The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://mail.texaschlforum.com/
Anyone know how to bulk-email them without going through the web portal 19 times?mojo84 wrote:The 19 need some encouragement and a pat on the back for standing on principle.
When life gives you lemons, make lemonade?Charles L. Cotton wrote:We now have a record vote. Those who put Straus back in power will either prevail upon him to act like a Republican or suffer the consequences in 2016. This may be the best chance of forcing pro-gun bills to a vote in committee and on the House floor.
Chas.
In the link provided by Mojo84 it looks like Turner is pretty pro 2A to me:Keith B wrote:While I am not a Strauss fan, I am really hate the blanket 'throw the bum out and get anyone different' philosophy.
As Charles stated earlier we don't know for sure how Turner would be on gun legislation. At least with Strauss we have history and know how to work through legislation with him. Sometimes knowing your enemy and being able to out maneuver them is better then dealing with one that may take you by surprise.
In the case of politicians, it's more like out 'manure' them.
While that voting record looks favorable, that is not total proof that he can't be swayed by an anti-gun constituancy. I stand by my statement.The Annoyed Man wrote:Respectfully, yes we do know: https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-vot ... LVqwaOCOrVKeith B wrote:As Charles stated earlier we don't know for sure how Turner would be on gun legislation.
Keith B wrote:While I am not a Strauss fan, I am really hate the blanket 'throw the bum out and get anyone different' philosophy.
As Charles stated earlier we don't know for sure how Turner would be on gun legislation. At least with Strauss we have history and know how to work through legislation with him. Sometimes knowing your enemy and being able to out maneuver them is better then dealing with one that may take you by surprise.
In the case of politicians, it's more like out 'manure' them.
Keith B wrote:While that voting record looks favorable, that is not total proof that he can't be swayed by an anti-gun constituancy. I stand by my statement.The Annoyed Man wrote:Respectfully, yes we do know: https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-vot ... LVqwaOCOrVKeith B wrote:As Charles stated earlier we don't know for sure how Turner would be on gun legislation.
I didn't say he was anti gun or could be swayed. I just stated there are a lot of unknowns that can bite you with new people when you place them in a different role. Like I said, I am not a fan of Strauss, but putting Turner in probably would not have been a panacea for the heartburn like many would like to think.mojo84 wrote:Keith B wrote:While that voting record looks favorable, that is not total proof that he can't be swayed by an anti-gun constituancy. I stand by my statement.The Annoyed Man wrote:Respectfully, yes we do know: https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-vot ... LVqwaOCOrVKeith B wrote:As Charles stated earlier we don't know for sure how Turner would be on gun legislation.
Do you have information supporting that he is subject to being swayed by antigunners? I have information Straus has appointed progressive dems that buried pro gun legislation in committee.
Isn't that kind of like saying, "since you have not disproven the negative, I stand by my decision to ignore the positive proof?"Keith B wrote:While that voting record looks favorable, that is not total proof that he can't be swayed by an anti-gun constituancy. I stand by my statement.The Annoyed Man wrote:Respectfully, yes we do know: https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-vot ... LVqwaOCOrVKeith B wrote:As Charles stated earlier we don't know for sure how Turner would be on gun legislation.
Keith B wrote:I didn't say he was anti gun or could be swayed. I just stated there are a lot of unknowns that can bite you with new people when you place them in a different role. Like I said, I am not a fan of Strauss, but putting Turner in probably would not have been a panacea for the heartburn like many would like to think.mojo84 wrote:Keith B wrote:While that voting record looks favorable, that is not total proof that he can't be swayed by an anti-gun constituancy. I stand by my statement.The Annoyed Man wrote:Respectfully, yes we do know: https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-vot ... LVqwaOCOrVKeith B wrote:As Charles stated earlier we don't know for sure how Turner would be on gun legislation.
Do you have information supporting that he is subject to being swayed by antigunners? I have information Straus has appointed progressive dems that buried pro gun legislation in committee.
We haven't had a recorded vote for speaker every two years. Therefore, this is not the same.baseballguy2001 wrote:It's time we faced a few facts.
1.) The go along to get along crowd is larger than those of us who wanted to try someone different (for Texas Speaker) this time.
2.) Big legislative gains take vision, and courage. Most politicians don't have any. (Lobbyists don't either)
3.) Most Texas voters are not CHL holders.
Conclusion:
We do this dance every two years and expect a different outcome. We need to temper our expectations and enjoy the two Dove and baseball seasons before the next election.
You can't really tell for sure how Straus would have voted becuase as Speaker he did not vote on many of the issues. The one Guns issue he did vote on was a Yea http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-vote ... us/37/guns" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;The Annoyed Man wrote:Isn't that kind of like saying, "since you have not disproven the negative, I stand by my decision to ignore the positive proof?"Keith B wrote:While that voting record looks favorable, that is not total proof that he can't be swayed by an anti-gun constituancy. I stand by my statement.The Annoyed Man wrote:Respectfully, yes we do know: https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-vot ... LVqwaOCOrVKeith B wrote:As Charles stated earlier we don't know for sure how Turner would be on gun legislation.
