testtest

Texas Does It Again!

On the other hand, your freedom stops where it infringes others. That's where "safety" comes in play.
The system allows the safety of MANY to direct restrictions of ONE, when the PEOPLE decided that is indeed warranted (by laws made in Congress).

Example:
The liberty of MANY to drive on the street without fear of being killed by another driver imposed driving laws and driving licenses on INDIVIDUALS and allowed cops to detain people for infraction of that driving law.
With drivers licensing and laws (and training) there sure are a lot of accidents and deaths.

The main function of Government is to protect us from Foreign enemies, protect our Constitutional rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and not much else. All the rest is power grab. How much of law, regulation, permitting, licensing and so forth is permitted by the Constitution? Actually, there is a case for the Sovereign Citizen.
 
Yeah! And how about those stupid laws against killing other people? Government was never permitted to intervene, isn't?








Stupid arguments like this is what makes liberals happy, gives them legitimacy.
 
On the other hand, your freedom stops where it infringes others. That's where "safety" comes in play.
The system allows the safety of MANY to direct restrictions of ONE, when the PEOPLE decided that is indeed warranted (by laws made in Congress).

Example:
The liberty of MANY to drive on the street without fear of being killed by another driver imposed driving laws and driving licenses on INDIVIDUALS and allowed cops to detain people for infraction of that driving law.
I hate to burst that bubble but, a PERFECT example of the government botching the drivers license issue is where I live. A license is required by state law to operate a motor vehicle (they also sign up every yahoo to vote without proof of citizenship) yet every year we see in the news that someone has killed someone else (or a group of folks) by driving up the wrong way on the highway...with a suspended license, drunk and on drugs, with no insurance.

Here is the kicker: Usually, this person has been arrested 6 to 10 times for DUI and is still out there cruising around blasted. Equal application of sentences is paramount to achieving human justice. If you don't have a job, are homeless or an addict, you don't even get a fine! If you are an upstanding citizen, they throw the book at you.

Sadly, most laws are what I call "mop-up" laws. In other words, the law gives the government some means of meting out justice after the crime has been committed. Laws sold as "prevention" have little to no effect on society's (or criminals') behavior.

The less Bill Gates and Beto know about me, the better.
 
There was no bubble... I know that laws are perverted by politics. Sometimes is better to be criminal than the law obeying citizen. Or just claim "no habla inglese"...
 
There was no bubble... I know that laws are perverted by politics. Sometimes is better to be criminal than the law obeying citizen. Or just claim "no habla inglese"...
Si', no habla nada, Dude.

This kinda brings me to the “gun violence” issue.

In virtually every city and state where “gun violence” is a problem (You know, its hard keeping all those guns in their cages so they don’t run out, get drunk and shoot somebody) the issue of keeping criminals in jail never seems to come up.

In fact, most of those cities are in the throws of “defunding” their police and charging officers with crimes against criminals. Chicago is a great example. Folks get shot and killed with sickening regularity and the offenders invariably are repeat, systemic prohibited possessors.

They continue to pass restrictions on the law-abiding and yet do nothing to keep the hyenas in cages.

Pristine stupidity…
 

There was once a time where if a person was caught carrying a handgun under cover, he was thought immediately to be up to no good because only the Bad Guys did that.

As the times changed and the Yankee carpet baggers made their way across the fruited plain, it became uncomfortable for the creeps to be around so many openly armed, law-abiding citizens. They were now accused of “spoiling for a fight” and cajoled into believing the police would protect them and there was “no need” for the personal ownership of firearms. Slowly laws changed to prevent citizens from openly carrying their arms. Of course, laws were also passed to prevent citizens from carrying their arms concealed too!

Now, the criminals (those previously named carpet baggers) were free to predate on normal citizens at their leisure without fear of being shot.

It would appear that after a hundred years or more of this nonsense, we are slowly returning to our senses and once again allowing the law-abiding to protect their own loved-ones, property, and lives without getting permission from a non-existent law enforcement agency.

You will note: There have been no on-going riots in Texas where citizens are being threatened by BLM terrorists with guns.

Do ya have to ask why?
When I first moved to Texas the day I moved to Texas matter a fact. I got pulled over about 45 minutes away from my new home actually. I was carrying my XD-M .45 open on my hip. The officer freaked out on me. He said and I quote “Here in Texas we much prefer the element of surprise”. I went into a military surplus store a couple days later to find a drop holster and was told the same thing. Totally blew my mind especially coming from a state like Arizona. Personally tho I can’t wait to become Constitutional Carry. I’m actually on the “Battle Group” calling and emailing leaders here to convince them to vote and sign the bill.
 
When I first moved to Texas the day I moved to Texas matter a fact. I got pulled over about 45 minutes away from my new home actually. I was carrying my XD-M .45 open on my hip. The officer freaked out on me. He said and I quote “Here in Texas we much prefer the element of surprise”. I went into a military surplus store a couple days later to find a drop holster and was told the same thing. Totally blew my mind especially coming from a state like Arizona. Personally tho I can’t wait to become Constitutional Carry. I’m actually on the “Battle Group” calling and emailing leaders here to convince them to vote and sign the bill.


Reading some of Texas' gun laws I was a little surprised. These days I am extremely thankful to be living in Missouri.
 
So you are arguing for more government mandated rules in order for someone to exercise a constitutional right which was codified by our founding fathers with no such stipulation? Interesting.

Of course training should be recommended.

The fact is no small number of cops on any given shooting range are horrible. And they presumably "Qualified". Do you suppose some state mandated firearm course would somehow exceed that? Is there a test? Maybe there should be. And maybe a test to vote as well.

It's also worth noting that driving is a privilege not a right.
"It's also worth noting that driving is a privilege not a right."

Concur, and that privelege is constantly abused. I'm much more concerned about being hit/killed by some twit with their face buried in their phone while driving, than I am of ever being shot.
 
I think there is a line between safety and govt intrusion. I don't know where that line is. Prob should not be a line as most of you state, but I guess I am not articulating my opinion properly.
I want and like constitution carry. I get it. Im a dyed in the wool Republican. I am also a huge fan of the shooting sports and prob send more rounds down range than 95% of folks in my whole metroplex. I see the absolute horrible shot placement and poor safety at the ranges of almost all shooters, with notable exceptions.

where that balance meets will be the ever reason for discussion.
 
The last year or so I've been trying to study up on Arkansas' constitutional carry laws. I'm not a lawyer but it seems there are a BUNCH of exceptions to where you can carry in the state even with constitutional carry laws in place. I've found several conflicting articles indicating where, how, when, you can carry a concealed handgun. I had considered just letting my permit expire next year but I'm not sure I'd feel as confident is something happened if I didn't have my CCL. I like the concept of constitutional carry but even some former colleagues in LE have told me the statutes are very confusing.
 
The last year or so I've been trying to study up on Arkansas' constitutional carry laws. I'm not a lawyer but it seems there are a BUNCH of exceptions to where you can carry in the state even with constitutional carry laws in place. I've found several conflicting articles indicating where, how, when, you can carry a concealed handgun. I had considered just letting my permit expire next year but I'm not sure I'd feel as confident is something happened if I didn't have my CCL. I like the concept of constitutional carry but even some former colleagues in LE have told me the statutes are very confusing.
In Missouri the places you can't carry are the same as the places you can't carry even with a CCW. The difference is whether or not they can charge you with a misdemeanor for it. Pretty much places like sports stadiums, bars, etc. Which I never go to.
 
In Missouri the places you can't carry are the same as the places you can't carry even with a CCW. The difference is whether or not they can charge you with a misdemeanor for it. Pretty much places like sports stadiums, bars, etc. Which I never go to.
A fellow on YouTube that I regularly watch always says, "Don't do stupid stuff with stupid people in stupid places at stupid times."
Its funny how violation of even one of the "stupid rules" dramatically increases the chances of getting into a conflict. If you violate two of the "stupid rules", you are almost guaranteed to get into trouble best (and easily) avoided.
 
A fellow on YouTube that I regularly watch always says, "Don't do stupid stuff with stupid people in stupid places at stupid times."
Its funny how violation of even one of the "stupid rules" dramatically increases the chances of getting into a conflict. If you violate two of the "stupid rules", you are almost guaranteed to get into trouble best (and easily) avoided.
Has been my rule of thumb for many years. Works to a point? But, as more crap happens and more time goes on, it may be getting more difficult? Possibly why so many cartoon sections in newspapers are gone? Not much beats real life sometimes?
 
A fellow on YouTube that I regularly watch always says, "Don't do stupid stuff with stupid people in stupid places at stupid times."
Its funny how violation of even one of the "stupid rules" dramatically increases the chances of getting into a conflict. If you violate two of the "stupid rules", you are almost guaranteed to get into trouble best (and easily) avoided.
Absolutely.
 
I also live in Texas and the Constitutional carry is interesting to me. I believe that the Constitution referenced is the United States Constitution yet I am restricted on where I can carry. So I don't need a license and can carry open what else do I gain. Trying to gain some knowledge
 
Twisted meanings maybe misinterpreted? Thoughts maybe same?
"Should" and "Shall" are two different words and meanings.
Should basically means maybe or possibly.
Shall is more definite means you will or must.
Either way, is an infringement. Likely darned good ideas though?
In some ways is like: Which comes 1st? Chicken or the egg? Guess what, it doesn't matter? - Safety 1st matters.

Simply put: Federal or state governments do not actually have the right to enforce firearm or safety training or to state/say or enforce who may or may not own or use firearms according to 2nd Amendment. It's an infringement to Our 2nd Amendment Rights. Government taking over individual rights in this country is simply wrong. If our legal system was actually just it would reflect that and not the biases?

Someone who abuses those rights should be prosecuted for crime committed, firearms or not, while the right to own or possess firearms should be mute because it is every citizen of this country right to bear arms.

Where and how is also an infringement. Good or not in some peoples minds, there is a right for every person/citizen to bear arms in this country wherever they choose without stipulation or infringement. Doesn't mean they must carry or use firearms, only that they have the right to do so if they choose. Denying that right to choose is also an infringement.
I used to have conversations with an engineer I once worked with and he used to ask the chicken/egg question until I found the answer. It is the critter that laid the egg.
 
to ask the chicken/egg question until I found the answer.
That question implies some kind of natural evolution in play.

But if the chicken was created fully functional, with the associated rooster, then they were the first.
The creator could create first the eggs, but then he would need to create some kind of artificial incubator too...

*Note: replace "creator" with your preferred flavor - God, Intelligent Designer, Aliens... for us, humans any of those will be indistinguishable from the other.
We are like ants that cannot comprehend human Internet, even if would be explained to us.
 
That question implies some kind of natural evolution in play.

But if the chicken was created fully functional, with the associated rooster, then they were the first.
The creator could create first the eggs, but then he would need to create some kind of artificial incubator too...

*Note: replace "creator" with your preferred flavor - God, Intelligent Designer, Aliens... for us, humans any of those will be indistinguishable from the other.
We are like ants that cannot comprehend human Internet, even if would be explained to us.
I never tried to edit God from the process. Without that spark of creativity, we would all be comic dust.
 
Back
Top