I found a good link off of the NRA ILA page. An article in the Newton Kansan says there will always be two class of gun owners, those who obey the law and those who do not:
No matter how many bills are considered in Congress, there always will be two distinct camps of gun-owners in America.
There will be responsible citizens who abide by the law, and there will be criminals whose actions will not be guided by the law. That’s just the way it is.
Truer words could not be spoken. No matter who many laws controlling guns are enacted there will be people who will ignore them. For instance felons can’t legally own guns in this country yet many felons have guns. It is illegal to shoot somebody with a gun outside of self defense situations yet there are people who do it. Making further laws isn’t going to help curb violence since those who will commit violent acts will also ignore laws claiming to curb it.
This article also talks about the recent national carry amendment:
We’re not sure of all the hullaballoo, however. Currently, if a Kansas gun-owner obtains a permit for concealed carry, that same permit allows them to carry in a number of other states, as well. If the same person obtains an identical permit from Utah, that permit covers the rest of the 48 states already allowing concealed carry.
So all this measure would have done was eliminate one of the two permits needed and, in the process, simplified the process. It wouldn’t have changed the fact each state — and each local jurisdiction, for that matter — can set its own rules for concealed carry. In some places, one has to have a gun in the trunk. Others allow it in the glove compartment.
Although claiming having a Kansas and Utah permit will allow you to carry in all 48 states that have carry laws. Some states won’t let you carry regardless of the permit you hold, that’s one problem national reciprocity would have cured. But he is correct in the fact the amendment would have gotten rid of the need to hold multiple permits. I currently have a Minnesota and New Hampshire permit. I need the New Hampshire one to travel to Wyoming through South Dakota. Furthermore I will have to obtain either a Utah or Florida permit to travel to many other states.
The amendment would have also allowed each state to continue enforcing their own set of rules. For instance New Mexico could still disallow carrying more than one gun (unless they overturned that particular law in recent history).
The massive number of gun laws are impossible to keep up on. I find that ironic since the Brady Bunch always say there are only a handful of gun laws on the books. If I travel to Wisconsin I can’t carry my gun unless I do so openly. On top of that the police will probably still arrest me and once I get in my car the gun is considered concealed and I must disarm again. When I disarm I must follow Wisconsin’s laws dealing with transporting a firearm. It’s a mess.
The truth of the matter is there shouldn’t be any laws controlling guns because we have a constitutional right to bear arms that is stated not to be infringed. Well I can tell you first hand there are a lot of infringements against that right, far more then against any other right.