TexasCHLforum.com

Mike1951 wrote:Why not set up a sticky sub-forum for 'dead horse' topics? Make entries for CHL badges, Post Office carry, open carry, private school/church questions, shipping firearms, drinking while carrying, etc. Essentially anything that keeps getting asked over and over. Make it read only for forum members, allowing only moderators to contribute, to keep it manageable.

On another (non-gun-related) forum I visit occasionally, someone with too much time on their hands posted a "Newbies, read this first!" or some such. It has links to discussions of many, many frequently brought up topics. A mod locked it and stickied it.

Of course, newbies rarely read that first. But every time someone brings up a much discussed topic, someone will post a link to previous discussions, which they are welcome to add to rather than starting a new discussion of the same thing.
Sort of like a FAQ, but interactive.

Keith B wrote:For one reason the moderators have to read all of the posts, so the threads make it harder and harder for us to keep up.

Threads with valid discussions and new information are welcome and requested. However, just trying to win one more to your side of the issue when it has been debated over and over on the forum again and again and again is not productive use of the medium for the readers OR the mods.

I can back him up on that. I moderate another (non-gun-related) forum.
http://www.carvinbbs.com/
There are some debates that come up once a month like clockwork. It really irritates the mods. We have to dig through it making sure everyone is playing nice. It consumes a huge amount of time that seems could be better spent answering questions and being the helpful guys (and girls) we like to be. And trying to keep the stubborn ones in line causes the mods to draw fire from both sides with everyone claiming the mods are against them. It's frustrating and very tempting to lock such threads as soon as they start without giving it a chance to become volatile.

Since I'm new, I have not seen the older threads on the subject.
I intend to search them out and see if I missed anything. From the comments of the veteran members here, I assume that I have not.

The right to keep and bear arms is being infringed. We all know that. We are trying to keep the government from legislating new infringements and at the same time actually making some headway in rolling back infringements that have existed for some time.

Small steps.
We are winning.
Scaring the general populace is not in our best interest in this war.
As has been noted here, many claimed that legal concealed carry would result in "blood in the streets" and "gunfight at the OK Corral." Obviously, that has not been the case.
More and more states have enacted "shall-issue" laws since Texas did. Progress.
Reciprocity. Progress.
Carry in vehicles. Progress.
More people, whether they carry or not, are accepting the idea that people around them are armed. Some of them will notice that there has been no increase in gun violence over minor issues, almost none by CHL holders.
Open carry may eventually be legal, if we keep moving in the direction we're going. But it may take many years. As people become more comfortable with the idea that people around them are armed, and concealed carry becomes more and more common, and more people become comfortable with it, we gradually move toward a society where everyone knows many are armed and no one really thinks about it. THEN it will gradually become irrelevant whether or not the weapons are concealed. And we can have serious consideration of legalizing open carry of handguns.

Long guns are legal to open carry. Hardly anyone does. I don't hear stories of gang-bangers strolling around with shotguns and rifles. They probably prefer to have their weapons concealed in most cases for a number of reasons.

Many people's first thought about those of us pushing to rid our country of infringements on the right to bear arms is that "those people think machine guns should be legal." I'm not sure they shouldn't. Certainly a reading of "shall not be infringed" supports this. But it's too big a step for most people to swallow. Concealed carry was a big step we made. Open carry might be a little too far to push at this time. But that's just at this time. Someday, assuming we don't abuse our right, that time will come.

Zombies:
I'd think the lady in the picture would eventually get the muzzle clogged up with crud. It may blow her other leg off when she tries to fire that thing. But it looks like a grenade launcher under the rifle. I'd think a grenade launcher would be an excellent weapon against zombies.