TexasCHLforum.com

This page contains links to a video of the entire subcommittee hearing. It's an hour and 45 minutes long, so I have not had a chance to watch it.

http://volokh.com/2011/09/14/congressio ... spiracy%29" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

loadedliberal wrote:

Rex B wrote:

Purplehood wrote: there have been a whole lot of positive steps on the 2A front in the last decade.
.

But NONE of them came from a bill passed by the US Congress and signed into law by the president.
In fact, nothing enacted by Congress since the BOR has had the purpose of expanding the recognition our firearm freedoms.

Who was it said (approximately) "Never is the public in peril save for when Congress is in session" ?

There was the national park carry which Obama signed

I stand corrected. Good catch

Purplehood wrote: Don't you think that it is time for something positive to come out of Congress regarding the 2A rather than the drivel that we have seen in the past?

Absolutely! But they have a horrible track record for defending our rights.
I don't trust them as far as I can throw the lot of them, especially with the Democrats in control of the Senate.

Purplehood wrote: there have been a whole lot of positive steps on the 2A front in the last decade.
.

But NONE of them came from a bill passed by the US Congress and signed into law by the president.
In fact, nothing enacted by Congress since the BOR has had the purpose of expanding the recognition our firearm freedoms.

Who was it said (approximately) "Never is the public in peril save for when Congress is in session" ?

Sure, I'd like to know that I can travel freely, armed, across any state. The fact that my state certifies that I am not legally barred from carrying should be good enough.
I'm just not ready to cede yet one more area of personal responsibility to federal oversight.

The bill that SHOULD be making it's way through congress should encode constitutional carry for all law-abiding citizens nationwide, in the spirit of the Founding Fathers.
If I *wished* to carry anything to document that, each state could provide a simple short report on request (by that citizen) identifying any felonies or other reasons that citizen is barred from firearms possession.
My report would say

Felony convictions: none
Mental Health Issues: None

Purplehood wrote:

AEA wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09 ... latestnews

If this passes, what happens with the hold out Illinois?
This should really torque up Bloomberg!

As much as this sounds too good to be true..........
It may be unconstitutional as the States have rights.

I look at it the same as if a state had to recognize your marriage, divorce or driver's license. I don't really see it as any infringement on a States rights.

From that POV, if the feds can force a state to accept another's CCW, they can force us to accept a gay marriage license.
Something to think about.

My position is the 2nd Amendment says all that needs to be said.