New York Times Shitting Selves Over National Reciprocity Possibility

It looks like the New York Times will need to get a change of pants (note some people say this article requires registration to read it but I’ve not had that issue yet)…

Like most anti-gun articles this one is filled with hysteria…

Passage of the amendment would make it much harder for law enforcement to distinguish between legal and illegal possession of a firearm. It would be a boon for illegal gun traffickers, making it easier to transport weapons across state lines without being caught.

If a state has concealed carry laws how is this going to make it any harder to determine if a person they see is carrying a gun legally or not? This doesn’t make any sense.

Let us use an example here. A cop in Minnesota is walking down the street and sees a person openly carrying a gun. Here in Minnesota this is perfectly legal with a permit to carry since we have no concealment requirement. How can he tell if that person has a license or not without asking? He can’t. Now take this a step further and say the person is from Utah and has a Utah issued carry permit. How can the cop known the person is out of state without asking? He can’t. So there is no change here whatsoever.

And how will this make it easier to cross state lines with guns? No permit or license is required to transport a gun from one state to another. If a police officer pulls somebody over who is transporting a firearm across state lines they can’t arrest the person for that since no law is being broken regardless if the person transporting the guns has a permit to carry a gun.


Proponents of Senator Thune’s attempt to create the equivalent of a national concealed carry system claim it would reduce crime. But the evidence shows otherwise. Between May 2007 and April 2009, people holding concealed handgun permits killed at least seven police officers and 44 private citizens, according to a new study by the Violence Policy Center, a gun control advocacy organization. Other examples of crimes committed by concealed-carry licensees are plentiful.

So in two years people holding carry permits have killed at most (not at least because you know if there was the chance of it being more they’d use the higher number) seven police officers and 44 citizens. Of the hundreds of thousands of permit holders out there only 51 people have been killed in two years. That’s a much lower number than the number of people police wrongfully shoot per year, heck probably per month. Furthermore there is no citation of the study and no mention why these 51 people were killed (i.e. was there a belief of the carry permit holders that their life was in danger).

But being from the Violence Policy Center who is a paid shill for the Brady Campaign I can see why these numbers are meaningless. They’ve been known to sensationalize things a wee bit more than there are stars in the sky.

Let us continue…

For Alaska to permit residents who have committed repeated violent misdemeanors or who have committed misdemeanor sex offenses against minors to carry a concealed weapon is terrible public policy. For the Senate to extend that permit to 47 other states would be the height of irresponsibility, as well as a breathtaking violation of legitimate states’ rights.

Actually the state of Alaska allows their citizens to carry guns without a permit hence anybody there can carry a gun so long as they can legally own one. What is being said here is that a person who has committed violent misdemeanors or misdemeanor sex offenses against minors (note how both are misdemeanors) can purchase a gun.

And then they bring in the states’ rights argument which I feel is irrelevant. See the right to bear arms is spelled out in the Bill of Rights which is a list of rights considered natural and inalienable. Every state of the union must follow the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Hence the right to carry a gun is constitutional not state given. As stated in our Constitution any laws not spelled out in it are reserved for the states and citizens. Well the right to bear arms is spelled out hence it’s not reserved for the states but given to every citizen.

LOGIC?! Oh noes!!!!!!!!