TexasCHLforum.com

Not a law but they are trying

http://dailycaller.com/2011/08/30/your- ... e-borders/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The bill was introduced by Congressmen Cliff Stearns (R-FL) and Heath Shuler (D-NC) and it currently has 242 co-sponsors and the full backing of the National Rifle Association. By any benchmark, H.R. 822 has overwhelming bipartisan support.

Kirk wrote:Not a law but they are trying

http://dailycaller.com/2011/08/30/your- ... e-borders/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The bill was introduced by Congressmen Cliff Stearns (R-FL) and Heath Shuler (D-NC) and it currently has 242 co-sponsors and the full backing of the National Rifle Association. By any benchmark, H.R. 822 has overwhelming bipartisan support.

Huh. I didn't think it'd be that popular. I'm not sure how I feel about this one. I don't see how congress has the constitutional authority for this, but I'm not sure why the part of the constitution that makes CA accept my TX DL wouldn't make them accept my CHL as well.

Perhaps they think a federal law dealing with the second ammendment would have the right to supercede state or local law. I bet it would set off a heck of a firestorm!

RJ

We tell California they have to honor Texas CHL and soon California will soon want a say in how gets a CHL in Texas.

bkj wrote:We tell California they have to honor Texas CHL and soon California will soon want a say in how gets a CHL in Texas.

They don't have a say in how we get our driver's licenses. Why should our CHLs be any different?

Dave2 wrote:

bkj wrote:We tell California they have to honor Texas CHL and soon California will soon want a say in how gets a CHL in Texas.

They don't have a say in how we get our driver's licenses. Why should our CHLs be any different?

Nobody says we have to accept their DL either.

Don't like this bill. Get the feds involved and it will lead to a bigger mess than we have now.

"...I'm from the government and I'm here to help you..."

speedsix wrote:"...I'm from the government and I'm here to help you..."

Sen Hutcheson is among many congress people proposing a nationwide Wide Band Internet thingy

After The Subway in California jammed all Cell phone Service ...

I'm not sure this is a good thing either

I can see hill country having problems getting wide band Internet and they'd benefit

I can see one State not having concealed carry and some making it hard to get licensed and they'd benefit

What concerns me is when they "turn it off" or " 'Temporarily' revoke/suspend all licenses because of ..."

I prefer local Govt to Washington....Individual rights to States, States rights to Federal

Bullwhip wrote:

Dave2 wrote:

bkj wrote:We tell California they have to honor Texas CHL and soon California will soon want a say in how gets a CHL in Texas.

They don't have a say in how we get our driver's licenses. Why should our CHLs be any different?

Nobody says we have to accept their DL either.

Don't like this bill. Get the feds involved and it will lead to a bigger mess than we have now.

US Constitution, Article IV, Section 1 wrote:Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

I think the first half is why they all have to honor each other's drivers licenses, but if you search Google for "do the states have to recognize each other's driver's licenses, or are they just playing nice?", it just returns a bunch of articles about HR 822. Anyway, if licenses fall under the heading of "public acts, records, or judicial proceedings", then this is where Congress is getting their authority (though the way I read it, CA would be obligated to honor my CHL anyway, which they don't, so maybe I'm just being optimistic).

Anyway, the feds do tend to create big messes, so I certainly agree with you there.

But we like the state's preemption for our CHL. Wouldn't this be like that on a national level?

Well, it is a toss up. But with the NRA supporting it, it must be worthwhile?

C-dub wrote:But we like the state's preemption for our CHL. Wouldn't this be like that on a national level?

Yes, but since the bill hasn't been passed yet, the antis still have a chance to amend it. The argument (well, an argument) is that it'll attract the attention of folks who don't want this and they'll try to amend it to death, or bundle it with additional "common sense" gun control laws.

If this law passes some of the anti gun states may set traps for honest gun owners
like making prohibited areas out of vehicles on public highways off limits
or within 10 miles of a school ,church ,hospital ,or dog pound a feloney
or to make a feloney to posess the more common types of ammunition

Watch out for this one it is a trap

The 2nd Amendment gives us our right to bear arms. Any state (like Illinios) that deosn't allow that is infringing on that right. The 14th Amendment gives Congress the power to keep states from taking away our Constitutional rights. That is how they can do this. All the bill is doing is saying that states should recogonize other states' licenses for carry, just like a drivers license. You can carry but have to follow the proper laws of that state. You aren't required to get a different drivers license if you travel out of your own state. But the bill still has you getting your license to carry from the state you live in.

Honestly, which is more dangerous. A few ounces of lead or a 2-3 ton vehicle?