TexasCHLforum.com

anygunanywhere wrote:

cowboymd wrote: I did not say I was a prohibitionist or trying to restrict the freedoms of others. I said I have no issue with prohibition. I was only commenting on the part of the post I highlighted. I do feel if these drugs were legalized (the topic?) usage would increase and I do not see anything positive coming from it. Just my opinion.

If firearms were legalized for the law abiding including all classes of NFA firearms and the restrictions against the law abiding using their firearms for self defense ANYWHERE the law abiding are allowed to be then eliminating prohibitions against alcohol and drugs would end up working out just fine.

Anygunanywhere

Whats kinda funny is the the threatened (maybe real, possibly imagined) threat of restricting firearms has caused the effect of more guns and ammo on the street. Perhaps the restriction of certain recreational drugs has the effect of people stockpiling and hoarding.

Just thinking out loud.

mr.72 wrote:

txflyer wrote:

mr.72 wrote:Whether they were talking on their cell phone, they were just a bad driver, they were falling asleep, drunk, turning left into the turn lane, or high on PCP is completely moot. The punishment should be the same. I'm all for increasing the punishment across the board, but increasing it ONLY under the circumstances that you were at fault in addition to some other factor is hypocritical and inconsistent. That's what's wrong with our laws and our government to begin with.

I have to disagree with this. The purpose of the courts is not only to determine if a party is guilty of a crime, but to also determine punishment based on the circumstances of the crime. To remove the ability for a jury to temper justice with mercy puts us in totalitarian system of justice that is completely unacceptable.

Sure. Allow the JURY to make this determination, but you are advocating exactly what you say you oppose. Do you oppose hard-line increased sentences, or not? Only in the case of DUI? What if I think it should be ONLY in the case of text messaging while driving or putting on make-up? That's the problem with being inconsistent. Everyone has a different opinion.

I'm for hardline sentencing when circumstances warrant it. Problem is that juries/judges are often too lenient. However, I'm not willing to put a band aid on the situation that forces minimums and doesn't allow a punishment to be tempered with mercy. I don't have a solution to the problem of judges/juries being too lenient when circumstances don't warrant mercy. However, I do know that forced minimums are the right call. Perhaps the right call is to make the parole harder, using forced labor (Constitution says it's legal) so prisons can be more self sufficient and much more unpleasant places, etc.

More on Mexico.....

State Senator Dan Patrick… “TEXAS NATIONAL GUARD ON ALERT”
http://www.thecommentary.net/state-sena ... on-alert/#


found the Fox news blurb on you tube;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LujvhOiZNFU

Checking my stock now,.....but, I believe I am ready