Our states break up gun laws....

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by blueocean, May 30, 2013.

  1. blueocean

    blueocean New Member

    40
    0
    0
    So I am new to these gun forums, and was wondering. In the US, we fight gun laws state by state, each state with its own set of laws, which I always thought silly....as in why not have a set of laws for the entire country. So I wonder if other countries do the same thing? In other words, do Canadian laws vary by province? Are we unique in this or is it more common than I think in other countries, particularly European countries?

    Always seemed to me that we should just have a US drivers license, why need one for each state? One license, for life, just change the address on it when/if you move. Was it always like this from the first licenses given out?

    Did someone decide oh sure, you can drive that model T in that state, but not here, here it's illegal and you go to jail. The whole idea of something being completely legal in one state, that would get you put in prison in another state, seems ludicrous. Is it just me here?
     
  2. blueocean

    blueocean New Member

    40
    0
    0
    Oh, and I almost forgot. Does it seem too far fetched to think that two or three neighboring states should just combine law/licenses/etc? Then what if another neighboring state were to say, yea, that's a good idea, we'll join you, and so on and so on? Pros and cons here? Thoughts?
     

  3. Squawk

    Squawk New Member

    864
    0
    0
    I am happy with Kentucky and their gun laws. Very pro-2A state. If I lived in NY, I would have moved by now. The states have the right to govern themselves. I do not want universal gun laws across the whole country.
     
  4. trip286

    trip286 New Member

    18,658
    1
    0
    It's the tenth amendment to the constitution.

    Personally, I think the second is pretty well clear. But the tenth grants states the right to make some of their own laws.

    The deal is, the second enumerates the right to defense. And "driving" has been ruled a right unless engaged in commercial driving, yet no one cares.

    There are so many facets to your train of thought here, that there is no right or wrong response to your post.
     
  5. blueocean

    blueocean New Member

    40
    0
    0
    Not looking for right or wrong, just curious to everyone's thoughts on it, and how other countries are in relation.
     
  6. SSGN_Doc

    SSGN_Doc Well-Known Member

    6,924
    50
    48
    My thoughts are that by breaking it up and keeping some of those 10th ammendment powers keeps the federal government from gaining too much power to just make a blanket law that screws everyone nation wide. This allows for states of sheep to get real restrictive, and still not affect the residents of another state who what to retain responsibility and freedom to make their own choices instead of being nannied.

    As far as neighboring states having one permit goes there is a system of "reciprocity" in place where states may elect to honor the permit of another state. If you google "concealed carry reciprocity", you will get a better explaination than what I would put down in this post.
     
  7. JWagner

    JWagner New Member

    598
    0
    0
    I would be thinking that it is more likely for DC to make highly restrictive gun laws than the state I live in. And it is easier to challenge state laws and get them changed than it is for the federal laws. State lawmakers have better hearing than Congress members.
     
  8. nitestalker

    nitestalker New Member

    6,489
    0
    0
    Did you miss your 6th grade American History class. We are a nation made up of separate and individual governments that allow the Federal system to exist.
    The Founding Fathers realized the concept of Kingdoms only led to Servitude. They even went so far as to add the Bill Of Rights which identified and forbid Federal over reach.
    If you fail to understand the rights of citizens in relation to a an all powerful central government reread American History 1776 to present. :)
     
  9. DrumJunkie

    DrumJunkie New Member

    4,823
    0
    0
    If we allowed for national gun laws we'd have more like the should be illegal National Firearms act of 1934 or 1968.

    I's best we keep the states doing the bulk of the gun laws. At least that way you have the choice to escape over reaching gun laws. So Cali shooters and come to Ky where the gun laws are great and so is the view
     
  10. bcshadow

    bcshadow New Member

    16
    0
    0
    I just joined this forum today after googling a couple of things and finding some interesting information on firearms talk.

    I am a Brit, who has lived in Canada for over 30 years. In Canada, we have federal regulations for firearms. Until a couple of years ago, we had a long gun registry... The conservative party pledged to abolish it, as it had been absolutely useless and cost billions of dollars - literally!!. They did finally have the ability to eliminate the registry when they achieved a large majority in their second term. Handguns are a different story, they must still be registered and the transportation is strictly controlled, with recreational shooting and a club membership a pre-requisite. We have to take a firearms course to obtain any licence, and there are two types, non-restricted, and restricted (which includes handguns). There are background checks to obtain a possession and acquisition licence. We also have a course for hunting licences which is separate. Provinces differ on their view of firearms, depending on the political stripe of those in local power, some make it easy for recreational shooters ( i.e. BC) with others being far more obstructionist wherever possible.



     
  11. roadster

    roadster New Member

    12
    0
    0
    It is easy to forget our freedoms. Canada sounds a lot worse than here
     
  12. nitestalker

    nitestalker New Member

    6,489
    0
    0
    In Canada like England they are totally paranoid about handguns. They can own handguns made prior to 1899 that are on the approved list. To own a modern handgun is a pure night mare. The laws on a .22 target pistol are similar to out Machine gun ownership laws.:eek:
     
  13. bcshadow

    bcshadow New Member

    16
    0
    0
    Handguns in Canada

    Avtually, while it is very restrictive in Canada, I wouldn't describe it as a nightmare, if one is a pistol target shooter for example.

    i own a Glock 45 GAP, CZ Shadow 9mm and Smith and Wesson model 41, .22 that I shoot at a local gun club. My "ATT" - authorization to transport, permit, allows me to transport any handgun to a shooting range / club, in Canada and back home, and is valid for several years. It does not allow me to use it for carry or self defense purposes.

    When you say they can own handguns made prior to 1899, are you referring to England? That is not the case in Canada.

    I would love to be able to carry my 45 GAP when hunting but if I were to do that, it would be against the law here.

     
  14. WebleyFosbery38

    WebleyFosbery38 New Member

    7,510
    0
    0
    See, NY isnt so bad afterall! Its still complete BS to fetter an unfetterable Right at the state or federal level in the USA. Thats why we have a Constitution, if they dont like it, they should change it, thats not real easy but it could be done if they really wanted to follow the laws instead of making them up. I dont care that much if other countries dont allow their citizens to self defend, I wont go to places that my rights arent protected fully. I do care about my rights here and we will get them back the next election (or sooner).
     
  15. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 New Member

    614
    0
    0
    Agreed! I think that the individual states should have MORE rights in how things are run within its borders.

    Fellow Kentuckian, proud to live in such a pro-gun state also.