Gabby Giffords' gun control group runs ads against 8 House Republicans ahead of concealed carry vote
There are 1739 comments on the Washington Examiner story from Dec 4, 2017, titled Gabby Giffords' gun control group runs ads against 8 House Republicans ahead of concealed carry vote. In it, Washington Examiner reports that:
The House is expected to vote this week on the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017, which allows people with concealed carry permits to bring their guns across state lines. Former Rep. Gabby Giffords' gun control group is targeting eight vulnerable Republicans with a six-figure ad buy ahead of the House's vote on a bill that would allow for concealed carry across state lines.
Join the discussion below, or Read more at Washington Examiner.
Since: Feb 13
#1 Dec 4, 2017
Good that will help them win.
#2 Dec 4, 2017
Its great! It will get more Republicans out to vote.
#3 Dec 5, 2017
Who does this Gabby Gifford person think she is?
She thinks that just because she has a hole in her head from gun violence she can advocate for improving gun laws?
What a pompus bitch.
Gun laws don't work, everyone knows that.
She should just shut up her stupid liberal face.
Clearly her and her Astronaut husband just hate America.
#4 Dec 6, 2017
Was she shot in the head by gun violence or was she shot in the head by a psychopathic freak?
How would restricting the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves against psychopaths like this one be "improving" gun laws?
#5 Dec 6, 2017
Psychopathic freaks do not follow the law. So how could a law ever affect gun violence?
This is America. We are Americans, and we have the right to be armed because Americans with guns are above the law.
And yes she was a victim of gun violence that was perpetrated by a psychotic freak.
#6 Dec 6, 2017
Gotta love the rhetoric.
No one is above the law, but we Americans DO have the right to keep and bear arms. So I guess that means we who own them are acting within the law.
Consider, all states must honor the driver's license from any other state - not a constitutional right;
all states must honor a pilot's license from any other state - not a constitutional right;
states must AGREE to honor a CWP from other states - a constitutionally protected right.
See the dichotomy? The irony?
SCOTUS has acknowledged that the right to keep and bears arms is an individual right. My rights cease to exist when I travel to New York or California???
Seems UN-American to me.
#7 Dec 6, 2017
It is un-American to void your right to carry deadly force.
Californians and New Yorkers right to not be shot by gun toting out-of-staters shouldn't 'trump' your right to shoot whomever you like.
#8 Dec 6, 2017
As to your first point - you are absolutely correct
As to the drivel of your second sentence:
I haven't shot anybody since Uncle Sam quit paying me to do so (to protect YOUR rights, you know).
Should I travel to NY or CA (both States I pray to avoid for the rest of my life) denying me the right to KEEP from getting shot violates MY civil rights. My rights don't end at state lines.
Kinda why we're called the United States....
#9 Dec 6, 2017
Such melodrama. I bet you were one of the "blood in our parks'" when concealed carry was permitted on national parks. And, "wild wild west" when Illinois became a right to carry state.
#10 Dec 6, 2017
I don't know what the problem here is.....
I agree with you.
You have a right to have a gun I have no intention of disputing that.
But you do not have the right to carry where you haven't met the legal requirements to carry.
States you don't live in will not consult you about your opinions on their gun laws, nor should they.
Meet the criteria for concealed carry, or don't carry. That would be the only way for you to be one of those law abiding gun owners. Anything short of that, you're just a criminal with a gun.
Thank you for your military service.
#11 Dec 6, 2017
Actually no I wasn't.
I don't have a problem with guns.
But I'm sick of hearing gun owners whine about having to follow rules to own and carry deadly force.
I haven't had a ticket or a car wreck in 25 years. I still had to pass the written driver's test last year, and I still have to carry auto insurance.
But in my state liability insurance is not required on motorcycles. But since I travel out of state by motorcycle and other states have different insurance laws, I carry full coverage and uninsured motorist on my motorcycles. I don't whine about it, because I'm a law abiding motor vehicle operator.
#12 Dec 6, 2017
I haven't shot anyone in 25 years. And I can carry in most states. A person's right to self defense should not be ending at the California state line. Or any other state line. People with CCL/CHL/CCP et al have been vetted. More than drivers. Cars cause more deaths than firearms, even if you include suicides.
I haven't had to take a written driving test in 25 years. Does that mean since your state required a written test last year for you to get a DL, and mine didn't that I shouldn't be able to drive in your state?
The gloom and doom when firearm laws are relaxed (true common sense gun laws) have never come to pass.
#13 Dec 6, 2017
States cannot deny a constitutional protected right to citizens because they are from another state. It is almost impossible to obtain a license to carry in California. It would be completely impossible for someone from another state to obtain that license. They are in complete violation of the second amendment.
And do you see lower crime or murder in California as a result? NO! California still has significantly more mass shootings and violent crime than the national average despite having the strictest gun control laws in the country.
#14 Dec 6, 2017
The point being missed is that to get a concealed carry permit, you need to pass a background check that is more thorough than the NICS background check when purchasing as well as meet other requirements. They just don't hand them out. There is no reason to believe that just because one crosses state lines that they will behave differently and become a danger if they are carrying.
Since: Mar 17
#16 Dec 6, 2017
I'm pretty sure we don't carry "deadly force." We do, however, carry a gun to protect ourselves (our family etc..) from any threat should it ever arise. It becomes "deadly" or "leathal force" when used in self defense.
Since: Mar 17
#17 Dec 6, 2017
No one's whining here accept you.
#18 Dec 7, 2017
If you're agreeing, you may want to consider your phraseology. You SOUND like a hoplophobe.
As you note, driving, insurance and other motor vehicle laws differ from state to state, yet each and every state is required to allow a person licensed in another state to operate a vehicle within their state. Required...by federal law.
Driving a motor vehicle is NOT a constitutional right.
I'm not a citizen of California or New York (though I was born in NY), nor am I rich or famous, so getting a permit even if I lived in one of those states would be damned near impossible.
In MY opinion, those states have arbitrary guns laws passed by fools who lead by fear. Look at the crime rates of those who have CWP's from all the other states...you'll find CWP holders are less likely to cause crime than even the police or politicians. Reciprocity laws are simply a way for states to avoid complying with longstanding federal laws requiring them to honor other states licensing.
"Training requirements" is just a buzzword (buzz phrase?) used by politicians as a way to MAKE otherwise law-abiding folks into criminals. Florida doesn't require, as part of a driving test, for anyone to parralel park. If CA has that as part of their test, does that mean Florida drivers aren't allowed to drive in CA?
#20 Dec 7, 2017
I guess I was wrong about the whining thing.
The 6 responses you fine gun owners submitted to my opinion weren't all that whiney.
But there are a few things to clear up.
A loaded firearm is deadly force.
If you use your sidearm the expected result is the death of the person fired at. If your target is missed, it is quite possible the bullet could strike an kill a person that was not intended to be killed. That would be deadly force.
Your claims that a constitutionally protected right cannot be infringed upon by a state is obviously wrong because, it clearly can be. There are many places carrying a weapon is not permitted, notably one of them is the Capitol in DC.
30,000 people shot a year in America, and no legislative action is required!?!
The terrorist acts of 9-11 killed over 5000 people on American soil, and since then we have spent over a trillion a year on combatting terrorism. 30,000 shootings a year in America, by Americans and the answer is to do nothing?
Maybe one of you fine gun owners could explain to me why that makes sense.
#21 Dec 7, 2017
Your use of "fine gun owners" seems supercilious and smug....you won't find many friends here that way.
A loaded firearm is "potential" deadly force, and firearms are more used defensively without being fired than are ever shot....consider that there are somewhere between 500,000 and 1.5 million defensive uses of guns every year and significantly fewer shootings.
The aim of a defensive shooting is to stop an attack, not kill. If the aim was to kill, that would make guns sadly ineffective as shooting "kill" fewer than 10 percent of the people shot, die (and would at least constitute manslaughter)
The mere fact that states DO infringe upon a right doesn't mean they should be allowed to continue.
Your number of 30,000 includes suicides.
We've spent over a trillion dollars inciting more terrorism.
Making more useless gun laws that the government won't/can't enforce makes sense to you how?
#22 Dec 7, 2017
You’re right, why you would want a lawfully armed law abiding citizen who had to undergo a federal background check to carry concealed to visit these places, the criminal element probably didn’t apply to carry those weapons they’re using did they?
California’s gun-related homicide rate up, reversing years of decline
Shootings & Gun Deaths on the Rise in NYC
Add your comments below
|Safe carry||15 hr||payme||24|
|Reader Reaction Forum: Will concealed carry mak... (Jun '11)||Jan 17||Hendo||45|
|Secret sting operation by the GAO blows away th...||Jan 12||Say What||3|
|Malloy: Bump stocks should be banned in Connect...||Jan 12||Say What||3|
|NJ's new governor could sue feds over concealed...||Jan 5||jimwildrickjr||2|
|ATF Seeking Public Comment on Proposed Bump Sto...||Jan 5||Say What||4|
|Military must meet FBI database requirements||Jan 4||Watchdog||4|
Find what you want!
Search Guns Forum Now
Copyright © 2018 Topix LLC