TexasCHLforum.com

sugar land dave wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Make no mistake, if Hillary wins, the Heller decision will be overturned and the Second Amendment will be rendered meaningless. The never-Trump crowd needs to fully understand this. There are no alternatives, there are no counter-arguments and there is no justification for doing anything that allows Clinton to occupy the White House.

Chas.

That is a seriously bitter, bitter pill. Hil! is truly detestable. Trump simply disgusts me.

This video shows that Trump has been consistent for decades in what he has said and his self identification as a moderate Republican. It seems that he has displayed a desire to have someone else be the leader to rescue the country, but now has come to believe there is no one else who will do it.

Compare it to the video of Hillary throughout the years. Find the time to watch both and see who you feel that you can trust with our rights. See who you feel really cares about regular people. I know my opinions have changed over the last few years as I have more closely examined who people are versus who they project themselves to be.

Thanks Dave! That trump video poked a lot of holes in the anti-Trump arguments I've heard, including many I've read right here on this forum.

Doesn't this conflict with what the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals said in Moore/Shepard?

bblhd672 wrote:"I will protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic."

10 USC 502(a)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/502
I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

(Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

National Guard oath is similar: 32 USC 304
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/32/304

Many of us first took one or both of these oaths in the previous century. Whether last century or this one, there is no expiration date.

oljames3 wrote:

bblhd672 wrote:"I will protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic."

10 USC 502(a)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/502
I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

(Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

National Guard oath is similar: 32 USC 304
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/32/304

Many of us first took one or both of these oaths in the previous century. Whether last century or this one, there is no expiration date.

Exactly.

How in the world do the courts simply create "rights" out of whole cloth that are not even hinted about in the Constitution, and yet completely ignore one that is clearly and unequivocally enumerated in plain unambiguous English. It says "the right of the people to KEEP and BEAR arms, shall NOT be infringed". It does not say "privacy" or "marriage". Or "dignity". Or any of the other myriad of things the left simply makes up in order to get their way.

We cannot continue to allow the courts to do this. There is an amendment process that was put into the Constitution for a reason. We are going to lose our Constitution, and that means we are going to lose our country. We may already have.

Mr. Cotton is 100% correct. I don't like it any more than the next guy, but there is no justification for anything other than voting for Trump. No third party, no writing in Ted Cruz (as tempting as that would be), no staying home. This is the end game, people. If Hillary wins, we are done.

The Annoyed Man wrote:I agree that the 2nd Amendment is doomed if Hillary is elected, but what happens at the state level? Can a leftist-packed SCOTUS vacate state carry laws for states like Texas, which manifestly approve of at least licensed carry, or Constitutional Carry states like AZ or VT?

I ask not because I'm willing to concede a loss of the 2nd Amendment nationally, but because I want to know that my local rights are preserved no matter what madness reigns in DC.

A leftist-packed SCOTUS can and will do whatever it wants. There is seemingly no way to stop it at this point, other than to try to get some sane justices on the bench (which, btw, applies up and down the board, not just SCOTUS). Or a convention of states, which may or may not do more harm than good. Even a GOP Congress is not going to impeach these fools, and even if they did, it would take years for these decisions to be reversed, even if there is the political will for it. And that's a big "if". The alternatives after that are grim indeed.

One thing I think we need to face up to is that a huge chunk of the population - maybe even a majority - doesn't really have a problem with any of this stuff. They want what they want and don't really care if the Constitution is destroyed to get it. So you're not just fighting leftist judges and voters, you're fighting huge swaths of indifferent voters who hear talking points that these things are "common sense measures" and enjoy "overwhelming public support". It's up to the judges to uphold the Constitution as it is written so that the people are forced to do the hard job of amending it, if that's what they want. And tragically, with fewer and fewer exceptions even among conservative judges, they are increasingly sidestepping this most sacred duty.

Grim indeed. If you look at the two videos on page 4 of this thread, you should be able to tell who you believe. I hope everyone is beginning to look beyond our personal belief in the second amendment. If Hillary gets in we are going to see a whole world dissolve before our eyes. Does anyone here believe Putin will respect a President who disarms their own populace? The country is hanging by a thread and the Californa ruling just emphasizes it.

Pawpaw wrote:

sugar land dave wrote: This video shows that Trump has been consistent for decades in what he has said and his self identification as a moderate Republican. It seems that he has displayed a desire to have someone else be the leader to rescue the country, but now has come to believe there is no one else who will do it.

Compare it to the video of Hillary throughout the years. Find the time to watch both and see who you feel that you can trust with our rights. See who you feel really cares about regular people. I know my opinions have changed over the last few years as I have more closely examined who people are versus who they project themselves to be.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuiW_Jagl4U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... dY77j6uBHI

Thanks Dave! That trump video poked a lot of holes in the anti-Trump arguments I've heard, including many I've read right here on this forum.

You are welcome!

Beiruty wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:I was a funeral for an extended family member on Wednesday, and my son's brother in law - a currently serving LEO - and I were talking about potential loss of the 2nd Amendment. He said that, on the day he gets orders to stack up outside someone's home to confiscate their guns is the day he realizes that he no longer has an interest in law enforcement and retires. He would refuse to carry out such orders. That's the problem (and the blessing) - a problem for the statists, and a blessing for freedom loving americans. SOMEbody is going to have to stack up outside a home, kick the door down, and storm the place, NOBODY wants to be the first in the stack, and almost nobody wants to even be last in the stack. In the end, the fascists have to get somebody to do their dirty work for them......and most of the people who are trained and equipped for that kind of thing are not so inclined.

The day when 2ndA is annulled by whatever tools other than another constitutional amendment, is the day when the 2nd Revolution would start.

Overdue IMO.

We've not paid enough attention to the culture war that has been raging for years. Complacency and Political Correctness have already tipped our Nation in a direction that is not good for it. And WE are to blame.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:If any firearm(s) is(are) rendered unlawful to possess, it won't be necessary to send troops to confiscate those guns. Gun owners won't be able to use them, including for self-defense, without facing prosecution. Use your handgun in self-defense, become a felon and go to prison, lose your job, lose your family and lose your constitutional rights. Take your AR-15 to a range to shoot, become a felon, go to prison, lose your job, lose your family and lose your constitutional rights. Mass confiscation will not be necessary to bring firearm utility, and ultimately ownership, to an end. People will be made examples by the media and the population will simply give in. It happened in Australia, it's happening in California, and it will happen throughout the country.

The idea that there will be some mass resistance short of a revolution or civil war is wishful thinking. It could happen, it might happen, but odds are the public will cave in. It's not a pretty picture, but that's what we face of Heller is overturned. It won't be overnight, but that's the future without a Second Amendment.

Chas.

I respectfully disagree with you sir! I have greater faith that Americans are willing to bring about revolution (again) in order to maintain freedom and liberty. I have faith that the great majority of law enforcement officers, military officers and enlisted personnel will refrain from suppressing an uprising over the loss of the 2nd Amendment.

If you are correct, then that means millions and millions of Americans are willing to allow the end of the United States as envisioned by its founders. It means millions of lives that were given to protect and defend this great nation were in vain, that all positive things that the United States of America has done for the world were for naught. It means that the enemies of freedom and liberty have finally won and the American experiment failed.

Which Constitutional rights fall after the 2nd Amendment is nullified and Americans no longer have the ability to fight an oppressive government?
The 1st Amendment is already under serious attack. To paraphrase you: "Speak out against the government, become a felon, go to prison, lose your job, lose your family and lose your constitutional rights. People will be made examples by the media and the population will simply give in."

bblhd672 wrote:I respectfully disagree with you sir! I have greater faith that Americans are willing to bring about revolution (again) in order to maintain freedom and liberty. I have faith that the great majority of law enforcement officers, military officers and enlisted personnel will refrain from suppressing an uprising over the loss of the 2nd Amendment.

If you are correct, then that means millions and millions of Americans are willing to allow the end of the United States as envisioned by its founders. It means millions of lives that were given to protect and defend this great nation were in vain, that all positive things that the United States of America has done for the world were for naught. It means that the enemies of freedom and liberty have finally won and the American experiment failed.

Which Constitutional rights fall after the 2nd Amendment is nullified and Americans no longer have the ability to fight an oppressive government?
The 1st Amendment is already under serious attack. To paraphrase you: "Speak out against the government, become a felon, go to prison, lose your job, lose your family and lose your constitutional rights. People will be made examples by the media and the population will simply give in."

I wish I had this much faith in the American people but I fear we have crossed the line where a critical mass just doesn't understand or care enough to stand up to it. I would love to be convinced otherwise but I tend to think Mr. Cotton's view is correct. There won't be a "confiscation", the restrictions will continue to be more subtle and gradual and justified as "common sense", and therefore there won't be a mass resistance. And then at the end of the day the public will cave.

And as you note, it's not just the 2nd amendment. The 1st, particularly religious freedom, is in the process of being teed up for elimination also.

Was thinking about this thread lying in bed this morning, trying to put words to my feelings on the root cause.
A few of my favorite related quotes sum up how I feel. Perhaps notable that I don't think the root cause has anything to do with guns.

“A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship”.... Attributed (unconfirmed) to Alexander Tytler 1787

“I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.” ― Benjamin Franklin

A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their virtue then will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader.... Samuel Adams

A lady asked Dr. Franklin Well Doctor what have we got a republic or a monarchy — "A republic," replied the Doctor, "if you can keep it.".... Anonymous, from Farrand's Records of the Federal Convention of 1787

bblhd672 wrote:
I respectfully disagree with you sir! I have greater faith that Americans are willing to bring about revolution (again) in order to maintain freedom and liberty. I have faith that the great majority of law enforcement officers, military officers and enlisted personnel will refrain from suppressing an uprising over the loss of the 2nd Amendment.

If you are correct, then that means millions and millions of Americans are willing to allow the end of the United States as envisioned by its founders. It means millions of lives that were given to protect and defend this great nation were in vain, that all positive things that the United States of America has done for the world were for naught. It means that the enemies of freedom and liberty have finally won and the American experiment failed.

Which Constitutional rights fall after the 2nd Amendment is nullified and Americans no longer have the ability to fight an oppressive government?
The 1st Amendment is already under serious attack. To paraphrase you: "Speak out against the government, become a felon, go to prison, lose your job, lose your family and lose your constitutional rights. People will be made examples by the media and the population will simply give in."

The problem is not the harmless but armed folks anyone should feel easy about, it's the whole of the American people which includes gun grabbers.

Think how many people aren't sure if Hillary should be prosecuted for her bathroom mail server. Meanwhile, the Sarbanes-Oxley law provides for 20 years in federal prison for a corporate employee who mishandles records (including email) in a way that impedes an investigation, either now or later, either about the employee and his company or not.

There isn't a gun manufacturer out there, at least not in civilized countries like ours, that builds guns for purposes of malice. Guns are designed, those that aren't sporting guns, for one thing and one thing only - saving lives.

Unfortunately, it's an easy thing to sell the idea guns are uncouth to the muddle-headed masses yearning for free stuff.

As to whether the Second Amendment addresses this or that form of carry, it most certainly does unless one reads it as 1984 newspeak.

infringe |inˈfrinj|
verb (infringes, infringing, infringed) [ with obj. ]
actively break the terms of (a law, agreement, etc.): making an unauthorized copy would infringe copyright.
• act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on: his legal rights were being infringed | [ no obj. ] : I wouldn't infringe on his privacy.

Saying I can't carry a concealed weapon in public would be an infringement because it would be a limitation.

Yes, I realize that's a dead horse. The left successfully killed the poor beast.

bblhd672 wrote:Which Constitutional rights fall after the 2nd Amendment is nullified and Americans no longer have the ability to fight an oppressive government?

EVERY

SINGLE

ONE

The right to keep and bear arms secures all other rights of the people. Without the RKBA, all other rights are subject to revocation at the whim of the federal government.

I wish I had this much faith in the American people but I fear we have crossed the line where a critical mass just doesn't understand or care enough to stand up to it. I would love to be convinced otherwise but I tend to think Mr. Cotton's view is correct. There won't be a "confiscation", the restrictions will continue to be more subtle and gradual and justified as "common sense", and therefore there won't be a mass resistance. And then at the end of the day the public will cave.

I have a great deal of faith in people who identify as Americans first, or at least as much as they identify as any other thing -- particularly in those who have studied American history and the associated western philosophy that made it possible. These folks value the underpinnings of our nation and will not likely "go quietly into the night". But are there enough of them(us) committed to do our part to turn society back toward the principles it was founded on?

I also have faith that there are vast swaths of our society who neither know nor value the precepts that our nation was founded upon. These are the same low-information individuals that see fit to elect un-Americans to office. They are also the ones who will applaud "law enforcement" all day long when the authorities trample individual liberty to "forward the Progressive agenda". The numbers in this camp grow daily due to constant hammering by the progressive propaganda machines -- the press and the education systems.

Without equally consistent messaging and education representing the principles that built this nation, the concepts of individual liberty and individual human rights may soon be lost in favor of "the greater good". The path we are on (Collectivism) inevitably produces neither greater nor good for individuals that are the governed. Remember the three boxes of a free man -- soap, ballot and cartridge. Raise your voices where and when you can, vote your conscience whenever you have a chance, and prepare for both better times and worse.