TexasCHLforum.com

Charles L. Cotton wrote:The thing I find almost amusing is when a new member starts a thread on an old topic and it quickly degenerates to the same two or three people making the same arguments they've made in many many prior posts and threads. If they haven't convinced each other with a multitude of prior posts, what do they think they are going to accomplish.

When new threads are started about dead horse subjects, the people who are new might be reading about the topic for the first time. When I weigh in on one of those tired subjects, it's not because I'm trying to convince people who have disagreed with me before; I'm trying to let newcomers see that there is at least one differing point of view.

Kevin

Keith B wrote:For one reason the moderators have to read all of the posts

Surely every moderator doesn't have to read every post. I thought y'all had it divided up into sub-forums. If you don't, that's a terrible waste of manpower through duplication of efforts.

Kevin

Keith B wrote:Not to mention almost everyone has a video camera hanging on their belt or in their purse these days in the form of a cell phone. You Tube would be full of videos of 'gun-toting crazys' walking around the stores and streets, and the media/anti's would have a field day promoting those.

And the response would be: *yaaaaawwwnnn*.

Nothing to see. Nothing changing. No carnage at all.

frankie_the_yankee wrote:If most were comfortable with it, it would be legal and we would be doing it.

"Most" are surprised to learn it's not legal. I've never talked to anyone, pro- or anti-, who didn't think open carry was legal in Texas.

Just part of that cowboy lore, I suppose.

txinvestigator wrote:

KBCraig wrote:Laws that proscribe two adults engaging in a business transaction of their own free will, where no one else is harmed.

Any law that limits what people may do with their own bodies, so long as they do not endanger or harm others.

And, might I add, laws that require your 11 year old daughter to be injected with an untested, unproven, risky vaccine against sexually transmitted diseases, just because the governor has been purchased by a pharmaceutical company.

I didn't realize any of those were current laws. wow.

The first two are certainly current, and the last would be, had not the legislature overridden Perry's executive order.

Maybe you think it's "moral" for the government to forcibly inject your pre-teen daughter with a painful, untested, possibly dangerous vaccination. I don't, so I'm not going to hold that gun against your head and order you to do so.

txinvestigator wrote:So violating a law is not wrong? Violating a law is not immoral?

The things I learn on this forum.

Since when is "moral" defined as "legal"?

txinvestigator wrote:

KBCraig wrote: It's clearly illegal. I just said I don't see a problem with it, because while illegal, it's not wrong. And yes, there is a big difference.

That is a fascinating mindset. I have an 11 year old daughter, what other laws can I tell her that to do the proscribed acts are illegal, but not wrong. Just curious.

Laws that forbade hiding Jews in Germany, or runaway slaves in America, come quickly to mind.

Laws that mandate reporting your neighbors for political transgressions.

Laws requiring certain people to use the back entrance, use separate water fountains, or sit in the back of the bus.

Laws that proscribe two adults engaging in a business transaction of their own free will, where no one else is harmed.

Any law that limits what people may do with their own bodies, so long as they do not endanger or harm others.

And, might I add, laws that require your 11 year old daughter to be injected with an untested, unproven, risky vaccine against sexually transmitted diseases, just because the governor has been purchased by a pharmaceutical company.

This is not a "fascinating mindset". This is the American mindset, that unjust laws ought to be disobeyed.

(Referring to my post immediately preceding:)

45 4 life wrote:I know people like that as well (maybe not that part about the serial numbers) that does not mean I want one for back up in a gun fight.

Do you not take acception to any of those items in your post? Do you beleive that it is perfectly legal behavior?

It's clearly illegal. I just said I don't see a problem with it, because while illegal, it's not wrong. And yes, there is a big difference.

Do you beleive that it is their 2nd ammendment right to possess and carry those weapons? It is fine if you do, I do. It is there choice, I wish them luck if they are caught with the missing serial numbers.

Yes, I do believe it's a fundamental right. I've also had a long conversation with one fellow about the serial numbers, hammering him over the head for risking a federal felony, over something that would normally be just a state misdemeanor. Didn't help; he's got that old-time country mindset and won't let go.

I know Doofi who run around with guns now. They've done so for decades, long before it was legal. They will not get a CHL because they "don't want to be on a government list", and only buy used guns with serial numbers ground off, for the same reason. They will have a handgun in the vehicle 100% of the time, or in their pocket whenever it suits them. They spout spurious legal advice like the infamous "If you shoot him coming in the window and he falls out, you better drag him inside before the police get there!"

And yet, in spite of such doofosity, they've never shot anyone, never had an accident, never had a negligent discharge. They don't know the law, and might not even know much about guns, but they do know right from wrong.

I don't see a problem there.

45 4 life wrote:I am not so sure about open carry and no training and/or qualification process.

Works fine in VT, NH, VA, LA, AK, NM, AZ, WY, ID, UT....

But as someone said, those states didn't "legalize" open carry, they just never made it illegal. Carrying a handgun in Texas (excepting travel and sporting purpose) was illegal, period, before 1996.

I support legal open carry, even if unlicensed. I'm only concerned with what people do, not what piece of plastic they have in their wallet.