TexasCHLforum.com

I'll argue the point no more and will simply agree to disagree.

Tom

srothstein wrote:The amount may be different, but you have just agreed with the principle.

I do agree with the principle and I do not think anyone needs an RPG for personal defense or hunting. All of our freedoms have limitations. You can't exercise your first amendment rights by yelling "fire" in a crowded theater and you can be arrested for using cetain profane words in public (it's from a thread in the off-topic discussion area). Why is the second amendment any different?

This year we just ask for some small changes, like defining a school. Next session we ask for a few more small changes. It may take a decade or two, but we can get to total freedom if we try. I just keep remembering how long it took to get us in this mess we live in now, and it will take almost as long to straighten it out.

While I don't think we will get to the total freedom you have in mind, I think we can continue to make progress in small steps. That said, we have to be careful not to push so hard that we scare the general population and lose ground. IMHO, OC fits into this category at this point in time. I think the sight of weapons will freak people out and we will have more problems for a while. If we can get through that period and not lose any ground we will have done well.

Tom

KBCraig wrote:The argument against private ownership of nukes is exactly the same as the argument against open carry, or concealed carry, or private gun ownership of any kind. When asked, opponents are offended at the notion that they would do anything improper with such an item, but "everyone knows" that there are those who would use them for evil.

Kevin,

First, I'm not against OC and did sign the petition.

However, there's a big difference between owning traditional weapons and an RPG. There's no real need for private ownership of RPGs. I guess if someone really wanted one, they could co through the same process required to own and register a fully-automatic weapon. Of course, that would be an infringement on our 2A rights according to some here.

We've made huge gains in the exercise of our right to carry. I think many of us do not want to see it reversed because we continue to push for more and more too quickly. Personally, I think OC will happen in Texas and I don't think we'll have all the problems that are happening in other places at least in the more rural areas.

Tom

KBCraig wrote:Of course you should. Why shouldn't you?

anygunanywhere wrote:What I do not support in any way shape or form are infringements.

Anygun,

I typically agree with you on many subjects. However, you've lost me on this one. To follow the logic, if I want a hand-fired tacitcal nuke, I should be able to have and carry one.

While I don't think OC is a bad idea, I really think there will be a huge backlash from the average civilian. They've all been brainwashed by the media and that will take years to reverse.

Tom

Jason73 wrote:Im having a hard time believing what Im reading here. What is wrong with you people? Open carry should be legal, end of discussion.

SNIP

You dont like suv's so they should be banned? You dont like a particular genre of music so lets ban it too?

Jason,

I don't think anyone has said that OC should not be allowed. I happen to agree that it should be legal and I signed the petition.

I'm also old enough to know that sometimes you have to be careful when you ask for things--sometimes it doesn't turn out the way you wanted.

Tom

anygunanywhere wrote:The 2A is about OC. If you do not support OC you do not support the 2A.

Anygun,

I'm not anti-OC but I do think we need to take a cautious approach to this process. The average person is afraid of guns thanks to all the media hype. I think our efforts are better spent on eliminating places where we cannot carry with our CHLs.

Tom

ScubaSigGuy wrote: We might be better off quietly growing our ranks by education when we have the opportunity, rather than by shock treatment. I know it's a matter of rights and we all want more, I get it. But pushing for something that really gives you minimal if any advantage just to have the right to do it if you want to could hurt all gun owners in the long run. It's a situation where you have to consider the greater good.

Scuba,

Exactly my position. We have to be careful as we move forward. Too much might cause a backlash that could move us in the wrong direction.

Tom