Reciprocity is the concept that a legal permit in one state can be legally recognized in a different state, even though the state-specific laws may vary a bit. So, if I get a concealed handgun carry permit in, say..., North Carolina, it's still legal for me to concealed carry the gun in South Carolina.
That's what I figured.
So mr. "small government conservative" wants the federal government to step in and override state law. How...ideologically consistent.
Wow, way to miss the point of the conversation. They're trying to REDUCE the amount of regulations. Some states take gun laws to extreme (borderline unconstitutional) measures (e.g. California). By having federally-based reciprocity, you'd be REMOVING regulation, not increasing it.
May want to read up on this a bit more before making knocks at the guy. Then again, if people actually did their homework, most of his controversy wouldn't have happened in the first place.
If CA's laws are unconstitutional, a citizen can argue the case in a court of law to have it overturned. I'm sure they have and continue to do so. If it's not unconstitutional...too bad.
Way to miss the point of the conversation, though. CA decides it wants to place restrictions on gun carrying, and the same people who whine about "big government" trampling all over "states' rights" want the federal government to force CA to adopt different laws. Laws that its own citizens don't want forced on them. Sounds like tyranny.