Posted on 06/24/2004 1:51:47 PM PDT by neverdem
I live in the Great Basin, on the Wasatch Front in Utah. When you get more than 50 miles from the 4 counties that make up the majority of population, backup for a State Trooper is a half hour off. The Troopers I know are happy to have armed citizens around, as are the majority of sheriff's deputies.
Of course, we don't have a Sullivan act out here. yet... and nobody pays much mind to the Mini-14 in the back window of the pickup.
Naw, I'm not optimistic about the whole thing. The cancer is eating it's way in from both coasts. I do appreciate the perspectives from the planet outside the confines of the Rockies. Welcome to Utah. Set your watch back 20 years.
I'm no Constitutional scholar, but I'll venture interstate commerce and the commerce clause in that document.
and the penumbras. don't forget those all-reaching penumbras.
I am all for this, It will save lives.
Yo!
The last sentence in comment# 39 was supposed to start as "My guess is", not "My is". Ugh
LOL, that was supposed to be.
Their is already a law that recognizes the Right of all Americans to carry guns nationwide. It's call the 2nd amendment.
And there are already laws which make it a federal felony to deprive any American of their civil Rights.
If Bush/Ashcroft really believed the RKBA was an individual Right, and they really believed in enforcing the laws, they would simply file federal civil Rights charges against the first state cop that harassed someone carrying a gun outside their own state.
But they don't. They care about as much for individual Rights as Bill Clinton cares about his character.
They, like most previous administrations, believe that the gov't is the source of all of our Rights, and whatever "privlidges" we the people have are simply a result of our good graces.
If the House really cared about the second amendment, they would not have passed this bill unless it applied to EVERYONE. And if Bush cared about us peasants or the Bill of Rights, he would veto it.
Under Federal law, they CANNOT reject any of the Bill of Rights.
All it would take for them to 'cease and desist' would be for Aschroft to order in his JBT's to arrest those state cops and prosecutors who willfully conspire to deprive Americans of their 2nd amendment Rights. It is a federal felony to conspire to deprive or deprive someone of their civil Rights under color law.
If the feds did that, then cops would be able to carry nationwide. Of course, it would also mean that us peasants would be able to do so also, which this administration is dead-set against.
More privileges for the elites but not for ordinary Americans.
I totally agree.
So if we can't do this with a Republican President, and a Republican House, and a Republican Senate, when do you expect to "get this passed for us citizens"?
By righting this law they are telling us the second amendment doesn't really exist for us...but for them.
I doubt it. I'm not aware of a single state that has passed CCW, which used the fact that off-duty cops can carry to enact the bill. Quite the contrary, "cop organizations" are usually the ones trying to block them.
If it weren't for the cops blocking CCW laws across the country, there would already be reciprocity in 45 or more states.
Now that cops can carry nationwide, many of them will be less willing to cut Joe Q. Citizen a break for "illegally" carrying.
Our elected officials in Washington have a radically different (and wrong and illegal) view of the relationship between the people and the gov't.
They think the gov't is supreme, and all rights, privlidges, etc.... eminate from them.
In reality, "we the people" have supreme authority in this country, and we retain all our Rights (even if a majority votes to surrender them).
Any authority the gov't has is granted by "we the people", and the primary purpose of the government is to protect our Rights.
righting = writing
Have you noticed that Cops are no longer called Peace Officers? They are now Law Enforcement and they call us civilians.
One of my family members just joined the Border Patrol and used the same terminology with me. I corrected her and told her that she was a civilian too, but she insisted that she was not. I guess cops think of themselves above Civilian Law now, but they sure don't fall under the UCMJ.
It could be a foot in the door if some of the arguments from this thread are used to shape the "National CCW for regular folks" debate. It depends on who frames the argument.
If this passes, both sides will try to use it. Antis will say that this makes CCW for civilians unnecessary. Pros will disparage the elitism of cop-only CCW and say that the benefits of cop CCW will be increased (more guns = less crime) with civilian CCW.
It might help to point out that civilians have a lower percentage of "bad shoots" than cops do, though this may be an apples & oranges comparison because many concealed carry civilians respond to a crime they actually witness, while on duty cops tend to show up after the fact & have to figure out who the bad guys are. This is an general argument for CCW.
Since most states have CCW now it would seem that it wouldn't be that difficult to get majority votes for national reciprocity. The arguments for CCW on the state level could be used in the national debate.
Would there be a "state's rights" argument against this? If so, I think the 2nd amendment and equal protection should trump it. Doubt a liberal judge would agree with me though.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.