Skip to comments.Have Glock, Will Travel (New York Times Columnist Up in Arms)
Posted on 10/30/2011 7:12:56 AM PDT by goldstategop
New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey and several other states dont have reciprocity arrangements that allow someone like Todd to pay an armed courtesy call. Thats because New York officials can deny concealed-carry permits on a case-by-case basis, whereas many other states South Dakota, for example dont put much stock in such scrutiny.
H.R. 822, now in the House Judiciary Committee, makes a mockery of our diverse values and strategies for public safety. If it were enacted, off to New York the South Dakotan tourist could go, 9-millimeter Glock in tow.
Thats not liberty. More like lunacy.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The "lunacy" would be why does someone who lives in SD even want to go to NYC? Perhaps the perps in NYC would be more respectful of out-of-towners?
When he’s in New York working for the NY Times, I’ll bet Frank Bruni stays out of parts of Harlem, Brooklyn, and the South Bronx. Let somebody else be mugged and shot with an illegal weapon, the only kind most New Yorkers are allowed to carry.
A 9mm? Pretty light...Noo Yawk would be .45 territory, imho.
I’m sure he can get a permit with his political views and connections to City Hall.
Most New Yorkers will never be able to pack heat because Bloomberg thinks only the elites deserve self-protection.
They want power concentrated in reporters, lawyers and politicians, not individuals.
Heaven forbid we should allow the little people to protect themselves while traveling from one state to another.
Bruni is a liar. In New York City, the permitting system is hopelessly corrupt. If you don’t have political connections, financial clout or aren’t a celebrity, don’t bother to apply.
That’s the way its been there for a century.
He was up in arms the first time this was posted, too.
Federal and state law enforcement officials can already carry concealed nationwide, regardless of local law. Liberals just don’t want the little people to have the same right cops do!
I don’t know which is more astonishing: A Lib having a 10 Amendment epiphany, or the idea that someone from South Dakota would ever want to visit NYC.
We live in strange times.
Of course, the New Yorkers probably did prefer those nicely appointed, cultured British troops occupying their fair city throughout much of the Revolutionary War anyway, rather than Washington’s surrounding riffraff. Sad day for them, I suppose, when the Brits sailed away.
You posted it in General Chat. Sorry I didn’t see it come up when I searched for it.
"....Named for its primary legislative sponsor, state senator Timothy Sullivan, a notoriously corrupt Tammany Hall politician, it dates to 1911, and is still in force, making it one of the older existing gun control laws in the United States..."
The main motive for the law was to keep guns out of the hands of a rising immigrant and black population.
Now its used by the elite to keep the rif-raff from competing with their exclusive monopoly on gun ownership in New York City.
Of course Bruni would expect the Constitution’s ‘full faith and credit’ provision to apply to gay marriage.
I wonder why.
Situation Ethics. Carte Blanche for liberals to do anything at anytime. And always be right.
Situation ethics means there is no requirement to be consistent in your beliefs. Right for me is wrong for you. Wrong today is right tomorrow.
I suggest that concealed carry rights are granted in the federal constitution, by the Privileges and Immunities clause. States have no rights to deny Privileges and Immunities granted by other states.
Concealed carry is a privilege granted by your state, right?
I would look forward to seeing a SCOTUS case seeking redress: federal denial of the ability of another state to deny your CCW privilege.