Everyone was wondering what was taking Texas Governor Greg Abbott so long. The legislature passed a constitutional carry bill he said he’d sign a couple of weeks ago. It would have become law on Sunday without his signature.
We’d heard from reliable sources that there was a signing ceremony planned for tomorrow morning at the Alamo in San Antonio. Now Texas media are reporting that the governor has gone ahead and signed the bill without any pomp or circumstance.
Maybe he’ll still do something ceremonial tomorrow, not that it matter in the end. Texas is now the 21st state in the nation to allow citizens who can legally own a gun to carry one without a government permission slip (as of September 1 when the bill kicks in). That’s a huge percentage of Americans that can exercise their right to keep and bear arms as the Constitution and the Founding Fathers intended.
Louisiana could very well make it 22 as soon as next week. The legislature there has passed a constitutional carry bill that’s sitting on Democrat Governor John Bel Edwards’ desk. He certainly has no intention of signing it. Some expect him to veto it.
But the Governor apparently wants to be a Senator some day. A little birdie tells us the smart money is that he’ll do nothing at all and let constitutional carry become law in Louisiana without his signature on June 24. We’ll see. Stay tuned.
I never doubted him. Abbott is a true Texan and patriot. Always has been.
Thank God for Texas
I life long Texan and I just can’t believe how poorly this state is run. Now we are supposed to cut back on our air conditioning to save the grid and the worst heat is yet to come. We lost power for two weeks during the coldest weather of the winter because of “solar energy” (what a joke) now the are supposed to broil because our leaders won’t share power resourses with our neighbor states. How many people will die this time? Not a penny to fix it. The rest of the state looks like a junk yard sprinkled with garbage. Houston is a sewer. This state looks like crap. Glad all these idiots from California are coming here to ruin what’s left. Thanks governor, you’re an idiot.
I agree with you 100%.
It appears as those idiots brought their gun lobbyists with them.
I’m in El Paso. We’re on the Western grid. Got that air conditioner running full effing blast.🤠
The one to blame is IDIOT PERRY when he was governor every other month he went to California begging them to come to Texas because it was so great. What did the fool think that they was going to leave all their liberal ideas behind.
Texas really isn’t as Texas as it should be. It is after all the 21st state to implement Constitutional carry. That makes it a pretty middle of the road state. Nothing to brag about. A follower, not a leader
Still, this is very good news. I celebrate it. My respect for Texas just went up a notch or two.
Both you, and Chuck, have the most excellent points ever.
And the walls continue to close in around Sacramento as they lose another State to liberty.
As more States consider joining the CC club and actually honoring the Constitution, Newsom and his ilk will continue to dig their heels in. Remember…he ran his 2018 gubernatorial campaign almost entirely on #RESIST. The bogeyman at the time was Trump, but now it’s the Patriots.
Next up: Louisiana.
Haz,
You used the word ‘ilk’.
Reminiscent of an earlier thread, wordplay on your part.
Nice.
I hope and pray Louisiana uses far more common sense and better judgment than Texas has and does a much better job than Texas did on this bullshit that was just passed. Texas took one of their classic “baby steps” up but a giant leap backwards. Unbelievable.
What do you know about patriotism, traitor?
dis…what do you mean coming in here and talking out your behind and raining on the parade? Go put on the dunce cap and stand in a corner or better yet gfy.
Thanks but I’m not concerned about this person. He, she or it, has been trolling my posts for months. The name changes but the rhetoric is always the same, that’s why I know who it is. I ignore it. Not worth my time.
Also signed the suppressor bill.
Excellent news!
Thnx for sharing that.
More states need to follow suit down that same path to liberty and rights guaranteed by our constitution. Hopefully this sends a message to BATFE about what we Americans think of their illegal law regulation schemes.
And gotta say, the rooster eventually comes home to roost.
All these liberal states that have legalized pot within their borders now get to see how we can all play that game. I hope other patriotic states join in on stopping the bovine feces that is the suppression of freedom regarding suppressors.
(See what I did there?)
(I crack myself up sometimes.)
Eff-BATF
what is the TX supressor bill?
Basically, if I understood and remember it correctly, suppressors made in Texas, can be bought, sold and used in Texas without a tax stamp.
Basically an Eff Yoo to the NFA and the Feds.
Also signed Sanctuary State and firearms industry non-discrimination. A great day for Constitutional rights in Texas!
This is one of the most comical ever.
Welcome my brothers and sisters to one of the most exclusive clubs in the country. And it’s open to anyone no matter your sex, race, creed, color, national origin or sexual orientation.
any false-flag shootings expected?
Oh there isn’t any need of a false flag. The media will just blame every criminal shooting on constitutional carry for the foreseeable future.
(hangs head) yep, you nailed it. should have seen that myself ….
That is exactly what is going on in (middle) Tennessee right now, every shooting reported on the local news website is also stating it will get even worse after July 1, 2021 when TN permit-less carry starts.
There are plenty of felons carrying without permits–what makes anyone think the crime rate will change?
The Leftist Scum media will start breathless reporting of every instance, and the stupid public will start believing it…
are you “asking for a friend”?
“Constitutional.”
You keep using that word.
I do not think it means what you think it means.
“I do not think it means what you think it means”
so what’s it mean?
“so what’s it mean?”
It’s a ‘Princess Bride’ cultural reference, genius.
Had you bothered to lurk awhile and see the ‘lay of the land’ in TTAG before jumping in with both feet, you would have noticed it, as often as it tends to ‘pop up’ as an inside joke around these parts… 🙂
Geoff, you dum.
It’s not Constitutional, it’s ” Permitless Carry”. They also removed the part that kept law enforcement from screwing with you when they saw you carrying. There will probably be trouble in the liberal cities and the small towns where they do not know jack about the law.They argue that the law enforcement will not know who the bad guys are with everyone carrying. Well, maybe it’s the guys breaking the law !
Hot dang, another reason to love Texas!
I have really gotten to resent living in California.
Have you seen the AG’s reply in support of its application for a stay? It argues that featured ARs are “more dangerous” than featureless ARs because they are more accurate. This notwithstanding Judge Benitez’s opinion that found that there is no functional difference between one and the other, the only difference is that one is an evil “assault weapon” and the other is legal to buy, own, transport, transfer etc etc. Idiots.
“GOTTEN TO” really what has been holding you back for the last 30+years?
Odd. I spent a year commuting to Austin from Pennsylvania, every week. Big project. In all of that time in Austin, it seemed like I spent almost no time in Texas. Its a shame.
You are right you weren/t I Texas. You were in Eastern California.
personally I’m in favor of some kind of permission system to carry firearms. there are people who should not be carrying more dangerous than a pencil.
Shall not be infringed !
rights conflict and thus are delimited (“infringed”) all the time. for example, no civilian firearms in courtrooms.
Unalienable rights are not contingent upon other people’s behavior.
“not contingent”
but they are contingent on reasonably anticipated behavior. for example 35 of the last 36 mass shootings (by non-blacks) in the united states were by people on or just coming off of ssri’s.
Unalienable rights are unalienable. Period.
Why would anyone be afraid of their own unalienable rights? If you are, you’re exhibiting signs of a disorder.
“Why would anyone be afraid of their own unalienable rights?”
no-one is afraid of their own rights. the issue is how some other guy might exercise their capacity to harm others.
would you recognize that there are some people who should not have access to powered weapons?
“…how some other guy might exercise their capacity to harm others.”
That, sir, is the very definition of fear.
“That, sir, is the very definition of fear”
you’re avoiding the question. would you recognize that there are some people who should not have access to powered weapons? yes or no?
Somebody protesting as much as you are right now probably means that you think other people are as unstable as you think your own self is. You want to think that there are many other people with the same dark thoughts as you are currently having and you want to consider yourself as “normal”.
Well, nope, it’s mainly just your abnormality.
But thanks for being sane enough to realize you probably shouldn’t carry.
“probably means that you think other people are as unstable as you think your own self is”
consider it from the opposite end. do you think that everyone else is just like you? they’re not.
you’re avoiding the question. would you recognize that there are some people who should not have access to powered weapons? yes or no?
No avoidance at all ant7, of course- yes. And without compunction. Individuals who act with malevolence are to be held accountable for their criminal actions in a court of law. This is very straight-forward stuff- what is it about these concepts that perplexes you so grievously?
“Individuals who act with malevolence are to be held accountable”
I mean people who are obviously malevolent, or obviously mentally unstable, or obviously incompetent, or other similar, beforehand. do you acknowledge that there are such people?
You are in a vicious emotional circle here, ant7. The questions you need to ask yourself are:
a. do you support people being found guilty of actions they haven’t committed?
b. do you support punishing innocent people for the not yet committed possible actions of complete strangers?
Your fear is a very dangerous thing, ant7- it leads to anger, then hate, and eventually suffering. There’s already enough human suffering going on from the malevolent and disturbed folks in this world- don’t throw your fear on the fire, too.
Guns don’t make dangerous people more dangerous, but they make people who don’t commit crimes safer from those that intent to hurt them.
“Guns don’t make dangerous people more dangerous”
more precisely they make anybody more dangerous. for example they make mentally disturbed people more dangerous than they otherwise would be.
@ant7: Mentally disturbed people kill people with knives, baseball bats, pickup trucks and bombs. The ability to legally carry a handgun has no bearing on the fact. Almost anyone who can pass a FBI background check can buy a gun anyway, so there’s no difference. And criminals don’t give a $hit about laws, so again, no difference. If you don’t like guns, don’t buy one.
“Mentally disturbed people kill people with knives, baseball bats, pickup trucks and bombs”
yep, sure do …
“The ability to legally carry a handgun has no bearing on the fact”
… but using a firearm does bear on the outcome. take, who was that kid, adam stanza?, who killed a bunch of other kids all at once. couldn’t have done that with a knife.
Ahh, yes, these people who are so mentally disturbed that they pose a dire threat if armed…
but are so compliant that they follow the law and don’t carry illegally.
🙄
It is immoral (as well as ineffectual) to attempt to control the criminal actions of malevolent or disordered individuals by “delimiting” the civil rights of innocent, lawful citizens.
“It is immoral”
is it moral to accede to malevolent or disordered individuals having uncontested access to powered weapons, and thus endanger the right to life of innocent lawful citizens?
If there were no malevolent or disordered human beings, there would be less endangerment of the right to life for all of us.
That is irrealizable, and therefore any attempt to “control” malevolent or disturbed individuals by “delimiting” everyone’s basic human rights is… evil.
Moral people don’t accede to evil.
Quit whining and trying like a bed-wetting leftist. Texas does not have Constitutional Carry and if anything carry and wear rights were actually eroded this session. Aside from sounding like a whiny brat you’re overreacting to something that doesn’t really exist.
any attempt to “control” malevolent or disturbed individuals by “delimiting” everyone’s basic human rights is… evil”
so what you’re saying is that no attempt should be made to recognize obviously malevolent/disturbed/incompetent individuals and their access to and possession of powered weapons should be ignored – until they actually cause harm.
I think most people won’t agree with that. and neither would you in practice.
So, is “pre-crime” a thing, and “presumption of innocence” is fiction?
It is reasonable to hold individuals accountable for their actions.
It is unreasonable to imagine attempting to hold people accountable for their thoughts. If your “Thought Police” actually come to fruition- they’ll be coming for you first.
Of course we should attempt to recognize evil individuals- but not at the expense of innocent people’s rights. I’d say the overwhelming majority of rational people would agree with that.
Be smarter.
“Be smarter”
you’re avoiding the question. would you recognize that there are some people who should not have access to powered weapons? yes or no?
The more people who carry, the sooner that problem will solve itself.
Do you think anyone who intends to harm others is just waiting for the day xhe doesn’t have to apply for a cc permit? Wtf are you on?
Constitutional/permitless carry doesn’t magically put a gun in your hand and a map to gfz’s in your pocket.
“The more people who carry, the sooner that problem will solve itself”
answer the question. would you recognize that there are some people who obviously should not have access to powered weapons beforehand? yes or no?
“would you recognize that there are some people who obviously should not have access to powered weapons beforehand?”
Who does the deciding? and have they *ever* abused thir powers and denied someone the right to effective self-defense?
It’s simple, son – Abuses happen far too often to entrust someone with denying simple, yet *critical* civil rights.
Isn’t America supposed to be the kind of country where it is better if ten criminals walk free than to convict one person wrongly?
But something tells me you sure would like to be the one deciding… 🙂
antwerp…powered weapons? Yes There are indeed azzhats and mentally deranged people who’ll use anything and everything to reek havoc. With that said citizens need to be well armed to deal with those who get their jollies seeing blood or take their frustrations out on others. Now if you stand in my way of exercising my right to self preservation you have stepped into a hornet’s nest. Furthermore I suggest you study firearms so you won’t make a fool out of yourself with nonsense like powered weapons. I also suggest you study the diabolical history of Gun Control so you can see what you are standing in.
No.
Satisfied?
Want to see a pencil disappear?
Than they should be stripped of their gun rights by a legal court with due process. I agree that there are many crazies out there. Banning firearms makes everyone a target.
except that most of them will be carrying anyway…that little card or piece of paper is not going to offer much of a barrier to illicit carry…all it is is a revenue producer or a control mechanism to threaten you with by denial…
As a transplant to Texas, seeing this happen is great. It affirms an individual’s right of self protection. One of the first things I did after moving here after obtaining a Texas drivers license was to apply and obtain my LTC, something almost impossible in my home state. I hear people complain that Texas will become the “wild west” again. I doubt that. Texans have had access to firearms in the form of rifles and shotguns for almost 200 years without government permission slip. Recent changes to Texas laws allowed people to obtain a LTC handguns, now anyone who feels the need to protect themselves without an LTC can also. I intend to keep my LTC. I understand Texas is a property rights state, so I obey all 30.06/30.07 laws without complaint. ( I assume if my gun is not welcome, neither am I and I don’t patronize those businesses. ) I do hope people who do decide to carry handguns under this law choose to educate themselves on the law, and hopefully decide to get some gun safety training also.
“and hopefully decide to get some gun safety training also”
should be mandatory. maybe in junior high ….
@ant7: There my friend, we can be in agreement. Just like drivers ed. The Russians teach their kids guns safety and how to strip down an AK and reassemble it. We should learn a lesson from that.
We can wish. In Ca, they do not offer driver’s education in most high schools.
We had the top schools in the country and now we are lagging at the bottom.
The pointy end goes towards danger. Then pull trigger.
You good on toothpicks, or do they need ‘splainin too?
“The pointy end goes towards danger. Then pull trigger.”
you should be a firearms instructor.
And yet I get stuck explains toothpick usage to lefties. No time.
Typical, authoritarian fascist ant – “What isn’t forbidden is mandatory.”
Let’s examine that idea, shall we??? Every state licenses drivers, most, if not all, require some state-approved driver’s training to get the license. That’ worked out great, hasn’t it?? You NEVER encounter another driver on the road and say, “Dayum, what idiot gave that incompetent a license?”, amirite???
I, too, am in philosophical agreement with the CONCEPT that responsible gun owners need to seek training. I’ve owned guns for 60 years, and I’ve never STOPPED training. If I know a noob who has no training, I invite them to my gun range, at my expense, and try to politely educate them on the basics – the Four Rules, basic grip and stance, trigger control, etc., then direct them to a trainer/program I know to be reliable.
Do I think you, or I, or ANYONE else has the right to mandate such????
Since you seem to like to ignore the actual answers to your questions when you get them, let’s put that this way: Not just ‘no’, but ‘hell no!’.
As for your prior, equally stupid question about believing that there are some people who shouldn’t have guns? There are lots of people who, in my subjective opinion, shouldn’t have guns. So what?? Are there people out there who are such an obvious danger to themselves and/or others that they can be adjudicated such? Sure, and there are ALREADY procedures for that (that do not COMPLETELY stomp on due process, etc.). You want to deprive the neighborhood crazy of his/her Constitutional rights, start the proper proceeding. Oh, you don’t want to spend the time and money (or, more likely, you couldn’t get the cops interested), or you’re afraid the neighborhood crazy’s craziness may not be so obvious to a neutral third party?? Quelle surprise!!!
If you successfully pursue that process, you’ve achieved your supposed goal of (at least theoretically) danying them access to firearrms, without taking a giant s*** on due process and ‘innocent until proven guilty’. Already baked into the law and the Form 4473.
But your ‘feelz’ and your “Minority Report” bulls*** are what you are really about, aren’t they?? Take your bs out of here . . . I here there’s a great market for fertilizer in Nebraska, Iowa and Ohio.
If you’re moving here from a liberal-leftist state please go home. You’re not really wanted here at all and never really will be.
@GRA Just because you see one state as “leftist” does not mean everyone is. U.S. Citizens are free to move around the country as they please, even it it doesn’t please you. So, no, I’m not going anywhere. YOU don’t have to like me, but you do have to have me as your neighbor. Oh yeah, Texas was leftist liberal blue just a few decades ago, wonder how it turned red, all the conservatives from other states maybe?
“Texas was leftist liberal blue just a few decades ago, wonder how it turned red”
texas didn’t change much, the definitions of “liberal” and “conservative” were changed ….
@ant7 LBJ says it all, 4 worst president ever, right behind Carter (which Texas voted for) Obama and Biden (with almost 45% supported )
That is a complete fallacy.
JFK was to the right of Trump. Democrats used to be on the side of the working man, they kept factories open. The environmentalists have been used by the Corpracrats to shut down production and whittle down the middle class. Our jobs went across borders and the Corporations want to make us into a third world country, without the ability to stand up to them. They have bought out 90% of both of our major political parties. They are the ones that do not want the citizens to have firearms. Don’t be fooled, there are many in both parties that believe this way(and are paid to help)
The old evil business scare. You progs don’t see a marxist even when one is pulling your pants down.
that “training” is something dealers should offer to those who obviously need it…either personally or through a referral…might even consider making it a sales promo….
I wish my state would do this. 🙁
liberals are control freaks…if they are a significant presence in your state you can expect resistance…
“The People’s right to KEEP and BEAR arms shall not be infringed.”
To BEAR means to carry. On your person. All the time. Anywhere.
Lefty goons must be really stupid morons to not understand this…
Don’t they teach the meaning of words in school anymore?
Most of these anti-gunners are kolllege graduaits, therefore they must be really smart, right?
“To BEAR means to carry. On your person. All the time. Anywhere.”
at the time this was written “firearms” meant muzzle loaders, and “anywhere” meant “within an agricultural society where almost everyone knew almost everyone else”. surely 30-cap weapons carried by absolute strangers (both to each other and to any social authority such as law enforcement, pastors, family, etc) is a different situation?
No different at all. RKBA means just that. If the person isn’t doing wrong mind your own business, if they are deal with it or run to your safe place.
“If the person isn’t doing wrong mind your own business”
so what you’re saying is that no-one should be considered unfit to possess powered weapons until they actually harm someone?
In other news, no one should be considered a bank robber until they rob a bank.
Dude, what is it with the “powered weapons” thing? You’ve used this phrase dozens of times, and it’s completely and totally meaningless in the context of firearms.
ant7
Are you saying “the people ” referred to in the 2nd amendment are not equal to , and deserve the same freedoms and liberty as “the people ” in the other amendments?
A simple yes or no will do.
Just for you ant7:
Own a musket for home defense, since that’s what the founding fathers intended.
Four ruffians break into my house. “What the devil?” As I grab my powdered wig and Kentucky rifle. Blow a golf ball sized hole through the first man, he’s dead on the spot.
Draw my pistol on the second man, miss him entirely because it’s smoothbore and nails the neighbors dog.
I have to resort to the cannon mounted at the top of the stairs loaded with grape shot, “Tally ho lads” the grape shot shreds two men in the blast, the sound and extra shrapnel set off car alarms.
Fix bayonet and charge the last terrified rapscallion. He Bleeds out waiting on the police to arrive since triangular bayonet wounds are impossible to stitch up.
Just as the founding fathers intended.
“Own a musket for home defense”
not the issue.
would you acknowledge that there are some people who should not have powered weapons?
Fixed it for you;
“Use freedom of speech”
not the issue.
would you acknowledge that there are some people who should not be allowed to use the internet?
Powered weapons? We talking lasers? Rail guns? Light sabers?
“would you acknowledge that there are some people who should not be allowed to use the internet?”
some deranged hackers who have demonstrated psychotic intent to cause mass destruction. and that is in fact done.
now answer the question. would you acknowledge that there are some people who should not have powered weapons? yes or no?
“Powered weapons? We talking lasers? Rail guns? Light sabers?”
gunpowder is a power source.
“Gunpowder is a power source”
So what? All firearms use gunpowder. They are all “powered” in this manner (but not really, because the powder only sometimes “powers” additional functions of the firearm in addition to the bullet itself).
Honestly, it’s pretty obvious you aren’t really very knowledgeable about guns, but you’ve done a heck of a job getting everyone to pay attention to you in the comments, so… nice work I guess.
Muzzle loading muskets, i.e. the state of the art in military technology of the time, exactly the equal of that issued to the world’s premier military forces.
“the state of the art in military technology of the time”
yes, and the technology has changed absolutely to a level exceeding the assumptions of the 2nd. as has the culture in which the 2nd amendment was written.
speaking of the 2nd itself, it attaches the right to keep and bear arms to service in a militia – which is perfectly in keeping with the culture and education of the times and with the citizen/state relationship in a polis as conceived at the time. would you attach any meaning to the 2nd’s specifying of “the militia”?
Nope.
“Nope”
(I assume this is in response to attaching any militia meaning to the 2nd) then you’re at complete variance with the founders understanding of arms, militia, polis, and citizenship taken as a whole.
this is a common issue on the right. “patriot” and “citizen” have come to mean “me. just me. only me.” that’s really not how any nation or society works, and thus “patriot” and “citizen” are not valid terms to describe these kinds of people. “mountain man” and “wild man” would be more appropriate.
I’m, NOPE and WRONG.
At the time of the writing of the BOR, there was and had been an ongoing argument regarding the gov’s (“the state”) role in providing a standing army (“a well regulated militia” aka, a military) at the federal level. The well justified fears that such could be used against the people, by that very same federal government, is the reason for the rest of it. “It” being the second amendment, and it’s actual, plain purpose. Read the damn federalist papers, they go into great detail regarding the founder’s intent on all parts of the constitution and BOR.
The good news about the 2nd amendment is that you probably won’t need it until they try to take it away. – Thomas Jefferson
ant7. How about you are at variance with nine out of nine supreme court justices who all agreed that the 2A guarantees an individual right to keep and bear, only four of whom believed that the keep and bearing had to do with service in the militia. The prefatory clause is why it is important for the People in their Sovereign Capacity to keep and bear arms (because without arms there can be no militia to guard against insurgents, outlaws, and traitorous governments), but is not a limitation on the existence or scope of the right. See Heller and McDonald, which are the law of the land.
“at the time this was written “firearms” meant muzzle loaders,…”
Scalia dealt with that issue in ‘Heller”, the first amendment was understood to mean all future forms of speech (including electronic), not just a press powered by a human arm. The 2A (and all other rights) also includes future technology enhancements.
You’re certainly making an impression in TTAG, and so so far it’s lacking in intellect… 🙂
It was entertaining for a few minutes. I actually thought you jumped the gun commenting about the number of comments posted to a prior article. I was wrong.
I was going to throw in the old “anyone who can’t be trusted to own a gun shouldn’t be unsupervised in society” in the earlier dialogue, but not with this one-Ant7 does want to be the one to decide and I suspect that at least 75% would end up supervised.
Nope. If law enforcement and the military carry it, the citizen should be allowed to do so. Our forefathers wrote about a well regulated militia(like a volunteer fire department), every able bodied man training with others as a civic duty. The AR15 is the modern musket. Time marches on. Do you want to limit LEOs to muskets only? The same applies to the citizens.
antwerp…wrong horsebreath…”Arms” meant anything that stops a redcoat. Those muskets you and morons like you like to parade around in order to advance gun control forget one thing. Those muskets ran on Black Powder which can make bombs to sink ships, etc. In other words pilgrims didn’t have to stand there and pull a trigger 30 times they just let a bomb do their work. Try again.
You really are a special kind of stupid. GO AWAY
at the time this was written “firearms” meant muzzle loaders, and “anywhere” meant “within an agricultural society where almost everyone knew almost everyone else”
That is an incredibly stupid excuse for an argument. Have you even thought about where it leads with other rights, Ant7? I’m betting not.
one shot…well-aimed…can be just as deadly…and not everyone knew everyone else…particularly in the cities or on the frontier….
Too bad Abbot was a Covidian during Scamdemic. Disqualified from future office. He’s hoping being pro 2nd amendment will make people forget his “mask mandate” during Scamdemic. Kristy Noem he is not.
He is another RINO and we have several good candidates to primary him. He only came up with ” build the wall” when one of his opponents came up with it and only signed the Carry Bill when he found that it would be impossible for him to get re-elected if he didn’t. We have swamp creatures in Texas too.
Oh come on reconstruction was only how many years ago? So glad to see Texas is finally fixing laws imposed on them after the Civil War. At this rate you should see your natural rights restored about the time of Jesus Christs second coming.
LOL … NAILED IT 👍👍👍
The more accurate truth is what should be reported and exposed here; TEXAS DOES NOT HAVE CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY. No matter how much folks want or fantasize it to be this is VERY LIMITED carry in a few public places without the Texas LTC, but it is NOT Constitutional Carry.
The typical Texas practice of using the cheapest lobbyists possible, regardless of the importance of the legislation, SOLD OUT FOR THE CONSOLATION PRIZE OF PERMITLESS CARRY. As is typical of the generation the main lobbyists belong to, the last place trophy was good enough for them to keep their feelings from being hurt at the failure to get passed what long-should’ve been passed.
When you have as much (actually more) firearms-wearing freedoms with the LTC and less actual freedoms from the New York style stop-and-frisk at officer discretion you actually wound up taking barely half a step up for a full step(s) backwards. The true enemies of the freedom sought by passing an alleged and jokingly carry law are laughing all the way to the bank with a grin of success. Regardless of what people think and/or are told by certain journalists and shithouse lawyers these liberals are realizing how their tactics worked; “just let them think they’re winning and have won something so we can still keep domination and control”. This folks is the truth of what we saw this past legislative session in Texas regarding the struggle for “Constitutional Carry”.
Many I’ve spoken with agree this is nothing to be proud of and have absolutely NO CONFIDENCE in this new nonsense whatsoever and will maintain an LTC but not solely for travel to other states. Some even have stated that instead of winning more freedoms to wear/carry without permit the paranoid liberals have been handed on a silver platter the ability to give folks more room to hang themselves with the way this turned out. Can’t say I disagree with them. Texans need to learn that when it comes to matters of utmost importance they need to spend the money necessary for the best lobbyists in the business or else Texans will continue to get PUNKED like they actually did this time.
“At this rate you should see your natural rights restored about the time of Jesus Christs second coming”
… that will restore natural rights? actually the bible says that after the “second” coming “the kings of the earth will bow with their faces to the ground and lick the dust of your (the jews) feet” and “the nation that will not serve you (the jews) shall be destroyed”.
You really miss the point of everything don’t you? When you posted as Vlad you were at least a little more entertaining. This was rhetorical we do not want a response and will continue mocking you until you go away again.
“You really miss the point of everything don’t you?”
it’s a new point.
And you still missed it.
“And you still missed it.”
we can let the readers decide.
Seems they have.
That’s not Vlad, not by a long shot. This one’s a very special kind of stupid… 😉
the essence of the argument is whether or not people should be allowed or denied [legal] access to firearms…but even if you concede the point the issue then becomes how many?…a few?..some?…many?…all of us?……those that choose to control others are often viewed with a great deal of suspicion, especially when it comes to something as vital as self-defense….
Oh I dunno maybe Powerserge came back for some more. This guy is either honestly completely clueless or just trying to start an arguement. Trolls tend to recycle themselves unfortunately.
It (Jesus, actually) also said “… Sell your cloak and buy a sword.”
Btw, swords are the only weapon devised for the SOLE purpose of killing human beings.
AND talking that way about Jews almost makes you sound like a . . . democrat.
inorite?
“talking that way about Jews”
more specifically that is how they talk about themselves. Isaiah 60:12 and 49:23.
This guy does not believe in God, only uses it when he thinks its convenient. Also had nothing to do with the low brow humor I was using to explain how our rights are never going to be restored at the current rate.
“It (Jesus, actually) also said ‘… Sell your cloak and buy a sword.’”
yeah, but when peter tried to use it jesus told him to stop.
And yet he still didn’t take it away from him. Or make him ask permission to buy it in the first place. In fact, he asked him to stop so other armed men wouldn’t have a reason to kill him. Sounds like 11 other disciples didn’t follow directions very well. How’d that turn out?
And you more specific comment seems to give you a pass for the “n” word. Go outside a tell it to the mountain.
This is just reinforcing the idea of “defensive carry”, which is the normal reason for the average man/woman to carry. We are not LEOs, we could be needed in a pinch, but having a weapon for personal defense is the whole purpose of the 2nd.
Driving is a privilege, to be taken away at the whim of an official. Self protection is a God and Constitutional right. Those who give up freedom for safety deserve neither.
Alaska is and island, an island 12 miles long and 7 miles wide, isnt it? That floats off the gulf of mexico, it, it, appears on some maps. My concern is it, my concern, it will become to heavy from not using the oil it’s makes, making and it will capsize.
Welcome to the party
Congratulations to Texas and thanks to those who supported this legislation.
Let’s hope for many more states to follow.
“Texas is now the 21st state in the nation to ̶a̶l̶l̶o̶w̶ [recognize the inherent, natural right of] citizens who can legally own a gun to carry one without a government permission slip” – FIFY
Watch the mugging rate drop like a rock now!
BAAA BAAA BAAA , N YES THANK GOD FOR TEXAS
I HAVE LTC N TX , HOWEVER STILL BELIEVE IN TRAINING , LICENSE , LOT OF GOOD COMMON SENSE TEXANS OUT THERE OK Y’ALL , , HOWEVER LOT N LOT OF REALLY DUMB AS#$% PEOPLE N TEXAS INCLUED RED NECKS OF COURSE , THAT NEED TRAINING BEFORE CARRY A FIRE ARM . CLASSES NEEDED .
Comments are closed.