Credit Card/National Park CCW Thread

[...]

o.

BTW Gun Control is not popular. This has stunned many of these stupid democrats and they have to get re-elected so they are backing down. There have been a lot of shootings, even police officers kill and people have said enforce the laws we have. Don't forget Obama blamed us for mexico's problems and no one jumped on that wagon. Someone would have to do something really bad to change public opinion, but then they'd ask could we stop it? This happened at VT and many people said give students who can get CCW permits guns so they're not fish in a barrel.

Now is the time to educate the public, repeal stupid gun laws, have a Constitutional Reclamation act and introduce legislation for no new gun laws, ever.

 

[novus collectus]

BTW Gun Control is not popular. This has stunned many of these stupid democrats and they have to get re-elected so they are backing down. There have been a lot of shootings, even police officers kill and people have said enforce the laws we have. Don't forget Obama blamed us for mexico's problems and no one jumped on that wagon. Someone would have to do something really bad to change public opinion, but then they'd ask could we stop it? This happened at VT and many people said give students who can get CCW permits guns so they're not fish in a barrel.

Now is the time to educate the public, repeal stupid gun laws, have a Constitutional Reclamation act and introduce legislation for no new gun laws, ever.

Yes, now is the time to educate the public, but since the antis are possibly in charge of the government, we are now at a disadvantage and have to work even harder to educate the public because the party in charge gets to set the agenda for media attention for the most part.

WIth this possible victory now federaally is not the time to relax, but rather now is the time to be even more aggressive.
Being more aggressive may not win us advancements much as we hope, but it will definitely go a long way towards countering the antis' attempts at passing stupid gun laws.

 

[...]

Yes, now is the time to educate the public, but since the antis are possibly in charge of the government, we are now at a disadvantage and have to work even harder to educate the public because the party in charge gets to set the agenda for media attention for the most part.

WIth this possible victory now federaally is not the time to relax, but rather now is the time to be even more aggressive.
Being more aggressive may not win us advancements much as we hope, but it will definitely go a long way towards countering the antis' attempts at passing stupid gun laws.

were going to counter because of communication and common sense. More people get it now than in 1993, we just have to keep it going. I thought we'd get killed in MD this year, but there were not real new restrictions.

 

[MDFF2008]

Vette, are you talking about percentage of credit available? That kind of sounds like what your talking about.

With the recent credit market, a lot of my cards cut my limit, so for example I went from having a 500 dollar balance on a 1500 dollar card (0% apr of course) to having a 500 dollar balance on a 550 dollar card.

My credit score rock bottoms because my percentage of available credit has gone from 33% to 9%.

 

[Norton]

Duplicate threads merged.

 

[shadow116]

How the National Park Carry is better now.

I was under the impression that the National park carry was just making into law; what the rule change last year was supposed too.

But I was wrong.

The Bush Administration rule required among other things that:
The gun owner have a concealed carry license.
The gun owner carry a handgun concealed.
The state in which the park was located had to allow carry in state parks. (Not 100% sure about this).

The Brady Campaign sued and successfully blocked this in the federal courts.

Coburn’s amendment goes much further:

The Secretary of the Interior shall not promulgate or enforce any regulation that prohibits an individual from possessing a firearm including an assembled or functional firearm in any unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife Refuge System if–
(1) the individual is not otherwise prohibited by law from possessing the firearm; and
(2) the possession of the firearm is in compliance with the law of the State in which the unit of the National Park System or the National Wildlife Refuge System is located.

Thus Arizonans without a license can now carry any firearm openly in their national parks and Texans can now carry rifles and shotguns openly (and handguns in their cars without a license) in their national parks since those activities are in compliance with the law outside the Park.

This must burn up the Brady Campaign - they won a battle and lost a much bigger war!

So in states that have open carry, you can open carry in the parks. This is not a CCW only carry law.

 

[Norton]

I'm changing the thread title. A lot of people are missing that this is about the National Park CCW.

 

[Todd v.]

I wonder if backpacking is acceptable means of transporting business currency?

 

[Drmsparks]

What surprised me was that The firearms ban in national parks was instigated by Reagan.

And Helmke is a total Douchebag. "people will have to worry about AK47's when hiking" Really? what an idiot.

The big thing I think this shows it that any serious gun control legislation is dead in the water. If they can't stop CCW in the parks, there is no way they'll get support for an AWB.

The anti gun faction in the democratic party is on the decline, and they have lost far more power than they realize.

 

[shadow116]

What surprised me was that The firearms ban in national parks was instigated by Reagan

That is a funny thing. Most conservatives love to recall and talk about the Reagan era.

Look at the record, Reagan was NOT a friend to Gun Owners.

“[The Brady Bill] is just plain common sense that there be a waiting period to allow local law enforcement officials to conduct background checks on those who wish to buy a handgun.” by R. Reagan

“[L]isten to the American public and to the law enforcement community and support a ban on the further manufacture of [assault] weapons.”

Joint letter from former Presidents Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, and Gerald Ford, Assault Weapons Ban Appears to Gain, The Boston Globe, 5/5/94

“As a longtime gun owner and supporter of the right to bear arms, I, too, have carefully thought about this issue. I am convinced that the limitations imposed in this bill are absolutely necessary. I know there is heavy pressure on you to go the other way, but I strongly urge you to join me in supporting this bill. It must be passed.”
– Letter to former Rep. Scott Klug (R-WI) from R. Reagan

“It was Governor Ronald Reagan of California who signed the Mulford Act in 1967, ‘prohibiting the carrying of firearms on one's person or in a vehicle, in any public place or on any public street.’ The law was aimed at stopping the Black Panthers, but affected all gun owners.

“Twenty-four years later, Reagan was still pushing gun control. ‘I support the Brady Bill,’ he said in a March 28, 1991 speech, ‘and I urge the Congress to enact it without further delay.’"

 

[alucard0822]

I understand, what you are not taking into consideration I think is the point value of having less available credit because of less accounts far outweighs the point value for debt to credit. Which is probably more of what I'm really trying to explain and having epic failure I think. Sorry for maybe not getting that across very well. A 20 point drop I think would take more than a debt to credit balance unless it was significant.

I deal with a couple credit things, nowhere near the number or complexity you deal with, but my understanding by way of the fleet buisness, is the credit score (ex 820, or AA rating) means little to most creditors, it is just an overly simplified indicator based on certain chosen stats, the raw data is what most go by, us included, and total existing lines of credit are considered much heavier than percentage of that credit used, mostly because there is nothing a creditor can do to keep a person, or company from basically maxing out their credit after they get the loan. an online application for a credit card probably just looks at the credit score because it is quick and simple, but for most anything of value, the creditor actually reads the report, and kinda comes up with their own number that is probably different from the credit boroughs because there is more at stake, and special considerations and risks not factored into the generic scores.

That being said, I can personally and professionally vouch for the fact 3rd Rcn is one of the top professionals around in reguards to working with credit in real life, not just textbook examples and explanations, but actually how the information is used by real creditors, I would take his word for it over anything else, and if my understanding is not accurate, I know he will correct me.

 

[Waterdoor]

The two turncoats that voted no are Michael Castle from Delaware and Mark Kirk from Illinois. Castle is a known problem for gun owners. Simply put this guy must go in the next election cycle. He has an F rating from the NRA. I know we have DE. guys on the board and I hope they are working towards sending him to the unemployment line. Kirk has a D rating from the NRA as well. He too needs to find another job.

Voted NO on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers.
A bill to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others. A YES vote would:
Prohibit individuals from filing a qualified civil liability action
Exempt lawsuits brought against individuals who knowingly transfer a firearm that will be used to commit a violent or drug-trafficking crime
Exempt lawsuits against actions that result in death, physical injury or property damage due solely to a product defect
Dismiss of all civil liability actions pending on the date of enactment
Prohibit the manufacture, import, sale or delivery of armor piercing ammunition
Reference: Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act; Bill S 397 ; vote number 2005-534 on Oct 20, 2005

Voted NO on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse.
Vote to pass a bill that would prohibit liability lawsuits from being brought against gun manufacturers and dealers based on the criminal misuse of firearms. The bill would also block these actions from being brought up against gun trade organizations and against ammunition makers and sellers. The measure would apply immediately to any pending cases. Several specific exceptions to the ban exist. This includes civil suits would be allowed against a maker or dealer who "knowingly and willfully violated" state or federal laws in the selling or marketing of a weapon. Design and manufacturing defect lawsuits are also permitted when weapons are "used as intended.
Reference: Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act; Bill HR 1036 ; vote number 2003-124 on Apr 9, 2003

Voted NO on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1.
Vote to pass a bill requiring anyone who purchases a gun at a gun show to go through an instant background check which must be completed within 24 hours [instead of 72 hours].
Reference: Bill introduced by McCollum, R-FL; Bill HR 2122 ; vote number 1999-244 on Jun 18, 1999

Rated F by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun control voting record.
Castle scores F by NRA on pro-gun rights policies

 

[aquaman]

That is a funny thing. Most conservatives love to recall and talk about the Reagan era.

Look at the record, Reagan was NOT a friend to Gun Owners.

Reagan was one of our greatest presidents, hypothetically, even with some of his anti-gun positions i would still vote for him. Provided that both houses of our legislature were majority pro 2A

 

[Brychan]

Reagan was one of our greatest presidents, hypothetically, even with some of his anti-gun positions i would still vote for him. Provided that both houses of our legislature were majority pro 2A

Funny I don't remember him being so great, I remember him breaking the air controllers union, farmers driving their tractors to DC, I know he was credited with ending the cold war, but the USSR was broke and could not hold themselves together, he just happened to be president at the time.

 

[Half-cocked]

Funny I don't remember him being so great, I remember him breaking the air controllers union, farmers driving their tractors to DC, I know he was credited with ending the cold war, but the USSR was broke and could not hold themselves together, he just happened to be president at the time.

Point of fact, the air controllers strike was flat-out illegal, and they were given ample warning what would happen. They chose to ignore the warnings, and tried to shut down the entire nation's economy.

Another point of fact, Reagan was not president when the Soviet Union dissolved, Bush 1 was. But his policies are partly credited for triggering the Soviet Union's demise. At the outset of Reagan's presidency, the USSR had the world's largest and most formidable military, occupied all of Eastern Europe and Afghanistan, and was by any measure a ruthless and totalitarian empire.

 

[gamer_jim]

I'm changing the thread title. A lot of people are missing that this is about the National Park CCW.

So did the amendment make it through? Is Obama really going to sign it today?

 

[Norton]

So did the amendment make it through? Is Obama really going to sign it today?

House passed it clean, I thought. That puts him in the position of signing it or not.

http://www.NRAILA.org/News/Read/NewsReleases.aspx?ID=12506

 

[novus collectus]

Oh the irony, Obama is the most anti gun president we have had in maybe ever, but yet the first gun control law he signs will be pro RKBA.

 

[Todd v.]

Oh the irony, Obama is the most anti gun president we have had in maybe ever, but yet the first gun control law he signs will be pro RKBA.

And probably the 1st pro 2A bill he's ever signed....

 

[shadow116]

Can he just sign "Present" on the Bill???