TexasCHLforum.com

Article here:

http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional ... 71c06.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

From the above linked story..

Sen. Cale Case, R-Lander, voted for the bill. "In my heart, it just comes down to responsible people following the law and carrying a gun are not a threat," he said after the Senate hearing.

"It's people not following the law, or who are mentally over the top, they're not going to be deterred by a law that says you can't carry it," Case said. "To me, in the end, it's pretty clear."

Common-sense. I wish more politicians were like that.

Purplehood wrote:Common-sense. I wish more politicians were like that.

Glad to see a proper use of the term

I see it misused too often by people wanting either to make everyone use short ungrabbable magazines like at Virginia, Tech, Luby's etc so the body count is higher than Tucsons, or people misusing it to keep the "status quo" of Virginia Tech locations staying as vulnerable as they were. As the AT&T commercial says "It makes sense, if you DON'T think about it."

RoyGBiv wrote:From the above linked story..

Sen. Cale Case, R-Lander, voted for the bill. "In my heart, it just comes down to responsible people following the law and carrying a gun are not a threat," he said after the Senate hearing.

"It's people not following the law, or who are mentally over the top, they're not going to be deterred by a law that says you can't carry it," Case said. "To me, in the end, it's pretty clear."

Me too, .

Would be interesting to know what the expectations for the bill passing the House, and if the Governor has stated it would be signed if passed.

"We certainly want criminals to be punished to the max," Bouchard said. "But we don't want people that are just exercising their right to defend themselves penalized when they have no ill intent."

What a refreshing thought! I wonder if there was any way to have Rep. Bouchard talk with the folks in NJ and NY.

chasfm11 wrote:

"We certainly want criminals to be punished to the max," Bouchard said. "But we don't want people that are just exercising their right to defend themselves penalized when they have no ill intent."

What a refreshing thought! I wonder if there was any way to have Rep. Bouchard talk with the folks in NJ and NY.

To heck with that! Let's get him to come talk to the TX Legislature!!!

It's interesting that they are trying to pass a CC law in their OC state when we want to pass an OC law in our CC state.

Oh well,

Pawpaw wrote:

chasfm11 wrote:

"We certainly want criminals to be punished to the max," Bouchard said. "But we don't want people that are just exercising their right to defend themselves penalized when they have no ill intent."

What a refreshing thought! I wonder if there was any way to have Rep. Bouchard talk with the folks in NJ and NY.

To heck with that! Let's get him to come talk to the TX Legislature!!!

Not that it would do much good as this is the same House that just reelected Joe Straus as Speaker.

Pawpaw wrote:To heck with that! Let's get him to come talk to the TX Legislature!!!

If the majority the Republicans have in the Texas legislature (and executive branch) they should be able to pass significant reform to roll back restrictions on the fundamental right to keep and bear arms. If not now, when?

tacticool wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:To heck with that! Let's get him to come talk to the TX Legislature!!!

If the majority the Republicans have in the Texas legislature (and executive branch) they should be able to pass significant reform to roll back restrictions on the fundamental right to keep and bear arms. If not now, when?

One more time:

The first priority of our elected representatives (state and federal) is to get re-elected. Does that help answer your question?

Oldgringo wrote:

tacticool wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:To heck with that! Let's get him to come talk to the TX Legislature!!!

If the majority the Republicans have in the Texas legislature (and executive branch) they should be able to pass significant reform to roll back restrictions on the fundamental right to keep and bear arms. If not now, when?

One more time:

The first priority of our elected representatives (state and federal) is to get re-elected. Does that help answer your question?

It is also interesting to know that the Wyoming Supreme Court declared that term limits are unconstitutional.

Oldgringo wrote:

tacticool wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:To heck with that! Let's get him to come talk to the TX Legislature!!!

If the majority the Republicans have in the Texas legislature (and executive branch) they should be able to pass significant reform to roll back restrictions on the fundamental right to keep and bear arms. If not now, when?

One more time:

The first priority of our elected representatives (state and federal) is to get re-elected. Does that help answer your question?

Do I really have to say they should lose their jobs if they don't deliver?

I thought that was obvious.

WildBill wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:

tacticool wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:To heck with that! Let's get him to come talk to the TX Legislature!!!

If the majority the Republicans have in the Texas legislature (and executive branch) they should be able to pass significant reform to roll back restrictions on the fundamental right to keep and bear arms. If not now, when?

One more time:

The first priority of our elected representatives (state and federal) is to get re-elected. Does that help answer your question?

It is also interesting to know that the Wyoming Supreme Court declared that term limits are unconstitutional.

Of course the judges would rule that their life support systems not have term limits. Who needs judges, federal or state, who have lifetime appointments? Certainly not me, how about you?