that would make all states gun laws equil to the lowest level of restriction.Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
You get a driver's license in South Dakota, you can use it in NY. You get married in SD, it's recognized in NY. Why should a gun license be different?
If you split your time between a couple of states, it can be a problem. You can only get a concealed carry permit or even a permit to buy a gun in the state where you are a resident. What do you do at your other house?
if any state has to abide by the laws of another state you are taking away the right of that state to make rules.Quote from Arnie:
Nothing in this law diminishes states rights. They can still have a cc law they like, just like they do with drivers licenses or marriage lic. Having a drivers license is a privlege, not a right. Why should my RIGHT to own and bear arms be infringed just because I happen to travel to another state? Btw, SD has 77 murder/suicides/100K by guns. For NY and CA and all the other Blue states, its in the 1,000's. So the argment that this will make those states less safe doesn't hold water.
Vhehn, they know that full well. But their argument is ideological rather than logical. Once the doctrine has been cast, thinking need not apply. (There's a lot of that in the P&R forum, eh?)Quote from vhehn:
if any state has to abide by the laws of another state you are taking away the right of that state to make rules.
I know what I posted. I was just pointing out how statistics can be selected, manipulated and waterboarded, especially when there is an agenda on the table (and a Republican in the room).Quote from ByLoSellHi:
That's Australia and not really on topic. That has to do with the effectiveness of a 'gun buy back' program reducing crime in Australia, not the liberalizing of gun laws in U.S. states and declining crime rates.