Do you REALLY believe in the 2nd Amendment?

[ladder13]

Words taken right out of the Bloomberg playbook, along with "reasonable" gun control.

 

[smokindog]

Don't forget "common sense measures".

ANYONE who believes the government should regulate your rights is helping to erode the rights of all. NONE of the adjectives used have EVER been demonstrated by politicians.

I agree with all the statements of responsibility but that word does NOT equate to REQUIREMENT and most CERTAINLY does not extend to government MANDATE. Give a politician room to wiggle and someone, someplace, will regret it.

If you exercise a right to the detriment of another, we have courts. Unfortunately, the courts are now tied up with all the other "common sense" measures that have been enacted.

Change the target of this discussion to ANY of the other rights we have and tell me if you are willing to make the SAME arguments. An IQ test to vote? An grammar exam to print? A NEED for privacy for that search? How about a speedy trial? Do you really need to own that private property? Catch my point?

Words taken right out of the Bloomberg playbook, along with "reasonable" gun control.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

WOW.

Anyway. OC was illegal in TX for 140 years. Then the "2A extremists" came along. OC legal.

THANK YOU 2A EXTREMISTS. WE NEED MORE LIKE YOU.

Amen.

Let's not forget that at the time Texas gun rights lobbyists were saying that they didn't even have OC on the radar, and were taken by surprise at the grassroots support. Of course they then launched into criticism of the grassroots folks who put it on the radar among the people of Texas.

Results count.
OC demonstrators used methods to bring their grievance to the attention of the good people of Texas.
They won. Naysayers lost.

 

[keith44spl]

There may be some, that for one reason or another,
may not be responsible firearm owners.

But, some fail to be responsible in other areas of life as well.

I am not my brothers' keeper....He needs to carry his own means of self protection.

It takes all of my waking hours to tend to my business....I jest don't have the extra time to mettle in other folks' affairs.

So, if one is not committing a felonious act, I don't feel the need to get involved.

The haunts that I frequent, folks bear arms as naturally as putting on their britches.

I know there are accidents in life...And sometimes they are well deserved, sometimes not.

I fully support the right of the people to bears arms....to the very extent that
I gave my crazy MIL a snubnose'd Taurus for her self protection.


.

 

[Biggfoot44]

I got the OP's point. He was unfortunate in his particular illiustration example , as it predictably threatened to devolve into multifacited discusion of OC per se. ( And the rumors of my being beaten to death are greatly exagerated ).

The point is NOT about the tactical or public relations ramifications of OC vs CC generally , or in certain circumstances. Nor what various of *us* feel to be wise and prudent levels of knowledge and useful skills for either handling of firearms specifically or how to provide for one's personal defense. It's not about weather we personally know anyone who is foolish/ irresponsable/ similar. It's not about the concept that everyone *should* exercise a great deal of responsability in every facet of their lives.

It IS about recognizing that a Fundamental Right actually is a Fundamental Right. [ Insert several comparisons of other fundamental rights. No a/c , too steamy to whip of the extra paragraphs before falling asleep.]

But "Right to Feel Safe" ? Which translates into " Right to not be out of one's comfort zone " . Ah , that one's not in the Bill of Rights. Either today , or relatively recently that could hypothetically include : having blacks , american indians , immagrants, rednecks in pickup trucks , working class people, etc in THEIR neighborhood/ business districts. Political speach for/ against any issues , from any viewpoint could well have someone within sight/ hearing be uncomfortable with various messages. Real threats = abd thing. Legal activities or protected speach that might displease or upset = Life in a free society.

 

[ladder13]

Let me know when 330 million Americans agree on anything.

 

[Absalom]

I fully support everybody's right to open-carry. There is no doubt in my mind that it is protected by the Second Amendment.

I expect everybody to support my right to say that I think open-carry is a dumb idea for several reasons. There is no doubt in my mind that that's protected by the First Amendment.

If you don't want to hear people "whining" about open-carry, that's too bad; they probably don't want to see you carry. So you're both being annoyed by someone else exercising a constitutional right; in other words, you're even.

The "Islamic State" executes a lot more Muslims than non-Muslims, because it suspects them to not be really "true believers".

I don't think discussions based on the same underlying approach within the 2nd Amendment community are going to be particularly helpful to our cause.

 

[ladyT]

Vito...

Do you honestly think everyone you know, or know of, should handle a gun? Would you feel safe with anyone having a loaded gun?

It may be a right, but it may be hazardous to your health also.

I think they call that Life. As far as someone you don't think should own a gun that's simply an opinion and until said person has had their Rights revoked they can have a gun.

 

[ladyT]

Amen.

Let's not forget that at the time Texas gun rights lobbyists were saying that they didn't even have OC on the radar, and were taken by surprise at the grassroots support. Of course they then launched into criticism of the grassroots folks who put it on the radar among the people of Texas.

Results count.
OC demonstrators used methods to bring their grievance to the attention of the good people of Texas.
They won. Naysayers lost.

No one in Texas won a single thing. The act of carrying a firearm which is guaranteed by the Second Amendment as a Right is nothing more then a privilege in the State of Texas. Plus you have to pay for said privilege. Just like a Poll Tax.
As with any privilege it can be revoked or denied by the State for no reason other than they can.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

No one in Texas won a single thing. The act of carrying a firearm which is guaranteed by the Second Amendment as a Right is nothing more then a privilege in the State of Texas. Plus you have to pay for said privilege. Just like a Poll Tax.
As with any privilege it can be revoked or denied by the State for no reason other than they can.

Geeez... what a Debbie Downer.

Were you so glum about Shall Issue becoming law in Texas?

 

[k22fan]

Geeez... what a Debbie Downer. [...]

I Liked your post but apparently she has a point. She seems to imply you can only legally open carry in Texas with a concealed carry license which I vaguely recall from the news.

In Washington we've been legally able to open carry without a license for at least as long as I've paid attention to gun laws. However, prior to wide spread publicity about people open carrying in other states I rarely saw it happen other than while hunting. It was rumored that if you open carried in metropolitan areas you were bound to get a hard time from the police. That fear is mostly gone so the demonstrators benefited us in a round about way. In the last few years the only surprising thing is that no one gives any indication of noticing a pistol on another customer's hip while waiting in a store check out line or similar situation.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

I Liked your post but apparently she has a point. She seems to imply you can only legally open carry in Texas with a concealed carry license which I vaguely recall from the news.
.

That's the point about asking if LadyT was so glum about Shall Issue passing. You see, Shall Issue is about requiring a permit to carry. Must be that Shall Issue sweeping the country was also another non-win, right?

 

[hatt]

The same folks this thread was started about would question constitutional carry. "Do we really want just anyone carrying?" I've seen it happen time after time. I'm sure someone has posted about here recently.

"Assault weapons," CC, OC, Constitutional, whatever. It's always the same narrative.

 

[ladyT]

Geeez... what a Debbie Downer.

Were you so glum about Shall Issue becoming law in Texas?

No. I'm a firm believer in the Second Amendment. It's clearly written and does not need interpretation. It says I not only can own a firearm but I can carry that firearm and that RIGHT cannot be infringed upon.

The Bill of Rights are protections of the individual citizens. Our own government even says so.
Bill of Rights

During the debates on the adoption of the Constitution, its opponents repeatedly charged that the Constitution as drafted would open the way to tyranny by the central government. Fresh in their minds was the memory of the British violation of civil rights before and during the Revolution. They demanded a "bill of rights" that would spell out the immunities of individual citizens

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

LadyT,

When Shall Issue passed in Texas, did you also declare that a no-win?

 

[RobzGuns]

So, Lady T...
I guess you're an "Anything short of HB195 is a total loss" kinda person? If so, that's too bad.

Since HB195 never made it out of Committee, I think we did just fine getting HB910 and SB11 as a 'Next Step' advance.

 

[ladder13]

The same folks this thread was started about would question constitutional carry. "Do we really want just anyone carrying?" I've seen it happen time after time. I'm sure someone has posted about here recently.

"Assault weapons," CC, OC, Constitutional, whatever. It's always the same narrative.

Constitutional carry??? Heavens no.

Mandatory training, licensing and fees, or no soup for you.

And if you can't afford the monetary outlay or do the training, like an elderly person living alone for instance, tough, find a way.

Oh if you can afford a gun you can afford training and license fees.

 

[ladyT]

LadyT,

When Shall Issue passed in Texas, did you also declare that a no-win?

Again you come from the position that the State gets to determine who can exercise their guaranteed Constitutional Rights.


Let me ask you a question. Do you believe that a State can turn a Constitutionally Guaranteed Right into a Privilege?

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Again you come from the position that the State gets to determine who can exercise their guaranteed Constitutional Rights.


Let me ask you a question. Do you believe that a State can turn a Constitutionally Guaranteed Right into a Privilege?

Just a minute. I'm in the process of nailing down your sour grapes on OC passing.

This is what you previously posted here.


"Texas will not pass Open Carry. Won't happen. In fact this open carry issue most likely will scuttle the very progress we have made since the SCOTUS decision. In fact we will be very lucky to retain the progress we have made to date as the result of OCT's recent actions. They have played right into our opposition's hands. They have given the anti's all of the ammunition they need to stop the progression and expansion of our Second Amendment Rights."


So there you are championing past "progress" and fear mongering over losing it, and then lamenting about OC groups jeopardizing future "expansion" of 2A rights. But when your predictions turn out to be completely wrong and OC passes as well as other 2A "expansion" you scoff at it and imply that anything less than 100% of what the founders intended is a no-win.

Care to explain?

 

[ladyT]

So, Lady T...
I guess you're an "Anything short of HB195 is a total loss" kinda person? If so, that's too bad.

Since HB195 never made it out of Committee, I think we did just fine getting HB910 and SB11 as a 'Next Step' advance.

Yes. Anything short of the ability to fully exercise one's Constitutional Rights is unacceptable. Way to many people have died and sacrificed to protect those Rights. I will not Dis Honor those who have made such sacrifices.