Search found 3 matches

by Charles L. Cotton
Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:20 pm
Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
Topic: Ballot Initative
Replies: 42
Views: 3581

Re: Ballot Initative

stroo wrote:Charles,

It didn't read as limited to welfare. Moreover, if they can take rights away from welfare recipients because they have accepted tax payer money, they can take rights away from anyone who receives any tax payer money, which in one form or another at some point in our lives includes most of us.

And while it clearly is not any kind of legislation it is still shocking to me that people on this board and in Texas for that matter are so willing to give up their rights.

It is just bad precedent.

Like I said I don't want welfare recipients to use that money to support illegal drug use either. But taking away rights on this basis is not the way to attack the problem.
You're right, the opinion poll was not worded to apply only to welfare, but it's just that, an opinion poll. The underlying discussion was limited to welfare. There was a bill that failed last session that would have required drug testing for welfare recipients and it is that bill that prompted the question.

Chas.
by Charles L. Cotton
Wed Mar 05, 2014 1:07 pm
Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
Topic: Ballot Initative
Replies: 42
Views: 3581

Re: Ballot Initative

stroo wrote:I am shocked at how easily so many of you would give up your 4th Amendment rights.

You realize the way this is worded it would not only apply to welfare recipients but to Social Security recipients, Medicaid recipients, students receiving financial aid, anyone receiving subsidies under Obamacare, and arguable anyone receiving aid of any kind from the government such as your children attending government schools, maybe even driving on government roads (oh by the way, that is almost all the roads).

That means virtually all of us would now be subject to random drug testing as this initiative was worded.

NO THANKS.

While I don't want my tax money to go to pay for illegal drugs for anyone either, this isn't the way to do that. This just is another eating away of our rights.
This is an opinion question, not a bill to become law. All of the discussion of this issue was limited to welfare, not any of the other funding opportunities you mentioned. Anyone wanting to avoid working (not Social Security since recipients have already paid into the system) and live off taxpayers' money should be able to do so if they legitimately cannot work for some legitimate reason that is/was not self-imposed. Junkies don't fit that description.

Chas.
by Charles L. Cotton
Tue Mar 04, 2014 7:29 pm
Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
Topic: Ballot Initative
Replies: 42
Views: 3581

Re: Ballot Initative

cwade wrote:SECOND AMENDMENT

Texas should support Second Amendment liberties by expanding locations where concealed handgun license-holders may legally carry. YES / NO

I'm curious as to what they are trying to accomplish with this other than a measure of what voter's temperature is on the topic? And what other locations are they referring to?
The purpose is as you say, i.e. judge support within the Republican base. The outcome is pretty much known, but the percentage of support will be interesting

Chas.

Return to “Ballot Initative”