comes in and shoots up the customers they forced to be unarmed.

Do you think all places that serve alcohol should have to allow firearms?