Ad JS

Collapse

Leaderboard

Collapse

Leaderboard Tablet

Collapse

Leaderboard Mobile

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The hypocrisy of conservadicks knows no bounds.

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    reils....True, NY does not have a stand your ground law....but remember the law says you must retreat from the threat IF YOU BELIEVE YOU CAN SAFELY DO SO. Have never seen a definition of the requirements for a safe retreat. Additionally read PL 35 for the exceptions to the retreat law. NY politicos like to rant against stand your ground but NY pretty much has the same law and in a lot of cases a stronger "castle doctrine" than quite a few other states.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Ex Army MP View Post

      No issues with LEOSA.
      How is CCW reciprocity different?

      Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. - Ronald Reagan

      I don't think It'll happen in the US because we don't trust our government. We are a country of skeptics, raised by skeptics, founded by skeptics. - Amaroq

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Dinosaur32 View Post
        reils....True, NY does not have a stand your ground law....but remember the law says you must retreat from the threat IF YOU BELIEVE YOU CAN SAFELY DO SO. Have never seen a definition of the requirements for a safe retreat. Additionally read PL 35 for the exceptions to the retreat law. NY politicos like to rant against stand your ground but NY pretty much has the same law and in a lot of cases a stronger "castle doctrine" than quite a few other states.
        I understand NYS PL Article 35. I used to teach it when I was assigned as a firearms instructor.

        My point was a Treyvon Martin or Joe Horn type of incident. Whereby you shoot someone in a manner that would be legal where you live, received training and have a permit, but you do it somewhere else.

        And let me be clear, I understand fully that laws regarding carrying a firearm and using one are completely separate matters. My concern is are we setting people up for failure by just forcing reciprocal pistol permit laws, but not adequately training people for the day they might have to use it, and oh by the way there are now 49 other laws you need to learn.

        To jump in on ateamer’s question, I see the biggest difference between these 2 is training. LEOSA deals with trained LEOs. This doesn’t.

        If you could show me a set standard of training, a uniform standard of issuance requirements of the permit, etc. I might be supportive. But that’s probably not going to happen. Take Florida, you can get a license from Florida through the mail and having never been a resident there. On the flip side my own state is on the other end of the spectrum and it’s terrible in many ways, but the process is fairly rigorous, as it should be, on my opinion.
        I make my living on Irish welfare.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by ateamer View Post
          How is CCW reciprocity different?
          Training

          LEOSA requires at least minimum training to where you the actor has been a licensed police officer with arrest powers prior to being qualified under the ACT

          many states require minimal training or some have absolutely no training requirements for a carry permit

          big difference in the two
          Since some people need to be told by notes in crayon .......Don't PM me with without prior permission. If you can't discuss the situation in the open forum ----it must not be that important

          My new word for the day is FOCUS, when someone irritates you tell them to FOCUS

          Comment


          • #20
            Reils.....Florida requires proof of training in handling a firearm, even for non-resident permits. To get my permit I had to submit my most recent qualification report. What does NY require? I deal with firearms issues for my firm and there are quite a number of permit holders in NY that I wonder about.

            Comment


            • reils49
              reils49 commented
              Editing a comment
              NY requires a handgun safety training course, most likely the NRA Pistol Safety Course.

              My point was you can do it through the mail. No face to face contact with the issuing authority. What kind of background investigation can you do without even speaking with an applicant?

              If Florida is ok with that, great, but others are not. That’s why this is a states rights issue.

            • Dinosaur32
              Dinosaur32 commented
              Editing a comment
              reils...Maybe I'm missing something but the only reference I see in NYS Penal Law Sect 400 regarding handgun safety training relates to Westchester County. If there is something else please let me know.

          • #21
            Originally posted by Iowa #1603 View Post

            Training

            LEOSA requires at least minimum training to where you the actor has been a licensed police officer with arrest powers prior to being qualified under the ACT

            many states require minimal training or some have absolutely no training requirements for a carry permit

            big difference in the two
            What about the states where someone can be a working police officer for a year before ever going to the academy? There are cops out there who are very poorly screened and trained.
            Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. - Ronald Reagan

            I don't think It'll happen in the US because we don't trust our government. We are a country of skeptics, raised by skeptics, founded by skeptics. - Amaroq

            Comment


            • #22
              Originally posted by ateamer View Post
              What about the states where someone can be a working police officer for a year before ever going to the academy? There are cops out there who are very poorly screened and trained.
              It still better than where no training is mandated

              Iowa is one of those states...........BUT in order for the officer to carry a gun they must go through the same weapons certification as an academy trained officer.
              But that isn't the question

              LEOSA is a federal law for the SAFETY of law QUALIFIED LEOS. it is MUCH different in intent and in practice than a national reciprocity law


              We can disagree if it makes you happy.
              Since some people need to be told by notes in crayon .......Don't PM me with without prior permission. If you can't discuss the situation in the open forum ----it must not be that important

              My new word for the day is FOCUS, when someone irritates you tell them to FOCUS

              Comment


              • #23
                Originally posted by ateamer View Post
                How is CCW reciprocity different?
                Iowa beat me to it. While I am not necessarily of the opinion that all police are better trained than all civilians, police have minimum standards that all must meet.

                The requirements in some states for CCW is pretty scary.


                "Jerry, just remember, it’s not a lie if you believe it". George Constanza.

                Comment


                • #24
                  Originally posted by Ex Army MP View Post
                  By now many of you are aware of the concealed carry bill that Congress is proposing which forces reciprocity on each state with respect to concealed carry.

                  Don't get me wrong, I am as pro 2A as anyone. But this is an infringement on state's rights which conservadicks have always purported to be a champion of. It's not about the 2A because restrictive gun laws can be challenged under the Constitution. So, as long as a Federal court has not struck down our concealed carry laws, who is Congress to tell the state of NJ that we MUST honor a concealed carry permit issued in the state of Mississippi? Moreover, under what provision of Article I, Section 8 gives them such authority?

                  What happened to state's rights?
                  ateamer and HUDM are both absolutely spot on. Every issues you raise are the same issues raised in arguments against enacting LEOSA and that law took 20+ years longer to get enacted than it should have because of those same BS worries.

                  LEOSA is EXACTLY the same principle....period........oh and if its not show us were 'training' is listed as a way around states rights, counselor?
                  .
                  Good people with guns are NEVER the problem.

                  Regarding the training issue....total red herring.......I damn well know the training level with firearms AND COMPETENCE of the typical LEO and I also am well aware of the safety and competence level of the typical citizen who applies for, gets approved, and carries a firearm on a regular basis and who would consider actually carrying said firearm out of state...........I have absolutely no freaking greater concerns with those citizens over your average LEO and I can make a damn good argument for the opposite.....and I've got some range video to prove it!
                  Harry S. Truman, (1884-1972)
                  “Never kick a fresh turd on a hot day.”

                  Capt. E.J. Land USMC,
                  “Just remember – life is hard. But it’s one hell of a lot harder if you’re stupid.

                  George Washington, (1732-1799)
                  "I hope I shall possess firmness and virtue enough to maintain what I consider the most enviable of all titles, the character of an honest man."

                  Originally posted by Country_Jim
                  ... Thus far, I am rooting for the zombies.

                  Comment


                  • Langford PR
                    Langford PR commented
                    Editing a comment
                    No. I'm saying that the training issue as a point of denying citizens the ability to carry CCW across state lines is bogus.....
                    ....and yes, your average gun proficiency of the average LEO isn't something to yell from the mountain top as a reason they should carry and others not.

                    Bottom line...guns are serious business and should be treated as such but 'LEO training' is lousy excuse to hang the denial of rights to non-LEO citizens on. We LEO's are not a separate class of American who deserves what other citizens don't.........and my experience on the range and seeing thousands of other LEO's on the range damn well exemplifies that fact to me.....yours doesn't?
                    Last edited by Langford PR; 12-08-2017, 04:30 AM. Reason: meh

                  • Curt5811
                    Curt5811 commented
                    Editing a comment
                    My experience is that people are people, badge or no, and should not be trusted not to hurt themselves with a rubber spatula, let alone a firearm. I agree there should not be laws restricting the carry or use of firearms, for much the same reasons I think we should begin legalizing drugs. Permits? Prescriptions? Stupid people will continue to obtain/possess/misuse both... laws or no laws.

                  • Langford PR
                    Langford PR commented
                    Editing a comment
                    I agree with every single word of that, Curt.

                • #25
                  Originally posted by JDCOP View Post
                  I hope it passes to just make the libs cry.
                  Me too.

                  Comment


                  • #26
                    Originally posted by Ex Army MP View Post
                    By now many of you are aware of the concealed carry bill that Congress is proposing which forces reciprocity on each state with respect to concealed carry.

                    Don't get me wrong, I am as pro 2A as anyone. But this is an infringement on state's rights which conservadicks have always purported to be a champion of. It's not about the 2A because restrictive gun laws can be challenged under the Constitution. So, as long as a Federal court has not struck down our concealed carry laws, who is Congress to tell the state of NJ that we MUST honor a concealed carry permit issued in the state of Mississippi? Moreover, under what provision of Article I, Section 8 gives them such authority?

                    What happened to state's rights?
                    I like state's rights too.

                    That's why it ****ed me off when liberals forced gay marriage on everyone nationwide, even in states that had voted against it. 50 million people across the country voted against gay marriage, and yet liberals forced it on everyone through their constant lawsuits and whining and bitching.

                    Where were you on state's rights then??? Liberals hypocrisy amazes me.

                    Comment


                    • #27
                      Originally posted by beachcop05 View Post
                      I like state's rights too.

                      That's why it ****ed me off when liberals forced gay marriage on everyone nationwide, even in states that had voted against it. 50 million people across the country voted against gay marriage, and yet liberals forced it on everyone through their constant lawsuits and whining and bitching.

                      Where were you on state's rights then??? Liberals hypocrisy amazes me.
                      Yeah... that wasn't liberals. That was the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution.

                      Section 1 reads, in part, :

                      "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws".
                      That means no state may make a law which protects one group of citizens, but denies that protection to another. Laws must apply equally to all.

                      It has nothing to do with "states rights" and everything to do with the rights of the individual.
                      When the manure hits the fan, it's never evenly distributed.

                      Comment


                      • #28
                        Originally posted by Curt5811 View Post

                        Yeah... that wasn't liberals. That was the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution.

                        Section 1 reads, in part, :



                        That means no state may make a law which protects one group of citizens, but denies that protection to another. Laws must apply equally to all.

                        It has nothing to do with "states rights" and everything to do with the rights of the individual.
                        Nope, sorry. There is nothing in the Constitution that guarantees the right to marriage, for anyone. It is a 10th amendment right granted to the states, re-read the 10th amendment, 'any duties not the responsibility of the federal government shall fall to the states'. That includes licensing; driver licenses, marriage licenses, concealed carry licenses, and on and on.

                        And YES, it was liberals. They cried and whined like a 3 year old child until they finally got their way and forced their beliefs on the rest of the country.
                        Last edited by beachcop05; 12-08-2017, 07:57 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #29
                          Conservadick?? You didn't need to resort to name-calling right off the bat. As most of the members here in o.com probably identify as conservative or close to it, using that term isn't very wise.

                          Sigh.....I wish CCCSD were still around....he always handled situations like these well.
                          Last edited by beachcop05; 12-08-2017, 08:59 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #30
                            Originally posted by beachcop05 View Post

                            Nope, sorry. There is nothing in the Constitution that guarantees the right to marriage, for anyone. It is a 10th amendment right granted to the states, re-read the 10th amendment, 'any duties not the responsibility of the federal government shall fall to the states'. That includes licensing; driver licenses, marriage licenses, concealed carry licenses, and on and on.

                            And YES, it was liberals. They cried and whined like a 3 year old child until they finally got their way and forced their beliefs on the rest of the country.
                            Your argument is a red herring. You're correct, there is no guarantee of "marriage". However, there IS a guarantee that if the State is going to issue marriage licenses to one group, then State must issue such licenses to all. You can't say "everyone except gays" or "everyone except Jews or blacks or Asians". It's not about licensing, it's about equal rights under the law.

                            As for whining and crying, were black Americans "whining and crying like three year olds" about civil rights and Jim Crow laws in the early 60's?

                            Then after disparaging an entire group of people for standing up for equal rights, by saying they are "whining and crying like three year olds", you're going to complain about someone else name-calling? Thats a lot of damn gall, right there.

                            Apparently you really do believe one side is able to do and say things, others cannot




                            When the manure hits the fan, it's never evenly distributed.

                            Comment

                            MR300x250 Tablet

                            Collapse

                            What's Going On

                            Collapse

                            There are currently 5045 users online. 241 members and 4804 guests.

                            Most users ever online was 19,482 at 12:44 PM on 09-29-2011.

                            Welcome Ad

                            Collapse
                            Working...
                            X