Spark for pushing National constitutional carry?

bigmancrisler · Aug 27, 2020

I’m not sure if this has been talked about in the Kenosha thread or not, but what do you guys think about this (the Kyle Rittenhouse self defense shooting) possibly being what pushes them to pass national constitutional carry laws?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BigCountry14 · Aug 27, 2020

Not with a dem controlled house.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

bigmancrisler · Aug 27, 2020

BigCountry14 said:
Not with a dem controlled house.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

If the right were to retake both house come November do you think they would make a push for it? I personally think with recent events they might.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

davsco · Aug 27, 2020

fuhgetaboutit, that's crazy talk, we can't have good guys running around shooting bad guys.

ToolAA · Aug 27, 2020

bigmancrisler said:
If the right were to retake both house come November do you think they would make a push for it? I personally think with recent events they might.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Who are you kidding. How many times have republicans controlled the house and senate and it's not going to happen.

We'll have constitutional carrying of purple dildo's before we get firearms.

bigmancrisler · Aug 27, 2020

davsco said:
fuhgetaboutit, that's crazy talk, we can't have good guys running around shooting bad guys.

Shittttt your right

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JerseyMike · Aug 27, 2020

If anything the fact that this “gunman” used an “assault weapon” to gun down “peaceful protesters” will again bring gun control to the front of people’s minds and give Biden/Harris the push they need to work on that legislation earlier

bigmancrisler · Aug 27, 2020

JerseyMike said:
If anything the fact that this “gunman” used an “assault weapon” to gun down “peaceful protesters” will again bring gun control to the front of people’s minds and give Biden/Harris the push they need to work on that legislation earlier

True, I agree I think it can go either way

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

TheOriginalMexicanBob · Aug 27, 2020

Because of federalism I don't believe Congress could pass a carry law nationwide...there is such a thing as state's rights. The best Congress could do is make it legal to carry on federal property or withhold specific funds such as highway funds to states that won't pass such carry laws. That's called coercion which the Feds have done to get states to do something they don't want.

So...the chances are somewhere between slim and none short of the Supreme Court invalidating every state's restrictive carry laws or every American citizen being given a US Marshal's commission.

whistlersmother · Aug 27, 2020

bigmancrisler said:
If the right were to retake both house come November do you think they would make a push for it? I personally think with recent events they might.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No. The (R)'s had both sides and the presidency and still couldn't get supressors of the NFA.

They lack the will and just like the (D)'s, need something to dangle in front of their constituencies.

RoadDawg · Aug 27, 2020

Say what?

Yeah... right after Maryland volunteers to go shall issue.

rbird7282 · Aug 27, 2020

JerseyMike said:
If anything the fact that this “gunman” used an “assault weapon” to gun down “peaceful protesters” will again bring gun control to the front of people’s minds and give Biden/Harris the push they need to work on that legislation earlier

Seriously? What push? If they get elected they will do it NO MATTER WHAT.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

bigmancrisler · Aug 27, 2020

rbird7282 said:
Seriously? What push? If they get elected they will do it NO MATTER WHAT.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Facts

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LongRanger300 · Aug 27, 2020

ToolAA said:
Who are you kidding. How many times have republicans controlled the house and senate and it's not going to happen.

We'll have constitutional carrying of purple dildo's before we get firearms.

^^^ THIS The best shot we had at carry reciprocity was after the last election.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

swamplynx · Aug 27, 2020

TheOriginalMexicanBob said:
Because of federalism I don't believe Congress could pass a carry law nationwide...there is such a thing as state's rights. The best Congress could do is make it legal to carry on federal property or withhold specific funds such as highway funds to states that won't pass such carry laws. That's called coercion which the Feds have done to get states to do something they don't want.

So...the chances are somewhere between slim and none short of the Supreme Court invalidating every state's restrictive carry laws or every American citizen being given a US Marshal's commission.

Agree that the better way about it would be for SCOTUS to a) recognize the right outside the home exists and can’t be curtailed by may issue whims, and b) via precedent established in Obergefell (gay marriage) and the 14A that a license for carry in one state demands equal protection across others. Never gonna happen with the current court.

That being said, Congress has plenty of authority to legislate national reciprocity via the commerce clause. Also never gonna happen unless the Rs take 60+ in the senate and hold the house and WH.

Occam · Aug 27, 2020

LongRanger300 said:
^^^ THIS The best shot we had at carry reciprocity was after the last election.

And since the GOP didn't foolishly kill the filibuster while not having 60 seats, they had to suffer the fact that Chuck Schumer is still basically able to limit any and all Senate legislative movement to only what he wants. That hasn't changed. Without clawing back quite a few more seats (never mind the house), we're no more able to put through things like the HPA or reciprocity now than we were even when holding both houses but not 60 senate seats. Folks don't seem to understand this. Less than 60 seats means that F-in' Chucky can scuttle anything he wants to see killed.

adit · Aug 27, 2020

Occam said:
And since the GOP didn't foolishly kill the filibuster while not having 60 seats, they had to suffer the fact that Chuck Schumer is still basically able to limit any and all Senate legislative movement to only what he wants. That hasn't changed. Without clawing back quite a few more seats (never mind the house), we're no more able to put through things like the HPA or reciprocity now than we were even when holding both houses but not 60 senate seats. Folks don't seem to understand this. Less than 60 seats means that F-in' Chucky can scuttle anything he wants to see killed.

This, and due to that fact, many bills are not even offered up for consideration. They are sitting in a drawer waiting for an opportunity.

LongRanger300 · Aug 27, 2020

Occam said:
And since the GOP didn't foolishly kill the filibuster while not having 60 seats, they had to suffer the fact that Chuck Schumer is still basically able to limit any and all Senate legislative movement to only what he wants. That hasn't changed. Without clawing back quite a few more seats (never mind the house), we're no more able to put through things like the HPA or reciprocity now than we were even when holding both houses but not 60 senate seats. Folks don't seem to understand this. Less than 60 seats means that F-in' Chucky can scuttle anything he wants to see killed.

Got it. The real question becomes would they introduce 2A friendly legislation with a supermajority? If they did it would be a win for us but one less thing to campaign on.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

bigmancrisler · Aug 27, 2020

Occam said:
And since the GOP didn't foolishly kill the filibuster while not having 60 seats, they had to suffer the fact that Chuck Schumer is still basically able to limit any and all Senate legislative movement to only what he wants. That hasn't changed. Without clawing back quite a few more seats (never mind the house), we're no more able to put through things like the HPA or reciprocity now than we were even when holding both houses but not 60 senate seats. Folks don't seem to understand this. Less than 60 seats means that F-in' Chucky can scuttle anything he wants to see killed.

What is HPA?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

swamplynx · Aug 27, 2020

Occam said:
And since the GOP didn't foolishly kill the filibuster while not having 60 seats, they had to suffer the fact that Chuck Schumer is still basically able to limit any and all Senate legislative movement to only what he wants. That hasn't changed. Without clawing back quite a few more seats (never mind the house), we're no more able to put through things like the HPA or reciprocity now than we were even when holding both houses but not 60 senate seats. Folks don't seem to understand this. Less than 60 seats means that F-in' Chucky can scuttle anything he wants to see killed.

It would be better for the republic to NOT kill the filibuster. But since the commies (dems) are now on record of planning on killing it...

Spark for pushing National constitutional carry?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

2A Preacher

Ultimate Member

2A Preacher

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

2A Preacher

Active Member

2A Preacher

Ultimate Member

Peace through strength

Nos nostraque Deo

Ultimate Member

2A Preacher

Banned

Active Member

Not Even ONE Indictment

ReMember

Banned

2A Preacher

Active Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics