TexasCHLforum.com

LucasMcCain wrote:The problem is criminals and terrorists. The left will continue to be soft on criminals and terrorists so they they can take our guns.

Bravo! Hear! Hear!

Collectivists have constantly pushed the "gun violence" issue, calling for some "common-sense" thing or another to be done each time an individual uses a gun as a tool of criminal destruction. The real agenda, of course, is simply to remove any force tools from common citizens, thereby making former citizens into subjects of the State.

Criminal violence, per capita, in the US is not as epidemic as our 24/7 news cycle would have us believe -- it certainly is not increasing in the way the media treatment would lead you to believe. Even if it were, there is no such thing as "gun violence". It takes a person pulling the trigger of a firearm to affect violence with a gun -- the gun simply cannot do so by itself.

Is it common sense to outlaw or restrict tools when behaviors (sometimes committed with the aid of said tools) are already against the law? Is a victim of a violent crime any more or less a victim due to the presence or absence of a tool? The "common-sense" measures proposed (and rightly opposed by the NRA and certain other single issue advocacy groups) are really all about incrementally infringing (to ultimately completely deny) the basic human right to protect oneself with appropriate tools. Once far enough down this path, subjects (former citizens) will be forced to comply with every command of their government overlords and the outlaw gangs.

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness can only be realized if basic human rights are respected, beginning with the right to protect oneself. Anti-gun collectivists fear Liberty with it components individual responsibility, discernment and decision-making -- all of which thwart movement to a proper authoritarian utopia where each exists to serve the collective.

I think ISIS fears the same thing Alexander the Great worried about.

Alex The Great One once said he didn't fear an army of lions led by a sheep (neither does ISIS, apparently), he feared an army of sheep led by a lion.

What the civilized world should respect and terrorists fear is an army of optimally trained, well regulated sheepdogs led by a lion. That's us at our best.

I have a common sense Gun Control Law. Any convicted felon found in possesion of a firearm goes directly to jail. Anyone who uses a firearm to commit a felony goes to jail. Wait a minute, aren't those laws already on the books, but routinely plea bargined away? Less criminals on the streets would definitely make me less afraid.

It is the culture.

Most of those who are the most rabidly anti-gun were raised in the inner-city or the suburbs, many without a father in the home. They never saw their father with a hunting rifle, or shotgun, or a pistol... they were never educated on their use, safety, benefits, none of it. They were never taught that a gun could be a tool for recreation, preservation, they were not taught to understand and respect firearms.

Add to it that they only see guns being used for violence on TV and in the news, they only see the bad that guns do. Coupled with the above, it is impossible for them to see how anyone except for people who wish to do violence would need a gun. Add to it the animal rights / anti-hunting groups that are the most active in the suburban and urban areas that, again, lack understanding, and they cannot even fathom lawful hunting as a viable reason to own a gun... so all that they are left with is violence, evil, penis enhancement, and propaganda images of inbred, slobbering right wingers who only have guns to shoot at bambi, the government, and black people... all three of which are "special snowflakes" according to the left.

This is also why it is darn near impossible to talk sense into them. They did not reason themselves into their beliefs, so you cannot reason them out of them.

TexasTornado wrote:Since non of their proposed solutions target criminals but rather law abiding citizens, there are really only two logical conclusions:

1. They are afraid of guns themselves.
2. They are afraid of the people who carry them.

I find flaws in your logic.........

1. They aren't afraid of guns because (A) they LOVE the idea that only police and military should have them........and (b) their bodyguards. They just don't want YOU or ME to have them. As Mao Zedong said, "all power flows from the muzzle of a gun". They want the state to have power, but not the proles.

2. They aren't afraid of the people who carry them, because they do NOTHING to disarm armed criminals, and they give the vote to felons and incite them to riot. They only pass laws which disarm the law-aboding.

Therefore, their "gun-control" agenda is not about the guns, it's about the control. If you and I cannot be armed, we can be controlled. If we are armed, then they have to rely on our good will and voluntary acquiescence......because "power flows from the muzzle of a gun".

https://munchkinwrangler.wordpress.com/ ... ilization/

Nice link, TAM, and I quite agree. There are risks from guns in the hands of wrongdoers. There are greater risks to living in a gun free society, if such a thing is actually possible.

If I play Devils advocate for a moment and try to see things from the anti-gun citizens perspective, I can only come up with one legitimate concern to fear.

People with extensive and ongoing chemical dependence and psychiatric disorders can and do qualify for LTCs. Hell, you can be diagnosed with bipolar disorder and go to inpatient drug rehab, get granted your LTC the following month, and then go back to inpatient drug rehab again the next month without losing your license!

However, I think those same people, if prone to violence, get weeded out pretty quickly by the criminal disqualifiers.

SoConfused wrote:If I play Devils advocate for a moment and try to see things from the anti-gun citizens perspective, I can only come up with one legitimate concern to fear.

People with extensive and ongoing chemical dependence and psychiatric disorders can and do qualify for LTCs. heck, you can be diagnosed with bipolar disorder and go to inpatient drug rehab, get granted your LTC the following month, and then go back to inpatient drug rehab again the next month without losing your license!

However, I think those same people, if prone to violence, get weeded out pretty quickly by the criminal disqualifiers.

I doubt that is truthful if the person is also truthful about their hospitalization and their meds.

WTR wrote:

SoConfused wrote:If I play Devils advocate for a moment and try to see things from the anti-gun citizens perspective, I can only come up with one legitimate concern to fear.

People with extensive and ongoing chemical dependence and psychiatric disorders can and do qualify for LTCs. heck, you can be diagnosed with bipolar disorder and go to inpatient drug rehab, get granted your LTC the following month, and then go back to inpatient drug rehab again the next month without losing your license!

However, I think those same people, if prone to violence, get weeded out pretty quickly by the criminal disqualifiers.

I doubt that is truthful if the person is also truthful about their hospitalization and their meds.

Exactly, criminal background check is a criminal background check, but thanks to HIPPA, medical history disclosure is on the honor system.

jmorris wrote:Hoplophobia is a political neologism coined by retired American military officer Jeff Cooper as a pejorative to describe an "irrational aversion to weapons."[1][2][3] It is also used to describe the "fear of firearms"[4][5] or the "fear of armed citizens."[6] Hoplophobia is a political term and not a recognized medical phobia.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoplophobia

http://www.gunlaws.com/Hoplophobia-GunFear.htm

That could be changing.

SoConfused wrote:

WTR wrote:

SoConfused wrote:If I play Devils advocate for a moment and try to see things from the anti-gun citizens perspective, I can only come up with one legitimate concern to fear.

People with extensive and ongoing chemical dependence and psychiatric disorders can and do qualify for LTCs. heck, you can be diagnosed with bipolar disorder and go to inpatient drug rehab, get granted your LTC the following month, and then go back to inpatient drug rehab again the next month without losing your license!

However, I think those same people, if prone to violence, get weeded out pretty quickly by the criminal disqualifiers.

I doubt that is truthful if the person is also truthful about their hospitalization and their meds.

Exactly, criminal background check is a criminal background check, but thanks to HIPPA, medical history disclosure is on the honor system.

You are always going to have you dishonest and criminal activity. However, I would bet the amount of crime committed ( nation wide) by some one who has obtained an illegal LTC pails in comparison to the amount of killings perpetrated by thugs with illegally obtained weapons.....in Chicago alone
You are tilting at the wrong windmill.

WTR wrote:

SoConfused wrote:

WTR wrote:

SoConfused wrote:If I play Devils advocate for a moment and try to see things from the anti-gun citizens perspective, I can only come up with one legitimate concern to fear.

People with extensive and ongoing chemical dependence and psychiatric disorders can and do qualify for LTCs. heck, you can be diagnosed with bipolar disorder and go to inpatient drug rehab, get granted your LTC the following month, and then go back to inpatient drug rehab again the next month without losing your license!

However, I think those same people, if prone to violence, get weeded out pretty quickly by the criminal disqualifiers.

I doubt that is truthful if the person is also truthful about their hospitalization and their meds.

Exactly, criminal background check is a criminal background check, but thanks to HIPPA, medical history disclosure is on the honor system.

You are always going to have you dishonest and criminal activity. However, I would bet the amount of crime committed ( nation wide) by some one who has obtained an illegal LTC pails in comparison to the amount of killings perpetrated by thugs with illegally obtained weapons.....in Chicago alone
You are tilting at the wrong windmill.

, but unfortunately logic like this is lost on the irrational anti gunners.

WTR wrote:

SoConfused wrote:

WTR wrote:

SoConfused wrote:If I play Devils advocate for a moment and try to see things from the anti-gun citizens perspective, I can only come up with one legitimate concern to fear.

People with extensive and ongoing chemical dependence and psychiatric disorders can and do qualify for LTCs. heck, you can be diagnosed with bipolar disorder and go to inpatient drug rehab, get granted your LTC the following month, and then go back to inpatient drug rehab again the next month without losing your license!

However, I think those same people, if prone to violence, get weeded out pretty quickly by the criminal disqualifiers.

I doubt that is truthful if the person is also truthful about their hospitalization and their meds.

Exactly, criminal background check is a criminal background check, but thanks to HIPPA, medical history disclosure is on the honor system.

You are always going to have you dishonest and criminal activity. However, I would bet the amount of crime committed ( nation wide) by some one who has obtained an illegal LTC pails in comparison to the amount of killings perpetrated by thugs with illegally obtained weapons.....in Chicago alone
You are tilting at the wrong windmill.

If someone is mentally unstable enough to use a gun to commit violence, the fact of having an LTC or not, will have no effect. Neither will laws trying to add more people to the prohibited person list for purchasing a firearm. In fact if someone has mental issues, and are somehow predestined to commit violence either with a firearm, or some other method, they probably won't go through the process of obtaining an LTC in the first place. Laws requiring a license to carry have never stopped anyone, if they want to commit violence.