Yesterday, November 16, 2011, the US House of Representatives passed HR822, the National Right-to-Carry Act of 2011, after defeating the TEN ridiculous amendments legislators tried to inject into the bill. Let's review them, shall we?
- Amendment No. 1—Rep. Woodall (R-GA): This amendment would protect the rights of states that already have reciprocal agreements in place for the concealed carry of firearms to continue enforcing those preexisting agreements.
- I'm still not totally sure why this amendment was introduced. Seems like a moot point considering the intention of the bill itself.
- Amendment No. 2—Rep. McCarthy (D-NY): This amendment would specify that the legislation can only go into effect in states that have passed legislation enacting the bill.
- Talk about a law-nullifier! Nice try, Mr. McCarthy!
- Amendment No. 3—Rep. Hastings (D-FL): This amendment would exempt states from issuing a carry permit on the basis of state reciprocity which do not require individuals to apply for and complete a carry permit application in person.
- Yet another law-killer! Silliness!
- Amendment No. 4—Rep. Jackson Lee (D-TX): This amendment would require a state to create a comprehensive database to contain all permits and licenses issued by the state for carrying a concealed weapon and make this comprehensive database available to law enforcement officers from all states 24 hours a day.
- Pure bureaucracy!
- Amendment No. 5—Rep. Conyers (D-MI): This amendment would effectively gut the bill by “preserving” state laws with respect to eligibility for concealed-carry.
- Enough said...
- Amendment No. 6—Rep. Johnson (D-GA): This amendment would require the possession or carrying of a concealed handgun in a state to be subject to “any law of the state that limits the eligibility to possess or carry a concealed handgun to persons who have received firearm safety training that includes a live-fire exercise.’’
- Are you seeing a pattern here? Those gun-grabbing democrats really want to 'limit the eligibility' of as many people as they can using whatever means they can.
- Amendment No. 7—Rep. Cohen (D-TN): This amendment would exempt from the bill any state law requiring a person to be at least 21 years of age to possess or carry a concealed handgun.
- Although I'm pretty sure most, if not all, states already have this requirement in place, there they go 'limiting eligibility' again!
- Amendment No. 8—Rep. Jackson Lee (D-TX): This amendment would require a person intending to carry or possess a concealed handgun in a state to inform that state’s law enforcement of their intentions at least 24 hours prior.
- Really? So I can't defend myself if I have to make an emergency, short notice, run out of state? Thanks, Mr. Lee! What a swell idea!
- Amendment No. 9—Rep. Cicilline (D-RI): This amendment would limit the bill from taking effect in a state until the State Attorney General, head of the State police, and the Secretary of State have jointly certified that the other state’s carry laws are substantially similar to its own licensing or permitting requirements.
- WOW! Another neutralizing idea from a known gun-grabber! Shocking...
- Amendment No. 10—Rep. Reichert (R-WA): This amendment would require a Government Accountability Office (GAO) study on the ability of state and local law enforcement authorities to verify the validity of out-of-state concealed firearms permits.
- Yet another attempt to use bureaucracy to abrogate laws the leftist gun-grabbers don't agree with. Typical.
So there you have it. All ten of these amendments seem like feeble attempts to render this much-needed-legislation virtually impotent. But I'm not delusional. I understand the long, tough road this bill has in front of it before it sees Presidential ink. I just wanted to point out the absurd ideas the anti-gun crowd attempted to thrust upon the American people in order to achieve their goals.
Now, on to the Senate...
No comments:
Post a Comment