PDA

View Full Version : My Rep's (Judy Chu) Response About National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act


gugoo
02-29-2012, 12:14 PM
February 19, 2012



Dear Gugoo,



Thank you for contacting me to express your support for the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act (H.R. 822). I wanted to respond to some of the questions you raised about this bill.



The right to carry a concealed weapon has always been an issue decided by the states and almost all states issue licenses to carry concealed firearms under varying criteria. And that is why dangerous individuals, like drug dealers, might be allowed to carry a concealed firearm in one state, but not another.



While federal law does not allow possession of guns by felons, individuals convicted of a misdemeanor crime of selling drugs are still able to carry firearms. In states like Utah, Florida, and Mississippi, the sale of certain types of illicit drugs to a minor are only charged as a misdemeanor. So a person living in those states convicted of such a crime would still be able to possess a gun and carry it concealed in those states. And under the National Right to Carry Reciprocity Act, these individuals would then be able to bring that weapon to California and carry it concealed in our state without notifying the authorities.



I find this very concerning because this contradicts current state laws regulating concealed weapons. California law today classifies those convicted of selling certain types of illicit drugs to a minor as a felony thus prohibiting them from possessing a firearm in our state.



There are many different views on this issue, and I appreciate you taking the time to express your thoughts on this legislation. I hope we can continue to have a thoughtful dialogue on the policies important to you.



Again, thank you for contacting me on this important issue. Democracy works best when we stay in touch, so I invite you to visit chu.house.gov and sign-up for e-mail updates at chu.house.gov/signup. And get late-breaking news at facebook.com/repjudychu and twitter.com/repjudychu.



I am honored to serve you, so please never hesitate to call or write in the future.

mag360
02-29-2012, 12:17 PM
ask them how a "drug dealer" could carry somewhere legally? There are just a few problems with this, lol.

email
02-29-2012, 12:25 PM
So, "drug dealers" are the reason that honest hard-working Americans can't carry wherever they can legally travel in the US?

Something is very wrong here.

X231
02-29-2012, 12:34 PM
:facepalm:

proclone1
02-29-2012, 12:42 PM
To the Rep: so because a potential criminal might do something, you believe in taking away the 2nd amendment from each and every single law-abiding visitor to this state.

Rossi357
02-29-2012, 12:48 PM
Drug dealers already have weapons, you nitwit.

hvengel
02-29-2012, 12:48 PM
...
So a person living in those states convicted of such a crime would still be able to possess a gun and carry it concealed in those states. And under the National Right to Carry Reciprocity Act, these individuals would then be able to bring that weapon to California and carry it concealed in our state without notifying the authorities.

I find this very concerning because this contradicts current state laws regulating concealed weapons. California law today classifies those convicted of selling certain types of illicit drugs to a minor as a felony thus prohibiting them from possessing a firearm in our state....

This is totally contradictory. H. R 882 says that someone can only carry in another state if they are otherwise in compliance with that states laws. If it is illegal for "..those convicted of selling certain types of illicit drugs to a minor ..." to possess a gun in California then the individuals he is concerned about can not posses a gun in California. Therefore these individuals are not covered by H. R. 822 since even the mere possession of the gun is illegal and they would be violating the law if they tried to carry in California.

SilverTauron
02-29-2012, 12:51 PM
And under the National Right to Carry Reciprocity Act, these individuals would then be able to bring that weapon to California and carry it concealed in our state without notifying the authorities.

That sound you just heard is the other shoe dropping. The problem this representative has with H.R. 822 is not crime but control. The state government has the power to dictate who should and should not be armed under the current system. If H.R. 822 becomes law, the State of California loses the final say as to who possesses or carries a firearm in their state.

For reasons which should not be mysterious to the readership here,H.R. 822 represents an outcome that your state legislature will fight 'to the death' to prevent. Their minds on the matter are already made up.

vantec08
02-29-2012, 1:06 PM
All kinds of fail.

Dreaded Claymore
02-29-2012, 1:09 PM
ask them how a "drug dealer" could carry somewhere legally? There are just a few problems with this, lol.

Um, the Representative already answered that.

While federal law does not allow possession of guns by felons, individuals convicted of a misdemeanor crime of selling drugs are still able to carry firearms. In states like Utah, Florida, and Mississippi, the sale of certain types of illicit drugs to a minor are only charged as a misdemeanor. So a person living in those states convicted of such a crime would still be able to possess a gun and carry it concealed in those states.

zonzin
02-29-2012, 1:21 PM
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!!! Who is your rep? Difi?? What a convoluted bunch of Bravo Sierra!



.

thebronze
02-29-2012, 1:44 PM
This is totally contradictory. H. R 882 says that someone can only carry in another state if they are otherwise in compliance with that states laws. If it is illegal for "..those convicted of selling certain types of illicit drugs to a minor ..." to possess a gun in California then the individuals he is concerned about can not posses a gun in California. Therefore these individuals are not covered by H. R. 822 since even the mere possession of the gun is illegal and they would be violating the law if they tried to carry in California.

Send Dipsh*t Chu a reply with the above contained as part of your reply. Her reply is ate up with FAIL!. Show her why and see what her reply is then.

My guess: More FAIL!

dustoff31
02-29-2012, 1:48 PM
As asinine as your representative's reply might be. It doesn't matter. HR 822 passed the house months ago and is now awaiting action in the Senate.

You could write your senators, but then considering who they are it's likely that you would get an even more insane response.

Uxi
02-29-2012, 1:52 PM
Sounds like my rep. :mad: Judy Chu? :barf:

gugoo
02-29-2012, 1:55 PM
As asinine as your representative's reply might be. It doesn't matter. HR 822 passed the house months ago and is now awaiting action in the Senate.

You could write your senators, but then considering who they are it's likely that you would get an even more insane response.

Yep, I wrote her months ago when the thing was still in the house, it took awhile to get a response.

Feinstein and Boxer :(

winxp_man
02-29-2012, 1:58 PM
EPIC FAIL letter

+1 to :facepalm:

ZirconJohn
02-29-2012, 2:09 PM
Typical major gubbament malfunction... what a sack-o-sheet...! :facepalm:

Checking this for to chew on later...!

Just in-n-out for lunch right now, lost my appetite... eezus ^^^...!!!!!

SilverTauron
02-29-2012, 2:22 PM
Out of curiousity,how do these people keep getting re-elected? I presume you guys do vote when the occasion calls for it,yes?These people represent your state to the rest of the nation,and thence generate the impression to 'free America 'that the entire CA population is nuts.

GaryV
02-29-2012, 2:34 PM
The only drugs for which unprescribed sale is a misdemeanor in these states are Schedule V drugs, i.e., those in the very lowest category of restriction. And even in California it is not a felony to sell these to adults, only when selling them to minors. In other words, selling these drugs illegally is generally only a misdemeanor everywhere in the country, but some states, like California, differentiate between selling them to a minor and selling them to an adult while some others don't. The definition of a schedule V drug is:

Substances in this schedule have a low potential for abuse relative to substances listed in schedule IV and consist primarily of preparations containing limited quantities of certain narcotics. These are generally used for antitussive, antidiarrheal, and analgesic purposes.

Examples include cough preparations containing not more than 200 milligrams of codeine per 100 milliliters or per 100 grams (Robitussin AC® and Phenergan with Codeine®).

In other words, these are drugs that are highly unlikely to be abused in the first place, and have a very low potential for harm when abused. As the DEA's own definition says, this is mostly stuff like the weakest prescription cough syrups. So, she's saying that someone who gave or sold cough syrup to a high school kid without a prescription is so dangerous that they alone are a justification for opposing reciprocity. After all, they're probably major figures in an international drug cartel or hard-core gang members, right?

Never mind that in California it is not even a misdemeanor to sell medical marijuana while in all three of the states she listed it would be a felony.

GMANtt
02-29-2012, 3:01 PM
I'm starting to research CCW laws. Can someone clarify one thing for me?

If HR 822 passes I can get the appropriate training, get an Arizona CCW and I will be allowed to carry in CA where I am a resident?

Hopalong
02-29-2012, 3:03 PM
The art of the Spin Doctor.

jwkincal
02-29-2012, 3:04 PM
I'm starting to research CCW laws. Can someone clarify one thing for me?

If HR 822 passes I can get the appropriate training, get an Arizona CCW and I will be allowed to carry in CA where I am a resident?

No. The Federal law would only apply to other states when your carry license is issued in your home state.

Barbarossa
02-29-2012, 3:04 PM
So.... It's for the children?

GMANtt
02-29-2012, 3:05 PM
Great still no hope for an Orange County resident thanks for the quick reply.

gugoo
02-29-2012, 3:10 PM
Great still no hope for an Orange County resident thanks for the quick reply.

LA County :facepalm:

GMANtt
02-29-2012, 3:21 PM
LA county is worse?

MindBuilder
02-29-2012, 9:28 PM
Isn't there a federal law making drug users prohibited persons? Is the federal law only for drug users convicted of felonies?

Not that I think taking this excuse away from this legislator would change her position on the subject.

GaryV
03-01-2012, 3:41 AM
Isn't there a federal law making drug users prohibited persons? Is the federal law only for drug users convicted of felonies?

Not that I think taking this excuse away from this legislator would change her position on the subject.

The federal law prohibits illegal drug users regardless of conviction status, and convicted felons regardless of their drug status. Her concern was convicted "drug dealers" (not users) who have only been convicted of misdemeanors, so there would be no federal law that would apply.

I put "drug dealer" in quotes, because the drug in question is cough syrup, so you're probably mostly looking at other kids who sell their left-over prescription cough syrup to their friends.

Bobby Hated
03-01-2012, 5:14 AM
No. The Federal law would only apply to other states when your carry license is issued in your home state.

wow are you serious? they left us out?

why do i keep giving money to the NRA when they just give our state away?

NytWolf
03-01-2012, 8:48 AM
I can't believe I woke up in the middle of the night thinking about this stupid post. While lying in bed, I thought of this letter to send back to our reps:


Dear Ms. Chu/Ms. Feinstein/Ms. Boxer/<fill in any other rep's name>,

Thank you for taking your time to respond to my concerns regarding H.R. 822, National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act. I respect your opinions regarding the my fellow citizens' safety.

However, as a concerned citizen and a member of the voting population, I demand that you put your personal opinions aside and I challenge you to do the duty that we elected you to do.

I represent to you the following:

Fact: The country is in a state of economic distress.
Fact: The people are resorting to crimes to get by.
Fact: Criminals do not care about laws.
Fact: Criminals never will care about laws.
Fact: Laws hurt the law-abiding citizen more than criminals.

As a concerned citizen and member of the voting public, I request that my voice be heard in all its weight so that you, as my representative, can better represent me.

Thank you,

Uxi
03-01-2012, 8:55 AM
Out of curiousity,how do these people keep getting re-elected? I presume you guys do vote when the occasion calls for it,yes?

There's more people in these districts with their hands out than there are without. Most of them in this state are bought and paid for by the public employee unions (most prominent are the teachers and prison guards)

marc4
03-01-2012, 5:06 PM
We covered this before here and did a blast on her facebook page.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=502743

SnWnMe
03-01-2012, 8:19 PM
This is the same Rep who spoke out against Susan B Komen on her FB page in support of Planned Parenthood because they provide mammograms (they don't, they will refer you however).

I asked her then on her wall where she got her facts and neither she nor her shills replied.

Not surprised that she doesn't know what she is talking about yet again.

stix213
03-01-2012, 9:07 PM
I bet there are some drug dealers with drivers licenses too. Is Judy Chu against drivers license reciprocity also? More people die from cars than guns per year after all.

gobler
03-02-2012, 1:29 AM
During the last election I was part of a conference call Q&A. I asked her why she was for open boarders and illegal immigration. Her response was asking me why I was a racist and hated Latinos. I was stunned by this and when I started to respond they cut me off ending my connection. I have been actively trying to get her out of office but as stated above, most people in this district have a hand out and love the .gov bennies.


Sent from somewhere in space & time...

Army
03-02-2012, 8:40 AM
wow are you serious? they left us out?

why do i keep giving money to the NRA when they just give our state away?
I must have missed the part in the Constitution that says the NRA can establish law...

You still own guns because of the efforts by the NRA since 1968, to change the minds of legislators.

SilverBulletZ06
03-02-2012, 7:49 PM
You all forget something, drug dealers are felons under the law and as such are unable to own or use firearms via several federal laws. Which state is breaking federal law and giving them CCW permits?

resident-shooter
03-02-2012, 9:01 PM
There is so much fail. On so many levels. I won't even bother to comment. :facepalm:

GaryV
03-03-2012, 6:19 AM
You all forget something, drug dealers are felons under the law and as such are unable to own or use firearms via several federal laws. Which state is breaking federal law and giving them CCW permits?

No states are. In most states, the selling of schedule V drugs (the weakest prescription cough syrups) without a prescription is only a misdemeanor. In some, like California, it gets bumped up to a felony if the sale is to a minor; in others it doesn't. This is all she's talking about when she talks about "drug dealers". Because these people would only be convicted of a misdemeanor in many states, even if they sold cough syrup to minors, they would not be convicted felons and would be eligible for an LTC.

mike_schwartz@mail.com
03-03-2012, 6:48 AM
We don't live in a Democracy. She should be voted out based on her inability to understand what kind of government she was elected into.

sawchain
03-03-2012, 7:08 AM
Miss Chu, your high school diploma is hereby revoked based on your demonstrated failure of simple logic.

Fate
03-03-2012, 2:19 PM
I'm curious as to her stance on medical marijuana.

vantec08
03-03-2012, 3:03 PM
Gawd . . . . . they breed, vote, and make law.