TexasCHLforum.com

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

jed wrote:

chuck j wrote:Keep the Federal government out of our business . They are already intrusive enough . The Feds will only make a mess of it . They can not be trusted .

National reciprocity sounds good but will backfire in the end . No faith on the Federal level .....none . Will come back to torment and bite you on the buttocks .

100% !!
We do not need the feds involved in states' reciprocity. This is a monumental mistake. Once they are waist deep in it they will only make the usual debacle of it and will forever have their hands in where, when and how we can carry, even in our own state. Do you really want the left helping to decide how to implement some type of national reciprocity? Come on people, think about way you are asking. You want the feds involved in this??

LEOSA passed 12 years ago and the feds have not regulated eligibility to be a peace officer, requirements for retaining a peace officer license, or where peace officers can and cannot carry their handguns. There are no federally-mandated peace officer courses for a police academy, no maximum/minimum rounds an officer may/must carry, no standardized firearms training or equipment requirements.

You ignore the fact that Congress doesn't need national reciprocity to pass gun laws; they have been doing it since at least 1934. Other major pieces of gun legislation was passed in 1968, 1986, and 1994. The slippery slope argument doesn't fly -- the feds are already at the bottom of the hill.

Chas.

The bottom of the hill analogy to the slippery slope is spot on and I'm stealing it!

I'm with a few others here and 100% against Federal intrusion into States business, unless that Federal Intrusion is enforcing the United States Constitution's limits of itself and the States. If the State infringes a Constitutionally guranteed god given natural right, Federal correction should be mandatory and swift. It has been absent for decades and this is the fault of we huddled masses in many States.

The Federal Government needs to start doing its job of enforcing Constitutional limits placed on itself and the States. If the Federal Government had been operating under the limits of the Constitution and enforcing those limits from the start, I dont believe we would have an issue.

I could get behind a Federal Firearms Law that exempts any citizen from any State to be charged with any firearms crime in any State that is perfectly legal in ones home State. We can call it the National Firearms Immunity Act. This would throw most States into a tailspin.