“While I appreciate knowing your views on this issue, please know that I do not support concealed weapons license reciprocity.  It is my belief that concealed weapons laws that may work in rural areas may not be suitable in urban areas.  What is good for Alaska or Wyoming may not be good for California or New York.  A federal policy mandating concealed carry reciprocity would usurp the right of states to grant concealed weapons licenses in the manner, and to those individuals, that they see fit . . .

“California sets a very high bar for those who wish to obtain a concealed weapon permit.  California’s strict rules ensure that felons, the mentally ill, and people who have been convicted of certain misdemeanor offenses or are considered a threat to others are automatically disqualified.  This legislation would force California to honor permits issued by all other States, including those which allow minors, convicted criminals, and people with no firearm safety training to carry concealed weapons.” [h/t girlswithguns]

 

Recommended For You

61 Responses to Quote of the Day: Feinstein’s Lies (Except for the Training Bit) Edition

  1. Force California… right, like she wouldn’t be more than happy to force the rest of the country to follow the inane labyrinth of regulation they’ve got over there.

    The woman just
    can’t
    understand
    normal
    thinking.

  2. White don’t these people (Feinstein in particular) read the law they are fighting? Do they just take the Brady line automatically?

    HR822 specifically and explicitly honors the states rights to restrict who and where a person can exercise their rights (as opposed to privileges like driving and other things the CA legislature thinks people are entitled to, like free everything and being bankrupt, but I digress…)

    This means that people who would be restricted in the PRK would still be restricted from bearing arms. And Bloomberg would have to convince the whole state to enact his draconian laws, instead of just his serfs in the kingdom of NYC.

    I really wish there was some way we could require these polits to be informed on the things they are spouting off about. Or at least before they vote on the issues. Not to mention get re-elected. Or some kind of recourse for them feeding such Bull to the public knowingly and falsely.

  3. That photo STILL gives me the willies… Magazine inserted, finger on the trigger, and muzzling an untold number of people.

    • If only it had been loaded – she might have wiped out some fellow gun grabbers and got herself life in prison. Talk about taking out two birds with one stone…. If only…

      • Nope. Would have been another case of a rogue gun accidentally discharging itself and thus re-enforcing her unqualified opinion. Negligence only applies to us common folk.

  4. Great point, federal reciprocity legislation absolutely bind’s the hand of the state it is unconstitutional, if that matters any longer.

    “California sets a very high bar for those who wish to obtain a concealed weapon permit”.
    Well that is an understatement, forget concealed carry the government of CA. is down right militant toward the thought of a gun, ammo or the individual right of such.

    O.k. it is a state right issue, true just don’t ask me a citizen of a neighboring state with every bit the sovereignty of CA to foot it’s fiscal disaster. I should not and do not want to be held responsible for the resurrection of the State of California. You made your bed. Vote’s have consequences.

    Unfortunately with the current political atmosphere my state and my individual right is irrelevant. So you can pick a single issue such as the right of the state to self governance “reciprocity” or any number of isolated issue’s. Those right’s only find relevance in a vacuum not in the reality of the overwhelming loss of the individual freedom citizens have endured whether they realize it or not.

    • Great point, federal reciprocity legislation absolutely bind’s the hand of the state it is unconstitutional, if that matters any longer.

      No, it doesn’t. The 2nd Amendment is part of the FEDERAL Constitution, thus laws requiring states to respect it are under the federal domain. It drive me up the wall that so many people support unconstitutional laws and then whine about this – the ONE TIME that Federal government would actually be doing something under it’s constitutional power.

      • Actually, enforced the Bill of Rights is not among the enumerated powers of Congress, so to be technically constitutional, such federal-level reciprocity would have to come from the courts.

        This, of course, sets aside the fact that the state reciprocity laws which would be superseded by federal reciprocity are per se illegal and unconstitutional.

        • The constitution continued to be amended after the Bill of rights.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

          Section 1 says that States are bound to respect the rights and privileges of citizens as enumerated by the Bill of Rights.
          Section 5 says that Congress shall have the power to enforce the provisions of the amendment.

          Then in 2010, The Supreme Court ruled that the second amendment is specifically incorporated to the states.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_the_Bill_of_Rights

          Saying that Congress doesn’t have the power to preempt State laws regarding civil rights takes us back to legal thinking of the 1800s.

        • Thanks, Dan. Gotta love how the government continues to treat the 2nd Amendment as the unwanted step-child.

        • No problem. Sorry if my tone was a little snippy, I just see a lot of people who’re annoyingly anti-gubment having issues with the idea that the constitutional amendments ever adding powers to Congress’s enumerated powers.

  5. concerned about safety
    posing with a firearm while not not paying attention where the muzzle is pointed, while failing to maintain trigger control. Probably under the assumption that it isn’t loaded. In short breaking all four rules at once.

    • Don’t expect a gun-grabber to know the four rules. That would require them to know something about what they are talking about.

      • Those guns all go off automatically and kill multiple children with a single shot all on their own-don’cha ya know?

  6. the right of states to grant concealed weapons licenses in the manner, and to those individuals, that they see fit

    The Senator has put her filthy finger on the real problem. Under the current system, a state can decide that a mentally healthy, law-abiding and sober citizen is somehow unfit to exercise his or her Constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Do you wonder why I despise California and everything it stands for?

    • See, this is the part I don’t understand. California Counties (not the State) still get to pick and choose who gets a CCW, at least among its residents. The reciprocity law will not change that. It only has to respect the licenses issued by other states, the same as it does for the drivers’ licenses issued by other states.
      California does not get to decide who can and cannot get a DL from another state, nor the training and education requirments for those out of state licenses, nor does it get to mandate how much training or experience is required of an out-of-state driver before he can drive here legally. Yet national reciprocity is NOT a state’s rights issue, but respecting CCWs is???

  7. “It is my belief that concealed weapons laws that may work in rural areas may not be suitable in urban areas.
    What is good for Alaska or Wyoming may not be good for California or New York”.

    That was strangely stated but then again DiFi is kinda strange. What about those many rural areas within CA and NY? Besides, does a state have the right to take away or reduce laws recognized for an individual’s liberty in the Bill of Rights? No, it does not. Her logic is illogical.

    I used to walk past her English-style Tudor House every other day when I lived in California. She’s a DINO — democrat in name only just like many politicos are members of one of the two major political party clubs yet in practice have values that are more akin to fascism.

      • Ha! I considered dropping off, on her front door step, the JPFO DVD ‘Death by Gun Control’– covering how All the genocides of the 20th Century were preceded by gun registration and confiscation. I figured that if I did go there the security cameras would record it, and I would later be accused of some crime (People’s KKKalifornia), etc.

        • Ha you should have given her a copy.. It might have done her some good.
          I am embarrassed of my own state, the city and county I grew up in.
          Although the impending collapse of Kalifornia has spurred massive gun sales. Even my wife who has been very anti gun, i.e. not for me thank you now wants one.
          If the state goes bankrupt which it very well might the only people who will be there to protect ourselves is us. I think she stated to get it..
          Yeah ok it is a bit of dooms day scenario but to be honest I could see it happening.

    • “It is my belief that concealed weapons laws that may work in rural areas may not be suitable in urban areas.”

      I dunno. I lived in Los Angeles, CA most my life. Now live in very rural Kansas. She can take my word for it, conceal carry is not only suitable in urban areas, but considered a must.

      Not that I ever did that there, , ,

      • Her belief is wrong. She should have stayed home in the kitchen and worn an apron, avoided politics, and kept herself busy cooking brisket and challah bread even though she seems like she’s probably a lousy cook too.

    • Fascism, the values of The State (IE: The Dictator) above all others. In Brief. And, we are headed that way by both parties. Just pick the party whose route getting there you like better. DiFi would look better with that AK up her posterior. I firmly believe people should have the right not to be armed as well as the right to be armed. Having a firearm is just part of it, understanding the responsibility of owning a firearm, is a large part of it. Arrogance and ignorance, are very close cousins.

  8. I didn’t realize all of the land in California and New York was city?

    The hypocrisy is hard to keep track of.

  9. I wasn’t aware that “felons, the mentally ill and minors” were eligible for CCW in any state.

    • I only just noticed that.

      “…including those which allow minors, convicted criminals, and people with no firearm safety training to carry concealed weapons.”

      Huh? Wich ones would that be exactly?

      • I noticed that as well. All those other states just have hoards of convicted felons being issued CCWs and running all over the country and cities. Opps, all those other states are rural areas only and only CA and NY are all totally urban areas.

      • Which states? The 51st through the 57th visited by a certain presidential candidate. Located between Mississippi and Alabama. Residents are cousin marryin (and beatin), corn likker swillin, gun toten, bible thumpin cretins, most of whom earned their first felony in the womb. The PRK is not in any danger since these people navigate by the sun. Travel 1/2 day east, possum bellies for lunch, travel 1/2 day west, repeat on the morrow.

      • She’s calling everyone under 21 a “minor.”

        In Texas a military service member or veteran can get a CHL at age 18. In a couple of other states that’s the minimum age.

    • Of course you’re not aware of that, tdiinva. You need to be constantly reminded of Jared Loughner, who on his way the the rally that day was enjoying Constitutional Carry, your favorite form of concealed carry.

      • Yep.
        Do you have a law you’d like to propose that will stop madmen from killing people?
        Do you think he’d have not concealed his weapon if it was illegal to carry it concealed?
        Was the firearm concealed when Loughner killed someone with it? (This is a little bit facetious, but since there’s no way to know someone’s intentions before they start shooting, it seems apt)
        You keep bringing that event up without providing any link from it to any argument you make. You’re getting better at providing evidence (though you’re confusing anecdote for date again), but you seem to have missed that you need to connect that evidence to your arguments.

        • Dan, do you think Loughner was doing open carry on his way to the rally?

          We don’t know what he would have done if stricter controls had been in place in Arizona, probably the same thing, but that’s no reason to make it easier for these nuts.

          And that’s the reason you can’t keep pushing concealed carry permits as a good thing.

          I refer often to old Jared, because in one single moment, he put the lie to several gun-rights bullshit stories. Constitutional Carry, extended magazines, and no screening for mental health problems.

          You should be proud to have such a poster boy. Embrace him as one of your own.

        • Mike, I never said anything about open carry.

          1) What possible way would you have the legal system detect a man like Loughner before he struck?

          2) You specified that Constitutional Carry was the issue. What is the likelyhood that Loughner would have not carried concealed or would have cancelled his plans if carrying concealed were illegal?

          3) It is illegal to purchase a firearm if you have been judged mentally incompetent by a doctor; those records are part of the NCIC check.

          Loughner had no *documented* past mental health history, no prior felonies, and there was nothing on paper to distinguish between him and a normal person right up until he opened fire.

          As for Extended magazines, I’ve been through that before with you; you have one data point. One data point cannot define a line. Without a line, you cannot describe a trend. Describing a trend is what you are attempting to do, so you need multiple data points to show a correlation between magazine size and casualty count.

  10. “California’s strict rules ensure that felons, the mentally ill, and people who have been convicted of certain misdemeanor offenses or are considered a threat to others are automatically disqualified.”
    Feinstein has one of the few permits issued in Alameda County and seems to consider anyone else who understands the wisdom of being armed, mentally ill and a threat to others when it’s actually she who is.

    • Alameda? Don’t think so. Her house is in Pacific Heights in San Francisco. She was the mayor, remember. And she doesn’t have a CCW any more–she famously gave it up along with her revolver some time ago, posted it on her web site.
      At the current time SF has NOT ONE CCW issued to a civilian. The former sheriff was very anti, and the new sheriff is having a hard time holding onto his office as a result of a DV issue (to which he copped a plea that allowed him to get his guns back, otherwise he would have been the only top LEO in the State barred from possessing weapons). And he is a hypocrit as well–said he supports the 2A, but not when it comes to issuing CCWs. In fact, SF’s requirements for obtaining a CCW violate state law in a number of ways, yet he seems to have no in terest in correcting the situation.

  11. I bet legislators, mayors and governors have a higher felony conviction rate than do CCW permit holders.

  12. “While I appreciate knowing your views on this issue, please know that I do not support concealed weapons license reciprocity.”

    Translation:

    The government has recorded your name and other information and will arrest you when we have consolidated our power, gotten most of the sheeple to sign-up for fascism, and set-up the re-education centers.

    • Add to that translation:

      Constituent or not, I don’t give a rat’s ass about your puny opinion.

      • Good addition to the translation. You hit the nail on the head. Political elites can be voted into office yet once in office they are for the most part arrogant and not accountable to the people.

  13. Funny how the democrats are all about state’s rights now but when it comes to civil rights or gay marriage they sing a different tune.

  14. I sent the good Senator a link to this post. I’m sure some low level staffer will make sure it never reaches the actual senator, but still, she guarantees that “Every e-mail I receive is read, and your opinions are carefully considered.”

    ha!ha!ha!ha!ha!ha! That’s a good one!

    • I posted to all my friends on Facebook lol
      I would say send it to everyone in congress. Get the word out that we want reciprocity.

  15. “California’s strict rules ensure that felons, the mentally ill, and people who have been convicted of certain misdemeanor offenses or are considered a threat to others are automatically disqualified.” These rules will only stop the above people from LEGALLY obtaining a CCW, but these people tend to follow their own set of rules. They will still get a gun and do as the please and no law will ever change this fact. Criminals are pretty stupid and they’re not worried about what will happen if they get caught with an illegal gun.

  16. {my click to edit still doesn’t work} I forgot to mention that states like Alaska and Wyoming, which pretty safe states to live in allow you to carry in order to protect yourself just in case the need arises. Now if you live in a dangerous state where you stand a pretty good chance of getting mugged, you’re not going to get a CCW unless you’re willing to become a circus clown and learn to jump through a million hoops in order to legally carry a firearm. I just don’t get it!!!

    • She forgot to mention that per capita the District of Columbia, and Kalifornia are both pretty high when it comes to gun homicides.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *