Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: If not Congress, Obama should reject bill on concealed-weapon permits

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Branchville
    Posts
    5,860

    Default If not Congress, Obama should reject bill on concealed-weapon permits

    California has some of the nation's toughest gun-control laws, but proposed legislation in Congress would force the state to let people with concealed-weapon permits issued elsewhere carry their guns here. The Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2015 would be bad law and bad policy, and if it passes — which it very well could — President Obama ought to add it to his growing list of bills to veto.

    Variations of the reciprocity act have cropped up in previous legislative sessions as part of a push by the gun lobby and its supporters to loosen what few sensible restrictions exist in the country. This latest proposal would force states with higher hurdles for issuing concealed-carry permits to recognize permits issued by states with lower requirements, a move that critics argue is a “race to the bottom.” Apparently, states' rights is one of those principles that conservatives are all for — but only when it suits their purposes.

    Federal gun-control laws are a good idea, in our view. But states, which have a responsibility to maintain public safety, also should be able to set their own, tougher standards without worrying that they'll be undermined by those of a more permissive neighbor. California, for instance, requires people to pass a gun safety course to qualify for a concealed-weapon permit; South Dakota does not.

    Do we really want politicians in South Dakota, Texas or South Carolina determining the rules on who may carry a concealed weapon here? Clearly, what might be a sensible gun law in rural Nevada would not necessarily be sensible in California, with it's urbanized areas and its urban problems.

    Previous incarnations of this bill easily cleared the House but stalled in the Democratic-controlled Senate. With Republicans now in control of both chambers, and with some rural-state Democratic senators backing the bill, it has a much better chance of reaching the president's desk. If Congress does the gun lobby's bidding and approves this, the president not only should veto it, but should help wrangle fellow Democrats in Congress to ensure the veto is not overridden.
    http://www.latimes.com/opinion/edito...308-story.html

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Mars Bluff, SC
    Posts
    13,642

    Default

    "Clearly, what might be a sensible gun law in rural Nevada would not necessarily be sensible in California, with it's urbanized areas and its urban problems."


    Wonder if he knows which place a weapon would be most likely needed?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Branchville
    Posts
    5,860

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mars Bluff View Post
    "Clearly, what might be a sensible gun law in rural Nevada would not necessarily be sensible in California, with it's urbanized areas and its urban problems."


    Wonder if he knows which place a weapon would be most likely needed?
    How dare you try to bring common sense to their liberal agenda. And, forget about the second amendment. Besides, that thing is so outdated that it is pathetic. Not sure what all these back woods gun nuts have against people living trying in a more civilized world.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •