Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
Maybe the Oklahoma legislature didn't waste the first couple weeks of their session wishing their biggest donors an official Texas happy birthday.Right2Carry wrote:I don't understand how Oklahoma was able to get the parking lot bill passed and yet Texas has failed repeatedly to get this done.
nitrogen wrote:Coming a little late to this, but heck, here goes.
Personally, I doubt i'd open carry.
Open carry IS important. Let me explain why:
Let's look at the issue from the perspective of the 1st amendment instead of the 2nd. I'm going to make a simple argument, full of logical fallacies and holes, but please follow me to the end.
Imagine if it was perfectly legal to be a Christian, you just couldn't wear artifacts of Christianity openly, or speak about it openly. "as we all know, Ideas are dangerous, and we wouldn't want the wrong ones openly discussed where our children could have access to them."
In effect, THIS is why open carry is important. It's the gun owners equivalent of the gays at pride parades saying, "We're here, we're queer, get used to it."
Right now, with the status quo, we can be 2nd amendment supporters, but we have to keep it to ourselves in public. Nobody knows (or should know) that we're carrying, so it gets to be an out of sight, out of mind issue for the public.
For practical reasons, that's great; because it allows the "sheeple" to stay ignorant, but allows us the maximum use of our rights today.
This is where I think a lot of OC advocates and people like Charles diverge, and start talking AT each other instead of to. Charles, and the TSRA is being pragmatic about our rights. They want the maximum use of what we can get with as few restrictions, and as few repercussions as possible from the "sheeple" This isn't a bad thing, in fact, it works up to a point. Like in business, if you never take risks, you never get rewards.
People in the OC movement (at least me) see fighting for OC as our version of "Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed" or "We're here, we're queer, get used to it." Bringing the issue out into the open, and forcing more people to talk and discuss it is very risky, but can have great rewards, too.
I think Charles and the TSRA are adverse to this risk. They see what we have now as "good enough" and I think many of the members of the TSRA would agree. I don't know Charles all that well, but from his posts on here, he strikes me as your normal conservative Conservative. This kind of position is a very conservative one, and one I'd expect.
I'm more of a liberal/progressive type. I like pushing the envelope, and I think many of the open carry advocates have some liberal tendencies, even if their beliefs fall into the typically "conservative" range. They want to push the envelope, too. Pushing the envelope causes change and progression. Many conservatives I know are more of a "regressive" (meaning, "things were better back then, we should go back to that") kind of thinking.
I don't see the TSRA's position as "bad" or "wrong" like many OC advocates seem to. I think they are being pragmatic and conservative. I also don't see the OC advocates as wrong, either.
Part of the problem is that political discourse in this country is so poor, that people are quick to demonize and lambaste people they do not agree with. This is a great example of that, I think.
tacticool wrote:Maybe the Oklahoma legislature didn't waste the first couple weeks of their session wishing their biggest donors an official Texas happy birthday.Right2Carry wrote:I don't understand how Oklahoma was able to get the parking lot bill passed and yet Texas has failed repeatedly to get this done.
Maybe the Oklahoma legislature is more competent or more ethical than the Texas legislature.
No maybe about it. I'm voting anti-incumbent based on the last session.
Of course if you vote for any change at all, no matter what change it is, you'll wind up in worse shape than what you had with the status quo....kind of like our current federal situation, perhaps?frazzled wrote:
You can only get change if you vote FOR change.
Nope - the gov VETOED it. There is work afoot to get an override of that veto in the legislature. Remains to be seen whether it'll succeed.oran214 wrote:Did the gov sign it yet, and will he? Thanks.
Perilously close to a personal attack.frazzled wrote:Keep that thinking. Do what you're told.
Then you are advocating defeat of long time friends who passed numerous pro-gun bills. That's not a recipe for success in 2011 or anytime. The best and quickest way for Texas to become New Jersey or California is for gun owners and pro-gun groups to abandon people who supported us.frazzled wrote:tacticool wrote:Maybe the Oklahoma legislature didn't waste the first couple weeks of their session wishing their biggest donors an official Texas happy birthday.Right2Carry wrote:I don't understand how Oklahoma was able to get the parking lot bill passed and yet Texas has failed repeatedly to get this done.
Maybe the Oklahoma legislature is more competent or more ethical than the Texas legislature.
No maybe about it. I'm voting anti-incumbent based on the last session.
You can only get change if you vote FOR change.
No offense taken.Charles L. Cotton wrote:Perilously close to a personal attack.frazzled wrote:Keep that thinking. Do what you're told.
Chas.
I think the NRA (and likely the TSRA) publish report cards for legislators, but I'm not sure where to find them right now - I haven't done a search yet.solaritx wrote:Chas,
Great idea.
Where can I go to see who these people are that supported and pushed the pro-gun bills?
Where can I find data on the Rep. leaders that put up road blocks on those good pro-gun laws that we all thougth were reasonable and right and all but doomed our 2nd amd. rights?
Where can I find those individuals that caved on their principles because the Dems said they would stop all laws from going through if the Conservatives continued to push for voter ID? They caved, nothing got done, and the Dem's basically got their way.
Personally, I want people to represent me, my views and my way of life. Not do the easy thing. Do the right thing.
For me, it's more important to be correct politically than it is to be politically correct.
I have no problem supporting those that stand for our rights, but I really don't know who these few lone voices are?
Garry N
The TSRA ratings can be a little deceiving. They tend to favor the incumbents. They tend not to even acknowledge Libertarians (would all be 2nd amendment friendly). They gave the guy I ran against (Craig Eiland) a B This guy is a democrat, who never pushes any gun legislation, but will get on the band wagon when pro gun legislation is inevitable. Eiland was one of the main leading the filibuster, chomping (or what ever its called. I wonder what the TSRA will rate him this year?UpTheIrons wrote: I think the NRA (and likely the TSRA) publish report cards for legislators, but I'm not sure where to find them right now - I haven't done a search yet.
If you have the bill numbers, you should also be able to search the legislature's voting record through the legislature's website. I think.
I made a quick run over to the 2009 Legislature sub-forum (http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewforum.php?f=92) and found the bill numbers. They are:
Parking lot bill: HB1301, SB730
Campus Security bill: HB1893, SB1164
I haven't searched around here too much, but one possibility is: http://www.votesmart.org/index.htm
Wait! I think I found it! The Lege's own website. Duh!: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/Home.aspx
Look under "view votes" under the "Search Legislation" box.
This is true. My senator (Wentworth) authored the Campus Cary bill, and my rep (Kuempel) was one of the co-sponsors of the Parking Lot bill. While they did everything they could (on those bills) to get them passed, I need to go back and see what they did on the other legislation (esp. Voter ID) to see if their work on those bills helped or hindered in other places.Liberty wrote:Those of us that have Reps that are generally pro gun need to be talked to also, They could have got some of the legislation through if they had used some statesmanship and political savy.
