TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/26/opini ... .html?_r=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There is so much wrong with this editorial.

I am curious what this part refers to:

"Finally, the gun lobby has filed two lawsuits in federal court in Lubbock, Tex., to compel the State of Texas to allow young people between the ages of 18 and 20 years old to buy handguns and carry them concealed in public places.

The first suit challenges the longstanding federal law prohibiting licensed gun dealers from selling handguns to anyone under 21 years old. The second case contests a Texas law setting 21 as the minimum age for carrying a concealed weapon."

I'm sure someone will enlighten me.

This statement really infuriates me:

"Beyond the dubious legal claims, the idea that young individuals ages 18 to 20 have a constitutional right to buy weapons and carry them loaded and concealed in public is breathtakingly irresponsible. "

My response? About as breathtakingky irresponsible as your senators desire to register my guns.
Who do you think is protecting this country for heavens sake!

I was classified 1A by the draft board at age 18; somebody thought I was mature enough for a gun.
(Though I had one prior to that age given to me as a gift)
About that time they let me vote in elections .... they probably regret that I registered to vote now.


That said, I am a lot more smarterer now than I was then, but I'm also smarter than I was at 30 years old and 50 years old and .... Maybe the age should be raised to 75?

PappaGun wrote:"Beyond the dubious legal claims, the idea that young individuals ages 18 to 20 have a constitutional right to buy weapons and carry them loaded and concealed in public is breathtakingly irresponsible."

Beyond the dubious legal claims, the idea that young individuals ages 18 to 20 can be allowed to serve in the military and risk their lives in this nation's wars is breathtakingly irresponsible.

There, I fixed it for you.

This sort of uninformed, biased "yellow journalism" is written by people who not only don't have guns, they don't have cars/trucks. Unfortunately, they pander to a large audience of their ilk who also know no better.

Our best defense against these insidious attacks on our constitutional 2A rights is our NRA membership and the ballot.

It did!

Comments are no longer being accepted.

baldeagle wrote:

PappaGun wrote:"Beyond the dubious legal claims, the idea that young individuals ages 18 to 20 have a constitutional right to buy weapons and carry them loaded and concealed in public is breathtakingly irresponsible."

Beyond the dubious legal claims, the idea that young individuals ages 18 to 20 can be allowed to serve in the military and risk their lives in this nation's wars is breathtakingly irresponsible.

There, I fixed it for you.

Just to be clear, I didn't write this.
It was a quote from the editorial.

Pretty much everything that the NYT prints makes me angry. The only things that change are the date and the subject. The Liberal stupidity runs through it all.

PappaGun wrote:I am curious what this part refers to:

"Finally, the gun lobby has filed two lawsuits in federal court in Lubbock, Tex., to compel the State of Texas to allow young people between the ages of 18 and 20 years old to buy handguns and carry them concealed in public places.

The first suit challenges the longstanding federal law prohibiting licensed gun dealers from selling handguns to anyone under 21 years old. The second case contests a Texas law setting 21 as the minimum age for carrying a concealed weapon."

This article will help explain the lawsuits:

http://www.statesman.com/news/texas-pol ... 73668.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Following their logic then the states would be in the clear to deny blacks the right to own firearms because of their above average involvement in violent crime. I'm sorry but these liberal elitists make me sick and I just wish that their core constituency would start to see through the baloney. It's the elitist that conspires to keep all of us common men down.

srothstein wrote:

PappaGun wrote:I am curious what this part refers to:

"Finally, the gun lobby has filed two lawsuits in federal court in Lubbock, Tex., to compel the State of Texas to allow young people between the ages of 18 and 20 years old to buy handguns and carry them concealed in public places.

The first suit challenges the longstanding federal law prohibiting licensed gun dealers from selling handguns to anyone under 21 years old. The second case contests a Texas law setting 21 as the minimum age for carrying a concealed weapon."

This article will help explain the lawsuits:

http://www.statesman.com/news/texas-pol ... 73668.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks Steve.

Car carry law says anyone under 21 can carry conceadled in the car if they're not a criminal. Under 17 had to load their own guns so no one gets charged iwth providing readily fireable gun toa a minor.

We give our young people the keys to 4,000 pound killing machines and turn them loose at the fresh young age of 16. Over 40,000 people die a year in car accidents, not to mention the number of injured.

At age 20 I was in the Marine Corps, and responsible for not running airplanes into each other from the control tower.

Liberalisim is ignorance of logic and truth.

Do you expect anything different from the NYT!

ricor wrote:Do you expect anything different from the NYT!

Categorically no.
I do however continue to be interested in the logic of the liberal mind when it comes to 2A.
The comments after any article always give me the best laughs, like this gem...

"It's obvious that too many Americans of all ages are unable to handle the responsibility of gun ownership. There are countries where there is more gun ownership per capita than in the U.S., but there isn't nearly the incidence of gun-related crime. "

Don't bother backing up your claims with documentation.
Just say it and maybe they will believe it!
Like health care.

did anyone read the comments, they are just as bad if not worse

"Clearly, those demanding this 'right' be extended to this age group do not understand that young people do not have fully developed brains, are physically uncoordinated"

I thought the age range was 18-20 not 8-12, I guess I misread the artical