Joined
·
378 Posts
I just don't get it... as far as I can determine (and of course, IANAL), states are required to give "full faith and credit" under the Constitution to each other's acts... I've had it explained to me that this is why my FL driver license is accepted in, say, New Mexico...
As we all know, driving is not even a right, it's a privilege extended to us, and licensed by the individual states..
But ALL other states recognize each other's driver licenses.... or marriage licenses.... or divorce proceedings, etc... This is why I can get a marriage license in Florida....
and then move to Alaska... or Illinois.. or New York... and they ALL will recognize and accept these wildly different licenses and acts...
But the right to "keep and BEAR arms" IS a right, explicitly defined in the Constitution, and should "...not be infringed.." Infringe means to encroach upon or invalidate something.. so our right to keep and bear arms should not be subject to limits that mere STATES impose..
So a state that does not recognize another state's CCW license is really violating BOTH a citizen's AND the other state's constitutional rights....
So my question is... why doesn't a gun-friendly state's Governer (representing the particular state) join with a resident CCW citizen to JOINTLY sue in Federal court to force states like NY or Illinois to recognize other state's CCW?? Because with a state joining with an individual and claiming BOTH a state's rights AND an individual's right are being violated... well... I think that would probably make the Supreme Court sit up and take notice.... don't you think??
As we all know, driving is not even a right, it's a privilege extended to us, and licensed by the individual states..
But ALL other states recognize each other's driver licenses.... or marriage licenses.... or divorce proceedings, etc... This is why I can get a marriage license in Florida....
and then move to Alaska... or Illinois.. or New York... and they ALL will recognize and accept these wildly different licenses and acts...
But the right to "keep and BEAR arms" IS a right, explicitly defined in the Constitution, and should "...not be infringed.." Infringe means to encroach upon or invalidate something.. so our right to keep and bear arms should not be subject to limits that mere STATES impose..
So a state that does not recognize another state's CCW license is really violating BOTH a citizen's AND the other state's constitutional rights....
So my question is... why doesn't a gun-friendly state's Governer (representing the particular state) join with a resident CCW citizen to JOINTLY sue in Federal court to force states like NY or Illinois to recognize other state's CCW?? Because with a state joining with an individual and claiming BOTH a state's rights AND an individual's right are being violated... well... I think that would probably make the Supreme Court sit up and take notice.... don't you think??