Thune's Gun Ownership Amendment - it's RIDICULOUS!

On Wednesday, the Senate is expected to vote on the latest assault on public safety in the name of gun ownership. Introduced as an amendment to the military’s budget bill by Senator John Thune, a Republican of South Dakota, this radical measure would nullify the laws of almost every state, subjecting police officers to greater risk and increasing the potential for gun violence.

Nearly all states issue licenses to carry concealed firearms, but the criteria for granting such permits vary widely, and it is now, sensibly, up to each state to decide whether to accept another state’s permits.

At least 35 states prevent people from carrying concealed weapons if they have certain misdemeanor convictions. At least 31 states prohibit alcohol abusers from obtaining a concealed carry permit and require gun safety training. The Thune amendment would force states with more restrictive standards to accept concealed carry permits from states with less stringent rules — in effect giving the lax rules national reach.

Passage of the amendment would make it much harder for law enforcement to distinguish between legal and illegal possession of a firearm. It would be a boon for illegal gun traffickers, making it easier to transport weapons across state lines without being caught.

For Alaska to permit residents who have committed repeated violent misdemeanors or who have committed misdemeanor sex offenses against minors to carry a concealed weapon is terrible public policy. For the Senate to extend that permit to 47 other states would be the height of irresponsibility, as well as a breathtaking violation of legitimate states’ rights.

Source from: www.nytimes.com...

Don't know if there's a duplicate post about this here.

FORGET OBAMA, this is an issue WE NEED TO TACKLE NOW.

And by that, I don't mean we support Thune. This amendment is the most DANGEROUS, most RIDICULOUS I've ever seen! I mean, I'm all for free ownership of guns, but this law takes "free ownership" and crosses the line downright to "dangerous ownership!"

Weapons transports... misdemeanors... this is NOT good public policy.

What do you think?

While we're at it lets stop states from recognizing out of state driver's licenses.

Those bastards in CT will give a license to anybody.

I should say having been an instructor in one of those more difficult states to get a permit in the whole "class" requirement thing is complete bull. If your check clears and you know which end goes bang you pass.

I dont particularly like Thune's amendment because if it passes it could open up the push for "standardization" which would subject everyone to the crock extortion that is these "permits and classes" and put it all under federal oversight. Very bad.

It sucks that I have to pull over and lock my gun up when I travel through MA but it would suck more to have federal mandates forcing my extortion and subservience.

[edit on 22-7-2009 by thisguyrighthere]

Its kind of a tossup, because not all misdemeanors are indicative of a person unfit to possess a CCW. In some locales forgetting to get your vehicle re-inspected or not wearing your seatbelt can be classified as a misdemeanor, however I fail to see either of those having an impact on someones character in relation to carrying a concealed weapon. That being said someone with a domestic abuse charge or any violent/drug related felony probably should not have a CCW, and from what I've read most places tend to prohibit such people from obtaining a permit.

Statistically, the majority of crimes committed by use of gun, are done by guns NOT registered to said shooter of gun.

There is no evidence that lawful gun owners are committing crimes with guns.

Therefore there is no evidence saying that allowing lawful gun owners to transport their guns is going to increase gun violence.

Again, placing restrictions on LAWFUL GUN OWNERS does nothing to curb CRIMINAL GUN ACTIVITY.

I say before any more gun control laws come out, there should be acceleration and speed governors in all vehicles. Its criminal that we have laws restricting speed and high acceleration yet vehicles are not designed in that way. Too many people are hurt and die needlessly because of this design omission.

Isn't that the same premise as guns causing crimes rather than those who use them?

If Thune's bill passes, then on the one side it makes things more difficult for the feds to control gun ownership, while at the same time it kicks open the doors for standardization of gun control laws amongst the states. One following the other.

Do not forget, some of congressmen are extremely intelligent, while others have intelligent people working through them. They have plenty of time to take this kind of stuff in steps.



PG

From my interpretation of the constitution gun permits are illegal. What part of shall not be infringed do they not understand? Certainly felons should not be allowed to posses or carry, as their rights are suspended anyway.

respectfully

reluctantpawn

It's outrageous in a sense that I've just never seen something so bold. I support it, to be honest. Legal carriers are statistically less likely to commit a crime involving a gun. That also in a way means more people to possibly help prevent a crime if needed. Or at least that's how I look at it. But I can see where people would have fears but to be honest, to do a crime with a registered and everything is asking to get caught.

Passage fails by 2 votes.

Washington, D.C. - Both Virginia Senators Mark Warner and Jim Webb broke with their party to back a gun control amendment, but the measure failed anyway. Senators Warner and Webb were among 58 senators who voted Wednesday in support of the controversial Thune amendment that would have allowed a person with a concealed weapon permit in one state to carry a weapon into another state. The vote fell two short of the 60 votes needed to approve the measure. Before the vote, Warner's officer said he is a strong supporter of Second Amendment rights, while a Webb spokesman said he has backed similar bills in the past. About 30 survivors and families of Virginia Tech victims had worked to defeat the amendment. One family member cheered the vote but said she was disappointed by the votes of Warner and Webb. Source

This is a reciprocity law that does nothing to endanger anyone except to damage the egos of those who are afraid of guns and the politicians who want nothing more than to disarm the public and abolish the Second Amendment.

There is no population of gun owners that is more responsible than those who possess concealed-carry permits. They are trained and they are law-abiding.

I personally oppose any kind of firearms licensure on the grounds that it can be used as a means to open a back door to requiring licensure for all firearms ownership and the kind of governmental, bureaucratic incompetence and malfeasance that is now taking place in Florida, where citizens must wait for ridiculous periods of time to get their licenses, the costs of those licenses are going up, and the money that has been earmarked for the licensure administration is being raided by political thieves.

Anyone who gets as riled up over this issue is either grossly misinformed or they are dishonest.



[edit on 2009/7/22 by GradyPhilpott]

Reply to post by KarlG

I have a federal firtearms license (01 FFL) and I fire more rounds training in one year than most cops do in their entire career.

Three years ago I ran afoul of an overzealous campus cop and it ended with me being charged with public intoxication. I requested a breathalyzer and I was denied.

By your standards I should be denied my right to self defense while traveling. Idiotic in the very least.



Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

This bill shouldn't be necessary. I though all states were to honor other state's laws when pertaining to travelers and visitors.

Otherwise, not only driver's licenses, but car license plates would be violating another state's requirements.

Boy, here in Florida, that could really provide a windfall of profit!

Pull over and ticket all out of state drivers. For illegal tags and illegal licenses.

Stupidity seems to be the norm now, and the sooner we reach a tipping point and bring reason back into law, the better off we'll all be.

The bill failed the Senate, so those who prefer for criminals and the police to have all the guns should feel all warm and fuzzy now. Check to make sure your cell phones are charged and handy.

Some may think it odd, but I personally see this as a victory.

The majority of voters value their Second Amendment rights and know that Democrats like Chuck Schumer are liars.

I don't know why so many voters put the Second Amendment on the back burner so easily, but history has shown that they will move it quickly to the front burner when those rights are flouted by legislators.

I'm hearing now that the bill may come up for another vote soon because the vote was so close.

I personally hope it fails and the American people get mad enough to vote these Marxist buffoons out of office.

2010!

[edit on 2009/7/22 by GradyPhilpott]

While marxism continues to bubble toward the surface of American policy and the masses finally wake up to what they've been supporting in the Democrat Party, the blow-back continues to grow in the background of every news story lately.

I'd like to point out that as an American citizen, I HAVE a permit! It's called the Constitution of the United States of America! I have the God given right to Keep and Bare arms. That's the law of the land.

You Democrats out there that call yourselves Americans, wake up to the fact that your party is actively supporting the destruction of your country.

You Democrats out there that think this is all just great, knock off the once noble, "Democrat" label and crawl back into your Marxist shells...

"An assault on public saftey" That takes the cake. This liberal gun control BS has gone to far!!! What do you suppose they consider armed drug dealers and street thugs? Constituancy perhaps?
A person that would take the,time,trouble and expense to get a"legal" concealed carry permit,would probably be a law abiding citizen. Of course armed law abiding citizens would throw a wrench in the plans,of the liberal criminal lobby. Armed victums don't make for very easy prey,do they? It sure makes supplementing a government check,a bit more dangerous doesn't it?

I tell you what I support. Criminal control!!! Not gun control!!

Originally posted by netwarrior
Reply to post by KarlG

 

I have a federal firtearms license (01 FFL) and I fire more rounds training in one year than most cops do in their entire career.

Three years ago I ran afoul of an overzealous campus cop and it ended with me being charged with public intoxication. I requested a breathalyzer and I was denied.

By your standards I should be denied my right to self defense while traveling. Idiotic in the very least.

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

I see. You wanted to shoot the campus cop because he denied you a breathalyzer. Right. Self-defense, sure.

'Nuff said.

Originally posted by dooper
This bill shouldn't be necessary.

You're absolutely correct. This law should be unnecessary. Every state in the union should honor and defend the right of all law-abiding citizens to exercise their rights under the Second Amendment of the Constitution.

Unfortunately, not all do and as it is the laws between the various states are so confusing that the honest, law-abiding citizen who travels has a daunting task trying not to be in violation of the law from state to state.

The bill that just failed and was maligned so viciously by Charles Schumer and others would treat CCW licenses like drivers' licenses. As long as you're visiting or passing through, your license is good.

This is a frightening thing to those whose primary goal in life is to deprive citizens of the right to defend themselves against criminals.

Pay close attention, folks. These left-wing politicians have been biding their time until they had enough clout in Congress to cram their agenda down our throats.

Now they've got it and the benefit of this arrangement is that they are so embolden that even the most obtuse among us, who is at least honest in his judgement, will be able to see their nefarious intent because now nothing can stop them.

The following link does a pretty good job of describing the laws in the United States regarding concealed carry.

Good luck making sense out of it.

www.handgunlaw.us...

[edit on 2009/7/22 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by KarlG

I see. You wanted to shoot the campus cop because he denied you a breathalyzer. Right. Self-defense, sure.

'Nuff said.

If you weren't interested in carrying on a serious dialog, why did you bother to post?

Surely, you are capable of making a cogent argument for your position without twisting the words of others.

Your original post was inaccurate and inflammatory.

You purposely misrepresented netwarrior's post.

How about just one serious post?

[edit on 2009/7/22 by GradyPhilpott]

People are unsafe and dumb. They use guns to hurt other people.

If it wasn't for that minor issue, give guns to everyone.

But since I think our safety is more important than an unclear amendment in a document written when automatic handguns were much less common and crime was completely different... uh... I don't like this.

I don't like guns. I won't even play shooting video games. And if I have to die because I don't have a gun to defend myself, so be it. I'm not a violent person. Guns are violent, even for defense.

reply to post by KarlG


As much I love the second ammendment.. I completely oppose the idea of lax standards to concealed carry.

There should be strict standards to get one including, but not limited to; Safety training, gun training (as In, the kind Police officer's have), a psych evaluation, no violent crime record, ect..


If they can't meet those standards they should keep their gun at home. Fortunately, I don't think they would pass something to loosen the laws in this regard.

I do however believe there should be a national standard and national carry permits
edit: Add for content

[edit on 22-7-2009 by Miraj]

reply to post by ravenshadow13


While I respect your opinion.. I have a few things to note.

Automatic firearms didn't exist at all during at the time of the American Revolution..


Also if you look at the founding fathers thoughts, it was clear that; Guns are meant to be owned by civilians, and with a military use in mind for them. That they also believed that; Without the second ammendment, the first would never last.