29 minutes ago, Sniper22 said:

There's a guy that gets it. If it WAS going to happen, we just had a Repub controlled Congress and White House, so did it happen?

Plus, on the fairytail belief that the Senate passes it in the next few weeks, do you really think OUR communist state will it allow to be implemented without a MAJOR fight?

 

On the other hand, look how much other/worse stuff could have happened when Obama had both the House and Senate.  AWB? Yes I know they were pushing ARRA and healthcare, but they did have the opportunity for a streamlined free for all. 

Point is, majorities all over don’t always get everything done, and swings midterm happen.  If anything, the polarity pendulum is swinging more wildly cycle after cycle. With that being the case, next swing could be further in the favor of our side.  

I wouldn’t doubt this was all a ploy -  that often there is a shift midterm, now create the optic of who is holding up these rights, and force the discussion and balance of power again in 2020.  After all, SCOTUS should be favorable, and only more favorable as time goes by, but that’s a last ditch effort amongst the slow roll of politics.  And they want to slow roll stuff to keep getting certain groups’ vote.

Seems to me that a midterm victory on this wouldn’t be as beneficial for Trump getting a second term, as either a late-term win, or the polarizing optic of just whomis preventing it, right before people go to the polls in a Presidential year. 

But maybe Immway off base?

i would love to see HR-38 passed... but even though we picked up seats in the senate I dont think the votes are there.

and even though the dems have the house... i dont see any AWB coming forward anytime soon.  they know it would get squashed plus they will have their hands full trying to impeach trump, going after his tax returns and trying to get him indicted.  I'm sure that will be all they do until 2020 .. oh that and start the groundwork for medicare for all.

26 minutes ago, JHZR2 said:

Point is, majorities all over don’t always get everything done,

HR-38 was passed in the House on Dec. 6, 2017. It was then passed over to the Senate.

Do you really think the Senate couldn't find time between then and now to get it passed, if they wanted to?

23 minutes ago, Sniper22 said:

HR-38 was passed in the House on Dec. 6, 2017. It was then passed over to the Senate.

Do you really think the Senate couldn't find time between then and now to get it passed, if they wanted to?

My only hope is that they were waiting for the Lame Duck session, to protect their odds in an election year.

Now that I am in SC and have my CWP I see this from a different perspective: unfortunately I honestly don't think most of America really cares about national reciprocity.  The reason?  For the most part I already have reciprocity for the states I will most likely travel to:  NC, GA, FL.  Before I moved I saw it as important because it was a foot in the door towards gaining a realistic right to carry in NJ.  Most of us outside the anti-2A states just don't see it the same way.

19 minutes ago, tomk62 said:

Now that I am in SC and have my CWP I see this from a different perspective: unfortunately I honestly don't think most of America really cares about national reciprocity.  The reason?  For the most part I already have reciprocity for the states I will most likely travel to:  NC, GA, FL.  Before I moved I saw it as important because it was a foot in the door towards gaining a realistic right to carry in NJ.  Most of us outside the anti-2A states just don't see it the same way.

They don't. They have their resident CCW that reciprocates with all the states they want to travel. 

I care. And I can carry now in every state.

1 hour ago, Sniper22 said:

HR-38 was passed in the House on Dec. 6, 2017. It was then passed over to the Senate.

Do you really think the Senate couldn't find time between then and now to get it passed, if they wanted to?

Again, read my whole post.  Perhaps there are other strategies in play. 

To chalk it up to unwillingness - you’re saying that some small group pandering to our agenda was unwilling to champion?  There wasn’t a single person trying to ignore the spark? You’re right - they could find time, if the handlers said to.

None of us are that smart.  Certainly the political strategists who lay this all out daily, as opposed to us spending 20 minutes a day on a web forum, have given it some thought.  Perhaps I’m wrong and assume too much.  But I think there’s a strategy to everything.  

To me, there’s an established basis that the legislature changes hands mid term.  It happened with Obama, it’s happening with Trump, and likely happened countless other times. Is the play to have a success now, knowing that will happen anyway, or is the play to empower your 2A voting base to either react or affirm, in 2020??????  

“I don’t care what you did for me yesterday.  I care about what you’re doing for me today” type of logic. 

2 hours ago, PK90 said:

I care. And I can carry now in every state.

bc ur part of the "protected" class!  -such bullshit!

2 minutes ago, CageFighter said:

bc ur part of the "protected" class!  -such bullshit!

But I care.

2 minutes ago, PK90 said:

But I care.

shoot me a PM when those Rem V3 Tac13 is avail for NJ.

 

3 hours ago, JHZR2 said:

Is the play to have a success now, knowing that will happen anyway, or is the play to empower your 2A voting base to either react or affirm, in 2020??????  

You're putting way too much thought in conspiracy theories. Politicians aren't that smart. If the Senate wanted to pass it, they would have, since it went through the House.

3 hours ago, JHZR2 said:

You’re right - they could find time, if the handlers said to.

and that's exactly what it was. Throw a small piece of red meat to the base by getting the House to vote it in, but never plan on having the Senate vote. Just enough of a meaty treat to get the 2A animals to settle down.

The Repubs and Dems play for the same owners, they just wear different uniforms. Just like the Harlem Globetrotters verses the Washington Generals. Makes for good entertainment, but you always know what the outcome will be. Washington DC is exactly the same "game", and you're the spectator paying the bill.

 

 

At least the "shall issue "states should have the reciprocity amongst them. I travel quite a bit on motorcycle and is annoying to have to read all the rules. When I went thru Wisconsin I could open carry but not CC. I just kept the gun in one of the motorcycle  pockets

In reality to pass the bill it would take 60 votes in the  Senate.  I do not see that happening. The only true exceptions now are budget reconciliation or judicial nominations.

7 minutes ago, SJG said:

In reality to pass the bill it would take 60 votes in the  Senate.  I do not see that happening. The only true exceptions now are budget reconciliation or judicial nominations.

Concur.

looks like Hudson reintroduced his bill,   dont have a link right now.    I read it on the PAFAO website.

On 1/9/2019 at 9:17 PM, revenger said:

looks like Hudson reintroduced his bill,   dont have a link right now.    I read it on the PAFAO website.

Cornyn re introduced in senate as well 

1 hour ago, Zeke said:

Cornyn re introduced in senate as well 

Looks like Cornyn's has the same issue as before:

...." Cornyn's plan would grant reciprocity while still keeping intact state prohibitions on those not allowed to have gun permits. "

He highlighted these points in his bill:

• Allows law-abiding citizens to exercise their fundamental right to self-defense while they are traveling or temporarily living away from home.
• Allows individuals with concealed carry privileges in their home state to conceal carry in any other states that also allow concealed carry.
• Does not establish national standards for concealed carry.
• Does not provide for a national concealed carry permit.
• Respects state laws concerning specific types of locations in which firearms may not be carried and types of firearms which may not be carried by the visiting individual.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/cornyn-offers-reciprocity-for-17-million-concealed-carry-permit-holders

Since virtually no one in this state gets approved, his version won't help us.

 

This doesn't have a chance of getting through the House anymore, now that the Dems have taken control.  

Just now, Old Glock guy said:

This doesn't have a chance of getting through the House anymore, now that the Dems have taken control.  

True, it's a long shot in the House now, too. Here is Hudson's latest version:

https://hudson.house.gov/uploads/HUDSON_CCR_2019.pdf

 

 

4 minutes ago, Sniper said:

True, it's a long shot in the House now, too. Here is Hudson's latest version:

https://hudson.house.gov/uploads/HUDSON_CCR_2019.pdf

 

 

It even allows carry in the national parks, a good thing IF it happens. I am mildly hopeful this would happen before i retire from the state, but,,,,,,,,,

12 minutes ago, Old Glock guy said:

This doesn't have a chance of getting through the House anymore, now that the Dems have taken control.  

And that's why is being reintroduced on both houses. Once again, they are pissing down our legs and telling us it's raining. They had two years. 

Even still, with governors around the country, including ours, defying federal law (sanctuary crap, pot, throwing ICE out and not complying in general) what makes any of us think Murphy won’t have T-man to order police not to comply and arrest carriers anyway?

Thats exactly what I think would happen.

3 minutes ago, Shane45 said:

Thats exactly what I think would happen.

And we would be right back where we are now. Screaming about our rights but not able to pawn our lungs to defend them. 

I also think if this dream came true the rules of engagement may have to follow. If some guy from Fla came here stand your ground is out the window. The rules might have to be more uniformed. 

14 minutes ago, Shane45 said:

Thats exactly what I think would happen.

Then you would appeal up to federal court.

i think sanctuary crap and marijuana are bad comparisons.

The famous tinted windows argument is better!

"Then you would appeal up to federal court."

At which point they would drop the case to stay out of fed court.

7 minutes ago, Shane45 said:

"Then you would appeal up to federal court."

At which point they would drop the case to stay out of fed court.

So we will be harassed... perhaps discriminated?

All hypothetically of course 

Indeed hypothetical. But using the ccw case as a template, they gave it to the plaintiff to avoid appeal IIRC. And by abusing that authority to create that gambit, that is how it will remain denied in a general sense.