8 dead in Texas high school shooting

[Ridgerunner]

I acknowledge that NYC probably has the best PD in the world.

But unless the police never found a weapon on anybody previously, then you have people, probably more than before, walking the street carrying a concealed weapon. The stop and frisk policy undoubtedly removed some guns from the street.

 

[Inisfallen]

I acknowledge that NYC probably has the best PD in the world.

But unless the police never found a weapon on anybody previously, then you have people, probably more than before, walking the street carrying a concealed weapon. The stop and frisk policy undoubtedly removed some guns from the street.

Quite possibly. But it was a bad program, created an enormous amount of resentment, was probably unconstitutional as carried out, mostly produced a whole bunch of BS marijuana arrests, when it produced any arrests at all, and it had to go.

 

[Ridgerunner]

So you don’t want to answer the question. If you don’t want to acknowledge your real position, there’s no point in anyone talking to you further about it.

 

[Ridgerunner]

You’re mostly right. I, and a lot of others, don’t trust the left at all, believing that for many if not most of them, total ban is the objective.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I don’t see the merit in it other than in a “passing through” situation.

 

[Inisfallen]

You’re mostly right. I, and a lot of others, don’t trust the left at all, believing that for many if not most of them, total ban is the objective.

I do not advocate a total ban. I don’t know anyone who advocates a total ban. I don’t think I’ve seen anyone here advocate for such a ban.

But for those like me, we’re finding that the gun rights advocates are not open to any kind of compromise or regulation whatsoever. None. Certainly the NRA isn’t.

That’s pretty much why I gave up trying to persuade and just set up a credit card monthly autopay to Everytown for Gun Safety.

 

[Inisfallen]

That woman was pardoned by then-Governor Christie of New Jersey, so she didn’t go to prison.

Still, I’m pretty sure you’d agree that the holder of a concealed carry license has a responsibility to become familiar with the laws governing the carrying of a firearm.

And knowing that a Pennsylvania permit is valid only in Pennsylvania seems pretty basic. Even if her claim that she did not know that her Pennsylvania permit was not valid in New Jersey, that doesn’t excuse her. She should have known.

I’m well aware that I can’t buy a big bag of weed in Colorado and then sit on my stoop in Brooklyn and smoke it. Same situation.

 

[JonNC]

That woman was pardoned by then-Governor Christie of New Jersey, so she didn’t go to prison.

It shouldn’t have been a cause for arrest. She shouldn’t have needed a pardon.

And knowing that a Pennsylvania permit is valid only in Pennsylvania seems pretty basic. Even if her claim that she did not know that her Pennsylvania permit was not valid in New Jersey, that doesn’t excuse her. She should have known.

Maybe, but this is the reason for reciprocity.

I’m well aware that I can’t buy a big bag of weed in Colorado and then sit on my stoop in Brooklyn and smoke it. Same situation.

No. It isn’t. The right to keep and bear arms is a constitutionally enumerated protected right. Pot is not. Then again, marriage isn’t either, but that’s the closer comparison. A license in one state honored in the others.

 

[Inisfallen]

A license in one state honored in the others.

Whether or not that ought to be the law, it isn’t. And this woman was responsible for knowing that, as a holder of the permit.

Do you really disagree with me on that?

 

[JonNC]

Whether or not that ought to be the law, it isn’t . And this woman was responsible for knowing that, as a holder of the permit.

Do you really disagree with me on that?

No, though I am happy Christie pardoned her.
Are you really disagreeing about licenses?

 

[Inisfallen]

Do I disagree that every state should have to honor the minimal, and sometimes non-existent, permitting standards for carrying a concealed weapon of every other state?

Was I not clear? Yes, absolutely, I disagree.

 

[Inisfallen]

The right to keep and bear arms is a constitutionally enumerated protected right.

This is true. However, the Supreme Court, in Heller, specifically says that it’s subject to regulation, and that such regulation may include prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons.

 

[JonNC]

Do I disagree that every state should have to honor the minimal, and sometimes non-existent, permitting standards for carrying a concealed weapon of every other state?

Was I not clear? Yes, absolutely, I disagree.

So then, if North Carolina decides that New York’s drivers license requirements are minimal to non-existent, you are okay with NC arresting NY drivers for driving without a valid license?

I am sure that New York drivers kill more people than all CCL holders combined

 

[Inisfallen]

So then, if North Carolina decides that New York’s drivers license requirements are minimal to non-existent, you are okay with NC arresting NY drivers for driving without a valid license?

I don’t believe that a license to drive is in the same category as a license to carry a concealed firearm.

I am sure that New York drivers kill more people than all CCL holders combined

Interesting. Who knows, you might be right. Not relevant.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

No. It isn’t. The right to keep and bear arms is a constitutionally enumerated protected right.

If the state regulations on guns are constitutional then this fact you mention is of no relevance to the reciprocity question.

… Then again, marriage isn’t either, but that’s the closer comparison. A license in one state honored in the others.

There are fewer differences between states on laws on marriage than there are on laws on guns. Also the fact of being married is recognized as more central to who a person is than the fact that that person has a gun. A person can always sell his gun, or transport it through the state in a manner consistent with that state’s laws. It is much more intrusive to tell a couple who is married in one state that they cannot be married in another state. That is why we have reciprocity in marriage laws and not in gun laws.

 

[JonNC]

I don’t believe that a license to drive is in the same category as a license to carry a concealed firearm.

I don’t either. The right to keep and bear arms is constitutionally protected. Driving a car is not.

Interesting. Who knows, you might be right. Not relevant.

Completely relevant. Are you saying that your opposition to CCL reciprocity is related to something other than public safety?

 

[Inisfallen]

I don’t either. The right to keep and bear arms is constitutionally protected. Driving a car is not.

So it is. And yet it is subject to regulation, as the Supreme Court has pointed out.

Completely relevant. Are you saying that your opposition to CCL reciprocity is related to something other than public safety?

I see where you’re trying to lead me, but I’m not going there. Guns are not cars, licenses to carry are not driver’s licenses, and they should not be treated as if they were the same thing.

 

[JonNC]

If the state regulations on guns are constitutional then this fact you mention is of no relevance to the reciprocity question.

I understand. Then you have no problem with states exercising the same type reciprocity restrictions on drivers licenses.

There are fewer differences between states on laws on marriage than there are on laws on guns. Also the fact of being married is recognized as more central to who a person is than the fact that that person has a gun.

Not according to the constitution. The founders valued marriage very highly, but the right to keep and bear arms is specifically protected -“shall not be infringed.”

A person can always sell his gun, or transport it through the state in a manner consistent with that state’s laws.

Why should he/she have to sell something constitutionally protected?

It is much more intrusive to tell a couple who is married in one state that they cannot be married in another state. That is why we have reciprocity in marriage laws and not in gun laws.

The states have no obligation to have marriage laws at all. In fact, I don’t think they should, but that’s besides to point.
The point is the argument for marriage and driver’s license reciprocity is, essentially, convenience. There’s no reason not to provide the same level of convenience on CCL.

 

[JonNC]

So it is. And yet it is subject to regulation, as the Supreme Court has pointed out.

And driving a car is not. Reciprocity is not removing regulation. It is making it reasonable for law abiding Americans.

I see where you’re trying to lead me, but I’m not going there. Guns are not cars, licenses to carry are not driver’s licenses, and they should not be treated as if they were the same thing.

I know, but there is no logical reason not to treat CCL with the same level of reciprocity as any other license shown reciprocity

 

[Inisfallen]

Reciprocity is not removing regulation.

Of course it is, at least in this case. If New York, for example, has fairly stringent regulations for concealed carrying permits, and Vermont, say, has none whatsoever, effectively New York’s regulations are removed for everyone from Vermont.