Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-22-2009, 9:27 AM
M198's Avatar
M198 M198 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 605
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default "Senate rejects law on carrying concealed weapons"

via CNN.com

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Senate narrowly rejected a measure to allow people to carry concealed weapons from state to state Wednesday.
A Miami, Florida, gun store offers concealed weapons training.

A Miami, Florida, gun store offers concealed weapons training.

The vote was 58 to 39. The amendment needed 60 votes to pass.

The measure would have required each of the 48 states that allow concealed firearms to honor permits issued in other states.

It was the first significant defeat this year for the gun lobby.

The concealed weapons proposal was an amendment to a larger defense appropriations bill, introduced by Sen. John Thune, a South Dakota Republican.

Supporters of the measure argued it would help deter criminals; opponents claimed it would endanger innocent people by effectively forcing most of the country to conform to regulations in states with the loosest gun ownership standards.

Sen. John Barrasso, a Wyoming Republican who is a co-sponsor of the amendment, argued Wednesday that gun licenses should apply across state lines, like driver's licenses.

"People travel," he said on CNN's "American Morning."

"We have truck drivers on our roads, people traveling for vacation in their vehicles, and if you have a license... you should be able to use that license in other states. It should apply like a driver's license," he said.

He argued that concealed weapons deter crime.

But Republican Michael Bloomberg, the mayor of New York City and an opponent of the law, said the proposed amendment would trample on states' rights.
Don't Miss

* House passes law to allow concealed weapons in national parks

"Wyoming shouldn't be subject to New York state laws, and we're going in that direction," he said. "What's right for the people of Wyoming isn't necessarily right for the people of New York and vice versa."

Bloomberg insisted that guns do not make people safer.

"There's no evidence that if you have a gun, you're safer. Quite the contrary. If you have a gun at home, [you are] something like 20 times more likely to have somebody in your house killed," he said on "American Morning."

"We have to protect our policemen, protect our citizens. We can't have all these guns, and it's reasonable to have each state make their own laws," he said.

The issue has blurred Capitol Hill's usual partisan lines. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, is one of several Southern and Western Democrats who supported the measure. Others Democrats opposed it.

Before this vote, gun control advocates faced a setback when President Obama signed a credit card bill that included a provision allowing people to carry guns in national parks.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-22-2009, 9:29 AM
Liberty1's Avatar
Liberty1 Liberty1 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,541
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

First try and we came close. It will pass later.

Hey and there has been some progress, we've even gotten to Bloomberg:

"... If you have a gun at home, [you are] something like 20 times more likely to have somebody in your house killed," he said on "American Morning."


That's down from 43 times (or "something like" that)!!!
__________________
False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.
-- Cesare Beccaria http://www.a-human-right.com/

Last edited by Liberty1; 07-23-2009 at 12:32 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-22-2009, 9:33 AM
b.faust's Avatar
b.faust b.faust is offline
Senior Member
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 1,576
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M198 View Post

"There's no evidence that if you have a gun, you're safer. Quite the contrary. If you have a gun at home, [you are] something like 20 times more likely to have somebody in your house killed," he said on "American Morning."

[/I]
OMG something like a 1000+ times more likely that your firearm might also steal your credit card number and order all kinds of Teflon coated "man killer" ammo and a fancy shoulder thing that goes up. It'll threaten children when you're not home to watch it and probably also leads to global warming studies might say if we did some. Every time you clean your gun, an innocent child in some distant country dies of starvation, something like 20 times a DAY.


See, I could be a dips**t politician too.


B
__________________
______________________________________
http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/donate

DONATE TODAY!!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-22-2009, 9:38 AM
MKE's Avatar
MKE MKE is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Ventura County
Posts: 565
iTrader: 106 / 99%
Default

Quote:
"There's no evidence that if you have a gun, you're safer. Quite the contrary. If you have a gun at home, [you are] something like 20 times more likely to have somebody in your house killed," he said on "American Morning."


I have read this line so many times...does anyone know exactly where this research came from? This figure that's being used is just utter bs.

Anyone have the list of senators who voted against?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-22-2009, 9:38 AM
KylaGWolf's Avatar
KylaGWolf KylaGWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,698
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

You know I really hate when they pull a statistical number out their arse. I just wish the damn lawmakers would do some serious research but then they would have to admit they aren't doing what they should be.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-22-2009, 9:39 AM
PEBKAC's Avatar
PEBKAC PEBKAC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,026
iTrader: 16 / 100%
Default

I think he mis-spoke...I believe he meant criminals in your home are 20 times more likely to die if you have a gun in house.
__________________

Love and Peace through superior firepower.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 7x57 View Post
Plus, we can check out each other's hardware. Who says we can't find common ground?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
Soap box, ballot box, jury box, ammo box. Use in that order.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
You need to grow a full beard and move out into the woods before you can be a full fledged member of the surplus rifle long range shooting community.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-22-2009, 9:43 AM
vorpar's Avatar
vorpar vorpar is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 260
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M198 View Post
via CNN.com

"There's no evidence that if you have a gun, you're safer. Quite the contrary. If you have a gun at home, [you are] something like 20 times more likely to have somebody in your house killed," he said on "American Morning."
[/I]
They never read the statistic the right way:

"People who are 20 times more likely to die from violence in their homes tend to buy a gun."
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-22-2009, 9:44 AM
Liberty1's Avatar
Liberty1 Liberty1 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,541
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MKE View Post


I have read this line so many times...does anyone know exactly where this research came from? This figure that's being used is just utter bs.

Anyone have the list of senators who voted against?
I'm sure Prof. John Lott has addressed it or for that matter Prof. Eugine Voloch.
__________________
False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.
-- Cesare Beccaria http://www.a-human-right.com/

Last edited by Liberty1; 07-22-2009 at 10:08 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-22-2009, 9:45 AM
Cameron Cameron is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 29
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Maybe he should have better concealed the amendment?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-22-2009, 9:46 AM
dfletcher's Avatar
dfletcher dfletcher is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 14,600
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Here's a link to who voted and how - the nonvoters were Byrd and Kennedy and Mikulski, I'd expect Kennedy & Mikulski to vote have voted no. I assume Byrd & Kennedy were too ill, don't know why Mikulski could not vote.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI...00237#position

That weasel Lugar (R-IN) voted no, virtually all the no votes were Democrats including someone who calls himself pro 2nd, Senator Leahy. And new Democrat Specter voted no, hope he's soon gone from office. Interesting that Harkin continues to survive in IO.

Twenty Democrats (including Reid) voted yes, that's not too bad.

Last edited by dfletcher; 07-22-2009 at 9:51 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-22-2009, 9:46 AM
kennisonxgs kennisonxgs is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 102
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberty1 View Post
First try and we came close. It will pass later.

Hey and there has been some progress, we've even gotten to Bloomberg:

"... If you have a gun at home, [you are] something like 20 times more likely to have somebody in your house killed," he said on "American Morning."


That's down from 32 times (or "something like" that)!!!
He's actually right.

The intruder in your house is the one that's killed though. Which means that your probability of surviving a home invasion is 20x higher if you have a gun.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-22-2009, 9:47 AM
.454 .454 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 3,839
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Elections have consequences.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-22-2009, 9:56 AM
kalguns's Avatar
kalguns kalguns is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: The High Ground
Posts: 609
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

So close, yet so far
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by skateboarder74 View Post
"It is better to have a gun and not need it than need a gun and not have it." ---Clarence Worley ...
"License to kill gophers by the government of the United Nations. Man, free to kill gophers at will. To kill, you must know your enemy, and in this case my enemy is a varmint. And a varmint will never quit -- ever. They're like the Viet Cong. Varmint Cong. So you have to fall back on superior intelligence and superior firepower. And that's all she wrote." --Carl Spackler--
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-22-2009, 9:58 AM
rbgaynor's Avatar
rbgaynor rbgaynor is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Diego County
Posts: 234
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by .454 View Post
Elections have consequences.
Yep. Back in 2006 Senator Allen's (R-VA) CCW reciprocity bill never even made it out of committee, this one nearly passed.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S3275:
__________________
- Brian

Oceanside Practical Pistol Club - USPSA and IDPA matches in San Diego County
Linea de Fuego - USPSA and 3-Gun matches in San Diego County
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-22-2009, 9:58 AM
Decoligny's Avatar
Decoligny Decoligny is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newcastle, OK
Posts: 10,616
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberty1 View Post
First try and we came close. It will pass later.

Hey and there has been some progress, we've even gotten to Bloomberg:

"... If you have a gun at home, [you are] something like 20 times more likely to have somebody in your house killed," he said on "American Morning."


That's down from 32 times (or "something like" that)!!!
Well, I suppose the logic is sound.

If you have a gun at home, and home is the only place that the particular gun is kept, if someone is killed by that gun, it is highly likely that the person who is killed by that gun would be in your house (unless you are shooting out of your windows).

Example: Criminal/Murderer/Rapist who makes the mistake of breaking into a home where a gun is kept is many times more likely to be killed by a gun than the Criminal/Murderer/Rapist who breaks into a home where there is no gun.
__________________

If you haven't seen it with your own eyes,
or heard it with your own ears,
don't make it up with your small mind,
or spread it with your big mouth.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:00 AM
7x57's Avatar
7x57 7x57 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 5,182
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

The original number was "43 times," and it came from a thoroughly discredited piece of academic fraud by Arthur Kellermann. GunCite has a writeup, and if you read it and follow the links you can get started understanding how he cooked his data. But it's enough to know that all he did was compare *deaths*. That means, among other things, that he does not count defensive uses not ending in death. Given that the vast majority of successful defensive uses do not involve firing a shot, this means that essentially his calculation begins by ignoring defensive uses.

This is "banana republic vote-counting math": if you don't count 95% of the votes for the opposition party, the generalissimo gets re-elected in a landslide.

7x57
__________________


What do you need guns for if you are going to send your children, seven hours a day, 180 days a year to government schools? What do you need the guns for at that point?-- R. C. Sproul, Jr. (unconfirmed)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bulgron View Post
I know every chance I get I'm going to accuse 7x57 of being a shill for LCAV. Because I can.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:01 AM
MKE's Avatar
MKE MKE is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Ventura County
Posts: 565
iTrader: 106 / 99%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dfletcher View Post
Here's a link to who voted and how - the nonvoters were Byrd and Kennedy and Mikulski, I'd expect Kennedy & Mikulski to vote have voted no. I assume Byrd & Kennedy were too ill, don't know why Mikulski could not vote.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI...00237#position

That weasel Lugar (R-IN) voted no, virtually all the no votes were Democrats including someone who calls himself pro 2nd, Senator Leahy. And new Democrat Specter voted no, hope he's soon gone from office. Interesting that Harkin continues to survive in IO.

Twenty Democrats (including Reid) voted yes, that's not too bad.
I see that little slimeball Al Franken got his vote in. Having two of our senators didn't help...no wonder people outside of our state hates California.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:02 AM
M. D. Van Norman's Avatar
M. D. Van Norman M. D. Van Norman is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California refugee
Posts: 4,168
iTrader: 19 / 100%
Default

If I recall correctly, the Kellermann study did not control for whether or not the household gun was used in the crime. In any case, the particular statistic is not correlated correctly.
__________________
Matthew D. Van Norman
Dancing Giant Sales | Licensed Firearms Dealer | Rainier, WA
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:05 AM
glbtrottr's Avatar
glbtrottr glbtrottr is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: By the Beach, Baby!
Posts: 3,540
iTrader: 51 / 88%
Default

Interesting thoughts on Kennedy.

In the household, we have Massachusetts CCW's - they're called LTC's. Not sure how he would have voted.

Shame on the republican traitors...freaking Lugar moron.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:10 AM
highpowermatch's Avatar
highpowermatch highpowermatch is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Mendocino County
Posts: 2,433
iTrader: 71 / 100%
Default

they kept mentioning how other states CCW are just given to you because you are a gun owner. Is this true, certain states just issue them if you own a gun??????
__________________
"I watched a tank get disabled with a can of ravioli, once." - jdberger

“We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.”
― Winston S. Churchill
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:13 AM
berto's Avatar
berto berto is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA, USA
Posts: 7,722
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by glbtrottr View Post
Interesting thoughts on Kennedy.

In the household, we have Massachusetts CCW's - they're called LTC's. Not sure how he would have voted.

Shame on the republican traitors...freaking Lugar moron.
Kennedy would have voted NO. Has he ever failed to support a gun control measure? Today's no show doesn't count.

Last edited by berto; 07-22-2009 at 10:20 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:16 AM
rbgaynor's Avatar
rbgaynor rbgaynor is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Diego County
Posts: 234
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by highpowermatch View Post
they kept mentioning how other states CCW are just given to you because you are a gun owner. Is this true, certain states just issue them if you own a gun??????
Effectively it is for Alaska and Vermont - since neither state requires a license for CCW.
__________________
- Brian

Oceanside Practical Pistol Club - USPSA and IDPA matches in San Diego County
Linea de Fuego - USPSA and 3-Gun matches in San Diego County
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:19 AM
giarcpnw giarcpnw is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 209
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Time to fire the two republicans that voted no. They cost us the win.

C
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:19 AM
chiefcrash's Avatar
chiefcrash chiefcrash is offline
Internet Dictator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Bay-Area-In-Training, Nevada
Posts: 3,408
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

I love how most of the antis i've met say gun owners should have a license like we license drivers...

and yet, when we try to make those permits apply like driver's licenses, they start complaining again...





hmmmm....
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
we can not nor should not dismiss or discount my theory that in the dark of night you molest sea anemones by candlelight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKM View Post
Show me on this 1st Amendment bobble-head doll where the mods touched you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Click Boom View Post
It is clear from this thread that citadel grad was the gunman, and Oswald his patsy.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:19 AM
AndrewMendez's Avatar
AndrewMendez AndrewMendez is offline
C3 Leader
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 626
Posts: 6,778
iTrader: 44 / 100%
Default

What did this specifically mean for Us? Could we carry here with a Utah CCW?
__________________
Need A Realtor in SoCal? Shoot me a PM.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:19 AM
dfletcher's Avatar
dfletcher dfletcher is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 14,600
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by glbtrottr View Post
Interesting thoughts on Kennedy.

In the household, we have Massachusetts CCW's - they're called LTC's. Not sure how he would have voted.
Shame on the republican traitors...freaking Lugar moron.
As a transplanted Yankee I am certain how he would have voted - it would have been no. Remember he has always supported gun contol and years ago supported a proposed statewide ban on handguns in the Commonwealth.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:25 AM
sorensen440's Avatar
sorensen440 sorensen440 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sonoma, CA
Posts: 8,605
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

Wow this came much closer then I ever thought it would
__________________
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:25 AM
Liberty1's Avatar
Liberty1 Liberty1 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,541
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ANDREWMENDEZ View Post
What did this specifically mean for Us? Could we carry here with a Utah CCW?
Not here or in IL and WI, but in the 47 other states, yes
__________________
False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.
-- Cesare Beccaria http://www.a-human-right.com/
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:36 AM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,817
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

As far as I know, Lugar and Voinovich were retiring. They've generally always been anti-RKBA.

Right now, there's a Democratic primary between Arlen Spector and Joe Sestak. Pat Toomey is on the Republican side. Should ask Sestak if he supports this bill. If he does, good bye Spector.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:40 AM
6172crew's Avatar
6172crew 6172crew is offline
Moderator Emeritus
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord CA
Posts: 6,240
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Grouped By Vote Position
YEAs ---58
Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagan (D-NC)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reid (D-NV)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Snowe (R-ME)
Tester (D-MT)
Thune (R-SD)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Vitter (R-LA)
Warner (D-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Wicker (R-MS)
NAYs ---39
Akaka (D-HI)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Burris (D-IL)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Kaufman (D-DE)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Reed (D-RI)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Specter (D-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)
__________________

HMM-161 Westpac 1994
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:41 AM
tom_92673's Avatar
tom_92673 tom_92673 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,400
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

My thoughts are that maybe it's better if they don't know if we have firearms or not. Not to sound too tinfoil here, but If it's a constitutional right to bear arms to protect ourselves from a tyrannical government, perhaps not knowing if I have a gun or not will keep them honest. I'm not promoting any illegal activity here, but I know that I'm a much more polite driver in a violent area when I think someone might shoot me if I do something stupid. Just a thought.

While I would have liked to see this pass to avoid having to worry about being able to carry concealed, and I'm appalled at the idea that the senate wants to tell me when I can protect myself and when I can't, I'm just saying, maybe CCW's are a form of gun control that we don't need period.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:41 AM
M198's Avatar
M198 M198 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 605
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Nay

Anyone see something wrong with this line. Democrat from Obama-land votes yes, Republican votes no. Weird.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:42 AM
bubbapug1's Avatar
bubbapug1 bubbapug1 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: South South OC
Posts: 7,958
iTrader: 301 / 100%
Default

very close vote....maybe next time
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:42 AM
KylaGWolf's Avatar
KylaGWolf KylaGWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,698
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ANDREWMENDEZ View Post
What did this specifically mean for Us? Could we carry here with a Utah CCW?
No we wouldn't have been able to carry on a Utah permit.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:46 AM
KylaGWolf's Avatar
KylaGWolf KylaGWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,698
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Yeah I have to agree we were so close. I still think a massive recall to DiFi and Boxer would be a good idea right now since they seem to ignore the federal law says that 2A exists. They are federal representatives.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:53 AM
sorensen440's Avatar
sorensen440 sorensen440 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sonoma, CA
Posts: 8,605
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M198 View Post
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Nay

Anyone see something wrong with this line. Democrat from Obama-land votes yes, Republican votes no. Weird.
Those who have been paying attention realize there are anti gun republicans and pro gun democrats

Its part of the reason the political threads here were so destructive to the cause
__________________
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:57 AM
RomanDad's Avatar
RomanDad RomanDad is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: 92 acres of free Kentuckiana
Posts: 3,478
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M198 View Post
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Nay

Anyone see something wrong with this line. Democrat from Obama-land votes yes, Republican votes no. Weird.
And the stranger thing is, this is already the law in Indiana.... They ALREADY recognize EVERY other state's CCW permit (including PUERTO RICO and The U.S. Virgin Islands for pete's sake!)... SO the bill would have had ZERO impact on their constituents....

Seems like a good time to send Dicklugar some love notes.
__________________
Life is too short to drive a Ferrari...


Last edited by RomanDad; 07-22-2009 at 11:00 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 07-22-2009, 11:00 AM
KylaGWolf's Avatar
KylaGWolf KylaGWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,698
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RomanDad View Post
And the stranger thing is, this is already the law in Indiana.... They ALREADY recognize EVERY other state's CCW permit (including PUERTO RICO and The U.S. Virgin Islands for pete's sake!)... SO the bill would have had ZERO impact on their constituents....
Yep, also I wonder if the three not voting were done to sit and watch if they had enough votes to pass to have the three non-voters to step up and vote to hose the bill regardless.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 07-22-2009, 11:00 AM
tango-52's Avatar
tango-52 tango-52 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego County
Posts: 779
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RomanDad View Post
And the stranger thing is, this is already the law in Indiana.... They ALREADY recognize EVERY other state's CCW permit (including PUERTO RICO and The U.S. Virgin Islands for pete's sake!)... SO the bill would have had ZERO impact on their constituents....
Actually, the impact would have been to IMPROVE the benefits of a CCW to their constituents. Idiots!
__________________
“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.” - Lazarus Long
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 07-22-2009, 11:05 AM
Theseus's Avatar
Theseus Theseus is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 2,679
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

I don't see this as a "States Rights" issue.

The State can still not issue CCW's. All this would have done is require the state to honor the license like it would a DL, marriage license.

If you pass the BAR in one state is it also good in ALL states?
__________________
Nothing to see here. . . Move along.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 6:24 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy