Skip to comments.
So Much For Small Government (New York Times Masthead Editorial)
New York Times ^
| 10/26.2011
| New York Times Masthead Editorial
Posted on 10/29/2011 8:16:20 AM PDT by goldstategop
This extreme legislation, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011, would obliterate state and local eligibility rules for concealed weapons and the states discretion to decide whether to honor anothers permits.
At least 36 states now set a minimum age of 21 for carrying concealed guns, and 35 states require some sort of gun-safety training. Thirty-eight states prohibit people convicted of certain violent crimes like misdemeanor assault or sex crimes from carrying concealed weapons.
The act would override those rules, requiring states with tight restrictions, like New York and California, to allow people with permits from states with lax laws to tote concealed and loaded guns in their jurisdiction. Wording added by the committee exempts people with a concealed-carry permit from one state from having to meet eligibility standards set by the state they are visiting.
The measure, pushed by the National Rifle Association, would undermine legitimate states rights by nationalizing lenient gun rules most states have rejected for themselves. It would increase the chance for gun violence and make it harder to combat illegal gun trafficking.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012election; banglist; concealedcarry; nationalreciprocity; newyorktimes; righttocarry; secondamendment; sliming4tyranny
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
Its hilarious! You would think a bill that would expand individual rights would be endorsed by the
New York Times, right? Not when you're a gun owner. Suddenly, states' rights take precedence. When it comes to the Second Amendment, hardcore liberals discover their inner conservative.
Go figure.
To: goldstategop
I wonder what they would say if we citizens here in Arizona decided to NOT RECOGNIZE any DRIVER’S License from people from California using the sole reason that their standards are too lax and allow ANYONE to get a license regardless of their competence. Same Argument. Or maybe we should go 1 step further:
No License or permit issued from another State for any reason shall be Valid or recognized in the State of Arizona unless that State recognizes ALL Arizona permits and licenses.
Tit for Tat
2
posted on
10/29/2011 8:25:57 AM PDT
by
eyeamok
To: goldstategop
This is not a states rights issue, but a Constitutional issue. The Second Amendment applies to ALL states and citizens. What part of “Shall not be infringed” do they not understand?
3
posted on
10/29/2011 8:27:18 AM PDT
by
Crazy ole coot
(Mr. obama (the squatter in the Whitehouse) is NOT a Natural Born Citizen!!)
To: eyeamok
A license is a privilege, not a right. The RKBA is enshrined in the Constitution. It may not be popular with media liberals but the Second Amendment is there in black and white. If they don’t like it, they can work to repeal it.
4
posted on
10/29/2011 8:28:41 AM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
To: goldstategop
Does this mean that state and local governments should be allowed to set their own rules on abortions too?
5
posted on
10/29/2011 8:29:34 AM PDT
by
hometoroost
(Frodo lives!)
To: Crazy ole coot
The 14th Amendment gives Congress the power to pass federal laws to protect the rights of American citizens. They are not disputing Congress has that power. They're simply saying certain states should be entitled to deny law-abiding Americans a fundamental constitutional right because they don't approve of its exercise. Pure and simple. The Supreme Court's holding in Heller has made no lasting impression on our media elites.
6
posted on
10/29/2011 8:32:42 AM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
To: hometoroost
Liberals say no state should be allowed to infringe abortion rights. Then again, it perfectly illustrates liberal hypocrisy about states’ rights.
7
posted on
10/29/2011 8:34:28 AM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
To: goldstategop
I agree, however by taking this approach it would force the Marxist Gun Grabbers to make that EXACT ARGUMENT. That IT IS A RIGHT not a Privilege. I say force the issue.
8
posted on
10/29/2011 8:34:39 AM PDT
by
eyeamok
To: goldstategop
I love how the Times always write their anti gun tripe while hiding behind metal detectors and ARMED security guards.
To: goldstategop
Boo hoo NEw York Slimes, individual freedom gains, equal NYT loss.
10
posted on
10/29/2011 8:37:14 AM PDT
by
Sea Parrot
(Democrats creation of the entitlement class will prove out to be their very own Frankenstein monster)
To: goldstategop
It would increase the chance for gun violence and make it harder to combat illegal gun trafficking. The first part of the statement has been disproved so many times only a fool would use it. The second part doesn't even apply
11
posted on
10/29/2011 8:37:47 AM PDT
by
paul51
(11 September 2001 - Never forget)
To: eyeamok
Your plan sounds good to me.
12
posted on
10/29/2011 8:38:31 AM PDT
by
Sea Parrot
(Democrats creation of the entitlement class will prove out to be their very own Frankenstein monster)
To: BookmanTheJanitor
I love how they invoke the small government meme on a completely irrelevant subject.
13
posted on
10/29/2011 8:38:47 AM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
To: paul51
Every state with right to carry laws has seen a decrease in crime and in black market trafficking. But the facts don't help the New York Times, so it plain has to make it up. More guns equal a more a safe and a more polite society.
14
posted on
10/29/2011 8:41:08 AM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
To: goldstategop
NYT is all for state’s rights, doncha know.
15
posted on
10/29/2011 8:42:44 AM PDT
by
skeeter
To: goldstategop
That is RIGTHT, here in AZ no permit or license is required for CC. If one can legally purchase a firearm, then one can carry it concealed unhindered,
16
posted on
10/29/2011 8:44:04 AM PDT
by
Sea Parrot
(Democrats creation of the entitlement class will prove out to be their very own Frankenstein monster)
To: Sea Parrot
In my opinion, this legislation doesn’t go nearly far enough. It needs to legalize Vermont-style carry nationwide. Then let the liberals go into paroxysms! :)
17
posted on
10/29/2011 8:47:04 AM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
To: harpseal; TexasCowboy; nunya bidness; AAABEST; Travis McGee; Squantos; wku man; SLB; ...
Where to start?
Typical leftist hypocrisy: All for Big Government when it forces the homosexual agenda, the welfare state, more suicidal environemental legislation, etc. down our collective (no pun intended) throats. But something that actually is mentioned in the Constitution -- nyet, comrade!
They're all for states' rights, until it threatens one of their golden calves. Double-plus ungood!
Of course, it's not hypocrisy when they do it.
Doom on these smug, arrogant, lying, manipulative cretins.
18
posted on
10/29/2011 8:58:20 AM PDT
by
Joe Brower
(Sheep have three speeds: "graze", "stampede" and "cower".)
To: eyeamok
The New York Times has given us the perfect gift in this editorial. For this logic is also applicable to the gay marriage issue.
States should not have to recognize the (insert license name here) of other states. The NYT goes for gun licenses... but there are marriage licenses, too.
19
posted on
10/29/2011 9:17:42 AM PDT
by
gogogodzilla
(Live free or die!)
Do You Want FR To Survive?
Click The Starving Forum Skeleton To Donate
Then Support Your Forum
20
posted on
10/29/2011 9:19:37 AM PDT
by
DJ MacWoW
(America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson