Quote of the Day: Strict Scrutiny Edition

N1A_02PERRYELECTION020_16597705

“There is no reason to restrict liberty in any way if exercising that liberty is not hurtful. Open carry is not hurtful.” – Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson in Moms Demand Action Anti-Gun Group Opposing Open Carry in Texas [at breitbart.com]

comments

  1. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    I hope they hear this quote someday here in Florida.

  2. avatar Shire-man says:

    The problem is that to MDA and like minds simple not approving of a thing makes it hurtful to them.
    A good 98% of all the laws we suffer under exist because some nanny ninny didnt like a thing despite a lack of caused harm.

  3. avatar the ruester says:

    Now Texas moms will be able to “accesorize” for real! Gonna be hard to screech us out of our rights when a holster becomes a fashion statement.

  4. avatar jwm says:

    Unless you’re a Kennedy and use a car murder is already illegal everywhere. Having the right to carry a gun, concealed or openly, doesn’t exempt you from the law against murder. Of course, in the simple minds of mda anyone carrying a gun is just doing so to committ murder.

    You know, Streets running red with blood. Yada, yada.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      If the antis want to see what rivers of blood look like, allow cellphone calls and texting on airline flights…

  5. avatar borg says:

    Could MDA (moms demand action) be sued by MDA (Muscular Dystrophy Association)?

    1. avatar Alaskan Patriot says:

      I don’t believe so, because their full title is Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America.

  6. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    ‘…Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson, who told Fox 7 Austin that the Moms Demand Action group “don’t really know what they’re talking about…’

    There’s the money shot right there.

  7. avatar Unknown Prosecutor says:

    It’s too bad he didn’t win his primary… The most sane candidate in that race… Instead we’re stuck with Dan “deadbeat debtor” Patrick…

    1. avatar Mecha-Ben says:

      Hear, hear!

  8. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    I love and live by the saying, “No harm, no foul.” That applies to open carry as well.

  9. avatar Marcus (Aurelius) Payne says:

    If it becomes hurtful, then it has crossed a line into an exertion of power over others. In short, there is no reason to restrict liberty.

    I have a liberal friend who, judging by comments be has made, believes liberty includes the right to rape, steal, and murder, therefore liberty has to be limited. He is absolutely deaf to the idea that deliberately harming others is not liberty but power, and is limiting the liberty of others at that point.

    Some people put real effort into not getting it.

  10. avatar jdb says:

    Bravo, Bravo, Bravo. This is the essence of how Government should view our rights and their ability to restrain it.
    Next they should add this principle: we should only offer those services that can really ONLY be offered by a government.
    In the 1980s the Labour (liberal) government of New Zealand finally clicked to that last principle, right on the brink of total financial failure, and dramatically changed things. The Department of Forestry, for example, shrunk from 30,000 to, I think, 5. They realized that most of what they were doing should be done my the private sector, and most of their employees ended up making more money doing the same work, but in the private sector.
    They also ended ALL farming subsidies, and scrapped lots of rules and regulations. Today farming is NZ’s top industry, and her agricultural products are of high quality.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      Was that when it became legal in NZ to distill alcohol at home?

  11. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

    But, it hurts feelings… And we can’t have that…

    1. avatar CM says:

      +1
      Beat me to it. It hurts their feelings and they can use it as emotional manipulation to coerce the herd into pushing their political agenda.

  12. avatar Another Robert says:

    Come to think of it, concealed carry is not hurtful either. So why should we have to fund DPS to be able to do it?

  13. avatar Steve In MA (now RI) says:

    Mary Jo, put on your wetsuit we’re going for a drive.

  14. avatar DonFromCT says:

    I wonder if he feels the same way about gay marriage, pot, and prostitution?

  15. avatar JOE MATAFOME says:

    “If open carry is good enough for Massachusetts, it’s good enough for the state of Texas.” He doesn’t understand how things work in MA. It’s “technically” not against the law to open carry in MA, but if you’re crazy enough to do so you’ll be arrested for brandishing a firearm and the local chief will pull your permit. You never see anyone open carry in MA except for law enforcement. RI only allows open carry if you have a permit from the Attorney General, and you still don’t see anyone open carry. I remember RF OC’ing down Thayer street as a test and no one bothered him. You have a better chance of seeing a leprechaun than seeing anyone open carry in RI.

  16. avatar Mediocrates says:

    Exactly. My rights end where yours begin. Some things are worth fighting and dying for…

    1. avatar Bob says:

      The problem is that THEY think their rights begin way before they actually do begin.

      For example:
      You do not have the right to never be offended.
      You do not have the right to never be afraid.
      You do not have a right to a job or an income.
      Etc., etc., etc.

  17. avatar RLC2 says:

    I’m ignoring MDA – clearly gun control politicians got hammered this last election.
    And Wendys War on Wimmen Whining got her nowhere.

    Don’t interrupt the enemy when they are shooting themselves in the foot.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email