Now that Texas is set to become the 21st constitutional carry state next month, the media are generating more concerned think pieces on the spreading menace of permitless concealed carry. They didn’t pay very much attention when it was just an agglomeration of crazy non-coastal states that dropped their mandates that law-abiding residents obtain a government permission slip to carry a firearm. But now, with Texas on board, things are getting real.
Sure, the bubble-encased coastal media still view Texas as a just an odd rootin’-tootin’-shootin’ red blob out there in the middle somewhere. They know it’s populated by a bunch of ten gallon hat-wearing crazies who don’t matter munch until Democrats announce every four years that they’re just about to turn the state blue — before failing once again.
But now, with permitless carry in a state with four major metropolitan areas including two of the five largest SMSAs, it’s time to sit up and take notice. Besides, Texas has America’s fastest-growing city that’s drawing tax and crime refugees from both coasts. What if some of those people come in contact with these un-licensed gun nuts while they’re in town house hunting?
Hence last week’s laughably insane Dallas Morning News piece entitled, ‘Mexico worries that new Texas permitless carry law will lead to more violence south of the border.’ The article actually presents zero evidence that anyone in Mexico thinks dropping concealed carry permitting in Texas will have any effect on the crime situation down there.
It does, however include this claim by a random Texas state legislator about endangered Mexicans north of the border . . .
“The new law places Mexican expats in the United States in danger, especially in light of El Paso, especially with the heightened rhetoric that we’re seeing from the governor and lieutenant governor, because there are millions of Mexican expats living in Texas,” said Texas Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas and past member of the International Relations and Economic Development committee and member of the Mexican American Legislative Caucus.
“And the second concern would be that people who possess these guns can possess them now without any license and would be more likely to also traffic them,” he said. “And that creates a further vulnerability for Mexicans on both sides.”
Rep. Anchia is apparently blissfully unaware that criminals have been carrying firearms without permits since, well, forever. The only change here is that law-abiding Texans — including many of his own constituents — will now be able to do that, too.
That brings us to today’s report from the Associated Press’s Lindsay Whitehurst on the alleged tension between gun rights supporters in the 21 states that enacted constitutional carry who are also frequently backers of law enforcement.
Those who follow these things can tell you that some police orgs — mostly chiefs of police — have opposed constitutional carry in every state that’s ever enacted it. It’s as predictable as the sun rising in the east. Strangely, none of their dire prognostications of gun battles breaking out on an hourly basis have come true in any of those states.
Here’s the AP’s article . . .
The latest push to loosen gun laws in states across the U.S. has put police officers at odds with Republican lawmakers who usually trumpet support for law enforcement.
In states like Texas, Tennessee and Louisiana, police opposed pushes to drop requirements for people to get background checks and training before carrying handguns in public, plans that came as gun sales continued to shatter records during the coronavirus pandemic.
“We feel it was just another opportunity to get our officers hurt,” said Fabian Blache Jr., executive director of the Louisiana Chiefs of Police Association. “It was a danger to law enforcement.”
There, a last-ditch public plea by dozens of Louisiana law enforcement officers helped narrowly avert a push to override the Democratic governor’s veto of legislation dropping concealed-carry permit requirements. But he expects the proposal to come back next year, and in several other conservative-leaning states police opposition didn’t stop laws dropping permit requirements.
Gun violence is on the rise across the country and law enforcement agencies are struggling with how to manage the spikes, especially in cities. The federal government has stepped in with strike forces and other measures help to stop the sale of illegal weapons. Cops are already working at a disadvantage in many cities over forces winnowed by retirements and difficulty attracting new officers following the massive police protests in 2020, and many see looser gun laws as one more challenge.
Not knowing who might be carrying a gun heightens the potential danger in any encounter, and less required training means more people who don’t know how to properly handle a weapon, Blanche said.
“Police officers are trained around the country, and they make mistakes,” he said. “So why are we going to give opportunity to people who are not trained to be able to carry a firearm and use it at will?”
In Tennessee this year, warnings from police chiefs and sheriffs didn’t stop a push to drop permit requirements in the GOP-controlled state Legislature. That law passed months after another measure cracking down on protesters camping out for police reform, a vote that was framed as a support for law enforcement.
Though several polls have found public support for gun permits, arguments that they undermine Second Amendment rights have gained favor in conservative-leaning state governments in recent years.
“There is something of a disjunction between repeating the political slogan of ‘back the blue’ versus supporting policies that rank-and-file police and leaders of police organizations actually support,” said Robert Spitzer, a professor at The State University of New York-Cortland and author of “The Politics of Gun Control.”
Police opposition hasn’t stopped a push to drop permitting requirements that’s passed in about 20 states, Spitzer said. While their positions carry authority, they don’t have the ad campaigns and lobbyists that overtly political interests often do.
“Their voices and opinions have been known, but they haven’t been a real megaphone in public political terms because that puts them in a real bad spot. They’re public servants and their job is to enforce the law, no matter what the law is,” he said.
And permitless carry has supporters in law enforcement, including sheriffs, many of whom are in elected positions and oversee more rural areas. In Utah and Iowa, police groups were more divided generally stayed out of the debate this year.
Discussions about police reform dominated the conversation in Iowa, as well as how to stem the rise in violent crime, said Sam Hargadine, the Iowa Police Chiefs Association executive director. He doesn’t see the permit question as a big piece of the violent-crime discussion, especially since chiefs already couldn’t deny people permits.
“I think there’s extremes on both sides. But there’s got to be some compromises made, because we’re having far too many shootings,” he said.
Not all police oppose the legislation, and gun-rights advocates don’t see a conflict between combating crime and making it easier for people to carry firearms. They argue that people generally don’t get permits for guns used in violent crimes, so the change will make it easier for those who do follow the law to get a gun and many measures also tougher penalties for some gun crimes.
For Texas Republican James White, his party’s differing with the chiefs of the state’s largest cities on permit-less carry was part of the give-and-take of the legislative process.
“There were some things this session … where we were consistent with where law enforcement would want to be, and there were sometimes that we just had to tell them we have to look a different direction,” said White, an outgoing state lawmaker now running for agriculture commissioner.
He also touted the stronger penalties contained in the law for felons who carry guns illegally. “It was a very strong on crime, tough on crime deal,” he said.
White argued the new law didn’t represent a massive shift in a state where guns were allowed in cars without permits and licenses weren’t required for long guns. Texas became the largest state to drop handgun licensing requirements this year, a move applauded by the National Rifle Association and other gun-rights advocates.
Alan Gottlieb with the Second Amendment Foundation argued that policing is already inherently dangerous and dropping permits won’t make a big dent but will enhance gun rights. “I shouldn’t need a permit to exercise my constitutional rights,” he said.
Police opposition had helped keep the idea from gaining traction even in firearm-friendly Texas, but with a change in legislative leadership support swelled over the span of a few weeks this year. It passed over objections from survivors of the mass shooting that killed 23 people at an El Paso Walmart two years ago.
“One thing I’ve learned in my many years of working with police is, you can rely on them to tell you what’s going to put the public at danger,” said Everytown For Gun Safety President John Feinblatt. “I think that what police know is that crime is rising around the country and this is the worst possible moment to pass laws like this.”
Yup, that damned bill of rights gets in their way yet again!! Noticed that they shy away from all the inner city thug’s guns, why do you suppose that is?
From the article:
“…concern would be that people who possess these guns can possess them now without any license…”
– Rep. Rafael Anchia (D)
You mean, like our nation was for almost two centuries, as the Founders intended and handed to us? Without permission or knowledge from those who would appoint themselves as our Overlords? The horror!
they’re still using the ‘not trained’ BS
i have more firearms training, including training with fully automatic firearms, than most police forces ever require. Does that mean i can get a full auto SBR M4 to carry around in my car all day?
“i have more firearms training”
good for you. but you’re surrounded by hundreds who have, not just less training than you, but none at all.
I’m there with Draven, with possibly comparable training. So that’s two of us so far.
But as has been said many times, it’s called the “Bill of Rights”, not the “Bill of Needs”…and now we can add it’s not called the “Bill of Rights for the Highly Trained.” It’s for all citizens across the board, regardless of training.
Whoops! Did I just say the word “citizens”?
“Bill of Rights”
it is indeed. but what you’re focusing on is YOUR rights. which is amusing, because you’re not focusing on them enough – all these untrained people exercising their rights in an ignorant manner will be a hazard to you thus violating your rights. see, rights are not about the individual – an isolated individual alone has no need of rights – but rather about how people live together and regulate the inevitable conflicts that develop. but modern internet rightists just don’t get this, because their focus is on their isolated selves, and other people are either just like them or are “sheeple” or whatever cute dehumanizing term comes to mind.
“Well regulated”, missed that part. Kind of like having the 1st with everyone illiterate. Easy to fix by teaching firearm training in school.
“…untrained people exercising their rights in an ignorant manner will be a hazard to you thus violating your rights…”
Not true. Intention and ignorance are two separate and different things and cannot be conflated. Otherwise, an unfortunate traffic accident (perhaps brake failure) resulting in the death of an individual would be placed on the same level as premeditate murder (a clear violation of someone’s right to life).
Your argument is in perfect alignment with the prevalent over-litigious culture we have today, in which everyone is seeking out ways to complain that their “rights” are being violated by someone every which way possible.
“…see, rights are not about the individual…”
When it comes to civil rights, yes, they are.
The only ones who who think civil rights should apply collectively are Leftist Scum like you and your ilk…
“When it comes to civil rights, yes, they are”
no, they’re not, for the reason I stated. what you’re missing is that there are other people who have rights and responsibilities too – but for the modern internet right “other people” is just a non-sensical non-entity if they can be ignored …
“Leftist Scum like you”
… or “leftist scum” if they can’t be ignored.
“Intention and ignorance are two separate and different things and cannot be conflated”
sure. but the results are identical.
Geoff. ant is not a leftist. He has talked about the gestapo being men who loved their country. He has talked about black communites in a less than flattering light. He skirts around the ‘evil joooz’ thing. And he loves him some big regulated .gov.
He, like dacian and miner, is a fascist.
“but what you’re focusing on is YOUR rights.”
You’re absolutely correct those of us who understand, place our individual rights above all. And if everyone did the same instead of looking for strangers to take care of them. Our nation would be as it was so many years ago. When we were a free country.
fascist, leftists… same shit, different toilet. Or maybe, same toilet in a newer building? Either way, same same no change change.
“He, like dacian and miner, is a fascist”
when all this comes to fruition, you’ll be categorized as a fascist too.
” rights are not about the individual – an isolated individual alone has no need of rights ”
You couldn’t be more wrong. An isolated individual doesn’t need rights because, being isolated, he doesn’t have anyone crawling up his ass all the time. But bring other people into the mix and the whole dynamic changes. Individual rights are necessary to protect the minority view from the mob rule of the majority — like two wolves and a sheep voting on what to do for lunch. Without individual rights, tyranny has a total free hand.
But then, I think that appeals to you, doesn’t it?
Freedom is chaotic and violent.
“Freedom is chaotic and violent”
yep. that’s why people live under governments, to reign in the chaos and the violence. the more chaos and violence, the more government is needed. the more moral and civilized (i.e. ability of people to live with each other) the population, the less government is needed.
That’s why people live UNDER governments?
Is that why it started? lol. I always thought governments were oppresive and they have been since as far back as history records them. People don’t live under government because they are “helpful” and “civilized”. People don’t chose to be born into a governed society. Where in this world can you live without some form of government reigning in and oppressing you? Do you fucking want freedom, or not? You think governments will just cease to exist because everyone holds hands and fucking sings around campfires, saying thank you and being polite? Get real bruh. Nobody needs to be controlled. Ever. Governments are tools, and tools like you keep them alive and growing. More oppressive than ever. Less violent upfront, maybe, but oppression is not synonymous with violence like you seem to think it is. Governments, especially modern ones, have learned to hide their tactics and keep you oppressed while they murder countlessly, and dictate unregulated. Which, again, leads me back to my point. Freedom is violent. It’s chaotic. You can’t have government and freedom. They don’t work together. So you being scared of someone with “no training” is why people train. Dumbass. Get some training and a skillset that revolves around self defense and stop infringing on my freedom with your false sense of security and a utopia that doesn’t exist and never will. I’d rather have dangerous freedom than peaceful slavery.
“That’s why people live UNDER governments? Is that why it started?”
“Do you fucking want freedom, or not?”
for most on the modern internet right, “freedom” means “I do whatever I want because I’m sensible and logical, and every reasonable and worthwhile person fits in with me or they need to be put down.” and that – everyone living according to their own interpretation of that – is precisely the chaotic and violent situation that generates the need for government. really, you guys are no different from the left, except the left functions as a team and the modern internet right is a loose collection of isolates that will be mopped up piece-meal.
Do you have some special training in your First Amendment rights? No? They why would you require special training in Second Amendment rights? Whe you have had special training on the entire Constitution and the Bill of Rights along with the remaining amendments, get back to us.
“Do you have some special training in your First Amendment rights? No? They why would you require special training in Second Amendment rights?”
“Everyone needs to communicate; no one needs a gun.”
(fill-in your preferred “need”)
“Do you have some special training in your First Amendment rights? No? They why would you require special training in Second Amendment rights?”
because “second amendment rights” involve deadly force that if misapplied results in inappropriate deaths. your rights do not justify unnecessarily endangering others, thus proper exercise of the right implies training. (notice how there’s lots of laws governing speech – can’t yell fire in a crowded theater, can’t commit fraud, etc. journalists, lawyers, etc get lots of training in what they can and cannot say. same thing.)
“Because…..Everyone needs to communicate; no one needs a gun.”
not how it works at all – this allows “them” to define what you need, and they will define it so as to serve themselves. it’s not a matter of need, it’s a matter of capability.
So ? Look most untrained people do not ever hurt anybody. We have untrained people buy chainsaws, ladders , swimming pools. All kinds if dangerous things.
That said the “ untrained “ argument is fake. You can tell because when somebody makes it and you suggets making concealed carry safety training part if the standard public highschool program so EVERYBODY is trained in how to be safe around guns , the anti’s shit up about training.
“That said the “ untrained “ argument is fake.”
In extended family conversations, I usually ask:
– How many mass shootings were done by trained people, vs. untrained people?
– How many weekend shootings in the ‘hood are done by trained persons?
– How many of the 200,000 to 1.5 million defensive gun uses were accomplished by trained persons?
– Where are the reports of thousands of negligent discharges committed by non-trained gun owners?
“Look most untrained people do not ever hurt anybody.”
more accurately most things turn out ok even when mistakes are made. that doesn’t mean mistakes are irrelevant.
“We have untrained people buy chainsaws, ladders , swimming pools.”
most people who misuse chainsaws and ladders hurt only themselves, not someone else, and thus these are not rights issues. as for swimming pools there is quite a push to train kids to swim to minimize this hazard – rather than see this as a rights issue, a similar effort should be made with firearms.
“Where are the reports of thousands of negligent discharges committed by non-trained gun owners?”
(laugh) most are not reported. would you?
“they’re still using the ‘not trained’ BS”
Don’t they use this excuse to give police and security professionals special privileges in places like CA? You aren’t going to win that argument by saying that just isn’t fair. You can win the argument by pushing for everyone to be able to train and get tested just like law enforcement. Push the message to their constituents that dems want second class citizens. Now what’s their excuse?
“You can win the argument by pushing for everyone to train and get tested just like law enforcement”
(you’re missing the fact that for the left it’s not an argument, it’s an excuse. they want total control of all firearms and they don’t want anyone else – especially citizens – to be able to defend themselves from the left. any excuse to achieve this will do. if you overcome one excuse they’ll just move on to another excuse.)
self-defense is held to be a right, thus there is a right to the tools of self-defense. if a person cannot pass a qualification test, what about their right?
We used to have in this country an education infrastructure that educated the youngest students about their second amendment civil rights and responsibilities. And when the children grow older the school’s had rifle teams for them to put their learning to practical use. And gain some experience in shooting. This was especially important for City kids. Also the school’s had archery and fencing classes in them as well.
But the Left that now claims people need to be educated about Firearms, are the exact same ones who put an end to the firearms training, at the Elementary and high school levels. And in fact are working to prevent children from learning about firearms in the schools.
The people who make this argument are simply insincere.
“if a person cannot pass a qualification test, what about their right?”
You mean the rights they’re already being denied in places like CA and NYC when LE is allowed to have those rights? Maybe it’s time to try a different strategy. They don’t care about your rights. I’m not saying this is the end. It’s a start. Start securing equal treatment and go from there. Sometimes you have to be realistic about what can really be accomplished.
“The people who make this argument are simply insincere.”
Yes, and we need to call them out on it in the most public way.
While I understand where you’re coming from, I’d like to add that we didn’t get to this point by the anti-freedom crowd going for all or nothing. Everything with the Left has been about incremental change. I personally believe people should be a little more open minded about getting some wins, and focusing on incremental change in the opposite direction instead of this all or nothing attitude.
The mandatory training requirement that is wanted by some is a slippery slope. First you require x amount of training. Time and money required. Then you increase the required amount of training required, more time and money required. Rinse and repeat. Some of the ones against permitless carry were the ones doing the “required training” here in Texas. Did my required training for the concealed carry permit but could not bring myself to be finger printed and get a mug shot like a damned criminal. Nothing there to prohibit me , just didn’t want to be treated like a criminal .
The act of self defense is not limited to any specific tools, which you seem to think are worthy of being “tested”.
“The mandatory training requirement that is wanted by some is a slippery slope.”
A slippery slope to where? Go try to get a carry permit in NYC or Hawaii. Try buying a gun not on the approved list or a magazine that holds more than ten rounds in certain blue areas. Now try doing that while you’re in law enforcement. Having second class citizens is an abomination, just like denying rights. You guys can stay on your high horse all you like, but shouting “Shall Not Be Infringed!” to the dem pols doesn’t seem to be doing much.
Keep in mind, this is a state and local level fight. This “slippery slope” you’re talking about doesn’t affect free states. All I’m trying to do is assert the right to equal treatment. That would be what’s called a win in those areas, then you keep progressing from there. Like I said, the Left has used incremental change to their advantage. You guys could learn something from that.
Montana: “The act of self defense is not limited to any specific tools, which you seem to think are worthy of being “tested”.
“Everything with the Left has been about incremental change”
and by teamwork and cooperation – something the modern internet right simply does not understand or accept.
(laugh) you will be too, whether you wish it or no. or you’ll lose.
Draven with all the full auto training you boasted about having you should be able to answer your own question. Your question is not about transit but an attempt to use “training and transport” to shore up your opinion about concealed carry.
Frankly draven…It is none of your business what degree of training someone has. And why is that you ask? Simply because whatever goes down goes down between the victim and the perp. At that point where will those who have a problem with concealed carry be to help?
Like in Louisiana where the democRat gov. and turn coats in the legislature denied citizens who can already open carry the ability to wear a coat. That means when a perp sees a woman the perp knows the odds are in their favor the victim has no means to defend themselves. That’s all because victims are abiding by a 24/7 armed guard protected Rat’s decision. A Rat who used “training” as an excuse to crap on freedom and cater to criminals.
“whatever goes down goes down between the victim and the perp”
and whoever they happen to hit. and that makes it everybody’s business.
The police, who are well trained, are the one’s that are shooting innocent bystanders. When was the last time you heard of a civilian accidentally shooting a bystander while defending himself/herself?
Crime is rising around the country and this is the best possible moment to pass laws like this
“this is the best possible moment”
you best moment is his worst, for the same reasons.
Crime is rising because Libertarians Liberals and the Left demanded the jails be emptied because of the Chinese flue. And the left wingers who run the major cities in the United States supported emptying the jails as well.
It’s all just unfounded craziness, lies, baseless accusations, and ignorance.
These things would never be much of a thing if our elected officials (specifically Democrats) actually cared to do theirs jobs instead of running away like cowards.
“actually cared to do theirs jobs”
they do. what you’re missing is that they’re not working for you.
“The new law places Mexican expats in the United States in danger, especially in light of El Paso,”
So, let me get this straight; The Mexican expats in the United States were not in danger when people were required to get permits to carry but still owned guns but just didn’t carry them without a permit but now with the same gun owners not needing permits yet still owning the same guns that did not place Mexican expats in the United States in danger before – suddenly it means that Mexican expats in the United States are in danger?
Ok, maybe I missed it but what kind of Harry Potter magical logic is that called?
… in El Paso… where everyone speaks Spanish…
Why is the Left full of pathological liars, pedophiles, and sex addicts?
“pedophiles, and sex addicts”
Long time republican speaker of the house of representatives Dennis Hastert?
Or Republican Senator Larry Craig?
“They’re public servants and their job is to enforce the law, no matter what the law is,” he said.”
There it is folks. “We’re only following orders.” Don’t trust the cops.
“One thing I’ve learned in my many years of working with police is, you can rely on them to tell you what’s going to put the public at danger,” said Everytown For Gun Safety President John Feinblatt.
Yet, others on the Left think police are killing millions of blacks and are the source of the problem. It’s really quite funny how asserting our Constitutional rights exposes the cracks in the lefty ranks. What is the source of the crime problem? Out of control cops? Or people exercising their Constitutional rights?
On one level, I hope police are defunded. Let the People take care of the crime problem.
“Let the People take care of the crime problem”
they can’t. and if they do, you won’t like it, because there’s always someone out there who will view you as being what’s wrong in the world and needing to be dealt with.
You just described most democrats.
Free people are their enemy.
Regardless, if people misuse firearms then the law addresses that.
Same way we deal with drunk driving. If you drive drunk, you pay the price.
Regardless of how much “drinking” training you have received.
“You just described most democrats”
not just them – and fewer of them than on the right actually.
“Same way we deal with drunk driving. If you drive drunk, you pay the price. Regardless of how much “drinking” training you have received.”
non-sequiter. being drunk renders a person unable to drive properly. having a firearm does not render a person unable to use it properly.
“who don’t matter munch”
“Rep. Anchia is apparently blissfully unaware that criminals have been carrying firearms without permits since, well, forever.”
he’s aware, it just doesn’t bother him.
“The only change here is that law-abiding Texans — including many of his own constituents — will now be able to do that, too.”
that is what bothers him. not that the criminals carry, but that the citizens will. it’s one step closer to them becoming naazis.
The best benefit to passing Constitutional Carry in yet another state is the full blown mind twisting of those Libturds. Carry on, America.
OMG Texas is freedom!!!!
Notice no one ever asks the rank and file officers about this stuff. It is always the elected officials, or appointed ones who are politically aligned.
If you were to talk to the boots on the ground the story would be completely different.
“what kind of Harry Potter magical logic is that called?”
mis-direction. substitute “the ruling elite” for “mexican expats” and it all comes clear. it’s a great technique that allows subversives to talk to each other openly across any form of media while leaving everyone not in-the-loop completely baffled as to what is being said.
Daniel……Now we need to elect a governor ( new one) that will do their job and not let things get out of control like this idiot has.
True. It is usually the Police “Chiefs”, especially in democratically controlled cities. The police chief is usually appointed or elected by the left leaning city councils and they have to pander to them to keep their jobs. The majority of Police on the force don’t feel the same.
“If you were to talk to the boots on the ground the story would be completely different”
… dunno. do you think a texas sheriff and a chicago downtown street cop would agree on this?
I have literally 40%+ of the comments on this article (9 of 22 as I write this one). I really like to see my username all up and down the page.
All the pages, really.
well people say interesting things worth discussing. don’t you agree that people say interesting things that are worth responding to?
Now I have 18 out of the current total of 50, meaning I command more than a third of this page all to myself. And I apparently enjoy talking to myself, too.
Oh wait, another article has just been posted. I need to hop on over there to grab that spotlight as well.
some, yes. not you. you only state the glaringly obvious via regurgitation.
try shiteposting. it’s more fun than pretending to be relevant.
“I really like to see my username all up and down the page.”
There ya’ go. Trying to up my name recognition to 1%. Got any advice?
Actually, I already control 87% of all the screen names. What else is there to do in full retirement?
C’mon, ya’ll. It is settled science that Texicans, just like Americans and America, are responsible for every evil visited upon the planet since there was a planet.
close. better to say that citizens are responsible for every evil they permit in their nation.
(when blm proclaims that whites are responsible for black crime, they have a point ….)
On top of their head maybe……ha.
You funny, auntie7.
No, they don’t have a point.
According to 2016 stats from the US Census Bureau non-Hispanic whites makeup 61.3% of the population, and blacks make up 13.1% of the population. The next census is due in 2026. So I’m going to keep this in the 2016 area just to illustrate how deceptive such a statement like “(when blm proclaims that whites are responsible for black crime, they have a point ….)” can be.
If we look at FBI crime stats from 2016 for violent crimes we can see that whites committed 241,063 of the 408,873 violent crimes, which is 58% of the total. So 61% of the population is committing 58% of the violent crimes.
If we look at FBI crime stats from 2016 for violent crimes we can see that the number of violent crimes committed by blacks was 153,341 of the 408,873 violent crimes, which is 37% of the violent crimes.
For 2016 (only because that’s the latest census), based upon population vs crime rate even though blacks had the lower population they committed violent crimes at three times the rate of whites.
If you or BLM or anyone else wants to qualify such statements they need to do the research first before throwing it out there.
his point being that oppression leads to… necessity being the… never mind.
Hyperbolic retardation aside it’s kinda nice to see them get their own goalposts moved for a change. To counter permit less carry and still appear “moderate” they have to at least claim to support permitted carry.
and thus gun ownership and thus validate the 2nd amendment is an individual right.
How many of those “expats” are illegal aliens?
Illegal Aliens are the most vulnerable to being pressured by crime cartels to become involved in illegal activities.
A cop needs more training because he has a license to kill .
Reciprocity, the gunm states should have constitutional reciprocity. You’ve got a Missouri DL you should be able to carry in Texas without a permission slip, same same.
Well really anyone should be able to pack a gunm anywhere without gov permission
according to the 2nd amendment .
How about that,,,
you have The Right To Be Armed if your elected officials permit it. ??? So class that explains rights , the constitution, and the supreme court .
A license to kill? You’ve been watching too many James Bond movies.
They have the duty to engage, and the authority to use reasonable force within the context of enforcing laws.
Fuck police chiefs and their corrupt organizations. They are just puppets for the leftist mayors and councils of leftist cities. They know that armed law abiding citizens prevent and stop crimes. Police chiefs are simply tin -horned minor politicians and deserve all of the consideration of any other crooked politician. Leftist media propaganda is failing to convince the public as more states regain their rights taken from them in racist, Jim Crow era laws.
Police officers also have Qualified Immunity, a wholly made up right that provides them with near blanket protection.
As for civilians, most liberal cities and states now effectively have constitutional carry only for criminals, a day or tow in the pokey is nothing for them since they know liberal prosecutors will release them.
I keep forgetting many states actually lock up criminals before trial (with or without bail) for crimes outside of murder normally.
I’m a baby boomer born in early 1950’s My Grandparents had a ranch outside of Mason Texas.
A lot of rattle snakes on the ranch, when I would spend summers there and was first granddaughter, also named after Grandpa’s mother, so had Princess status, I was sent to the Ranch by myself since older brothers were not so friendly toward me, for my own protection.
I think I was around 8 years old when first trip
Grandpa had an 22Lr rifle stored behind bench seat in his pickup.
Back then you didn’t need permission to buy a weapon, just needed enough to buy it, about the cost of a cow at Auction.
Ranchers/farmers were very self sufficient back then.
I remember my mom told me only things they had to buy was coffee, tea and sugar.
Some ranchers did it on horseback.
My mom, as first born, rode a horse and a knife to cut a sheep out of the babwire fence
Sheep are really stupid, if they get caught in the fence, they will just give up and die. There goes the whole sheep and future lambs. Rams take care of coyotes to protect livestock or the Border Collie will run them off.
I really miss those days when we really lived free of much government interference.
Are the thugs in Chicago trained? They didn’t seem to have an issue killing the trained
NH, ME, and AK are non-coastal states?
NH and ME are truly oddities, fun as can be but hardly typical by population of the Northeast. With that said what about Mississippi?
There are few things in life more amusing than being hectored abut gun rights by a Mexican, especially one who resides in a narco state.
Odd, up here it’s more seeing how they bling out oddball pieces. My favorite thus far was a rose gold anodized hipoint with some skull with roses grips.
Cops, or at least some cops, don’t want to see constitutional rights extended to everyone. And, lefties point to those cops, using them as an argument from authority.
Hmmmm. Authoritarians don’t like freedom. It has taken this long to figure out such a basic concept?
Do we, or do we not, live in an authoritarian country? The CTRL-Left thinks we should.
I not sure about other states, but in our state when they got rid of the permit requirement and went to constitutional carry the state crime rate overall went down especially crime committed against Hispanic and Asian communities who in proportion to population were the hardest hit by crime.
The law changed to remove the ability of cities/communities to restrict firearms carry, the law changed to make legitimate self defense users immune from lawsuit for using that legitimate self defense, the permit requirement for concealed carry was removed. And we moved to constitutional carry so anyone that can legally have a firearm can open or conceal carry without permit. No longer did people feel guilty, or shy, or need to be wary of some restriction some place (even though there are some prohibited places in state law that apply everywhere) imposed at random, or feel uneasy by being approached by a police officer for a traffic violation not knowing if some little stupid thing would get pointed out because of some obscure hidden city restrictions some place, or fear being sued into oblivion simply because you acted in legitimate self defense. Essentially, at the time even though the state said they respected the 2nd amendment right the enactment of the control via law had effectively disarmed a large portion of the state populace and the crime rate was high.
Overall, constitutional carry enactment here had the effect of a lot more, a lot lot more, people carrying making it more risky for the criminal and it gave people the ability to fight back and protect their selves and loved ones to no longer be defenseless prey.
Where as before constitutional carry there was hardly any risk at all for the criminal. Population wise percentage hardly anyone carried because the way the law was written made it too risky to carry even though you may have had a permit. There were different restrictions every where you went and you were constantly having to disarm to stay legal so it was really inconvenient and if you had to actually use it you could be sued into oblivion even though its use was legal and actual self defense.
So we went to constitutional carry and shall-issue, and suddenly people are carrying and it had a beneficial effect that benefited everyone gun owner or not. Doing that, constitutional carry so people can carry, lowered the overall state crime rate, especially in the area of violent rapes (the most dramatic drop) which in proportion to before constitutional carry the violent rape rates had dropped 70% after constitutional carry became a reality.
The Far Right Neanderthals and Denisovan’s are always their own worst enemies. Crimes with guns result in more draconian gun bans. Only a Moron would not realized that many of the Road Rage incidents and other unnecessary shootings happen because untrained people do not know when you can legally shoot and when you cannot legally shoot.
Proper training in gun safety is also a must before one should secure a permit to carry a deadly weapon. That is what is known as “common sense” something unknown to the Far Right.
Someone who shoots out of a car? Yeah, that’s a training problem….
Keep thinking you’re the smart one.
Where do deadly weapons stop? If someone is big enough to crush your skull with their bare hands, should they have permits for those hands? How about bows and arrows? So lets say you get your wish, what “weapon” is next? Anything projectile based? lol. The fascism never ends with you “Far Left Neanderthals”. What’s funny, is everyone who disagrees with your limitless control is all the sudden “far right”? Also, you referenced road rage, but how many countless people have used just their vehicles? No “weapons”. You’ve had enough dashcam videos for a day, jr. Go outside to the real world and chill tf out.
“If someone is big enough to crush your skull with their bare hands, should they have permits for those hands? ”
Yes, and government-mandated annual training.
Have you met your Auntie7?.
He’s been posting here all day.
Or is Ant7 your alter ego during the day giving way to wild and crazy Dacian in the evening?
If not, you two must be related…….
In 2021 so far as of today there have been 1,300 smoking-related deaths per day, 54 deaths per hour, or almost one death per minute.
In 2021 so far as of today you are 97 times more likely to die in a car accident as a result of a texting teen driver than you are to die as a result of any other accident or getting shot in any incident.
In 2021 so far as of today there have been 2.4 million car accidents (all types from minor to major) in the U.S.
In 2021 so far as of today there were 469,200,000 guns that did not fire a shot other than at the firing range or hunting or in legitimate self/home defense.
Which whatever-control group do we call to save all those people who are going to die or be injured as a result of smoking, teen texting drivers, and car accident?
smoking, driving, these are not constitutional rights. Gun ownership/use is a right so get over it. Criminal activity (road rage shooting) is not a right so stick to that instead of trying to indict every gun owner to make them pay for the the criminal acts of others.
All this going on around you, millions injured or killed every day by sanctioned “acceptable” activity that is many times more deadly than a gun ever was. Yet you are concerned for a few hundred criminal acts of road rage shooting and echo Shannon Watts as she ignores the legalized deadly activity of things that are not rights.
They only hypocrite is you Jack along with a good dose of the usual Right Wing ignorance about everything.
You mention smoking genius boy. We have come a long way since the 1940’s and anti-smoking campaigns along with the banning of smoking adds directed at young people has indeed had a profound effect on the number of people who do not smoke or who have quit. In other words we Socialists did something about the problem we did not ignore it or pretend it would go away.
You mentioned car accidents. Why do you think we socialists pushed for lower speed limits, anti-lock breaks, air bags, back up softies on lawn mowers. Again we did something about it.
quote————- Gun ownership/use is a right so get over it.———quote
Obviously like most on the Far Right you have no recollection that it is the Courts that give you gun rights not the Constitution and when crime or mass murder goes up gun bans are always blessed by the courts.
quote————-Yet you are concerned for a few hundred criminal acts of road rage shooting————-quote
Civilized people who care about peoples lives especially children’s do something about road rage and about child accidental shootings which ARE NOT ONLY A COUPLE OF HUNDRED RATHER THEY ARE 1,300 A YEAR. We do not ignore the problem or simply wish it will go away rather we do something about it.
Remember it was the Far Right that said spending money on freeways was too expensive and no one would use the freeways or passing the Brady Bill would ban all guns in 24 hours and were against requiring gun safety training and knowledge of the law to get a hunting license or a permit for a concealed weapon. Again when there is a problem you fix it you do not ignore it and hope it will just go away as Moron 45 the faker in the Whitehouse said when covid first struck , well it did not go away and it only got worse as most problems do until you do something about it. That is why Biden got elected because he did not pretend the problem did not exist or would just go away.
It has been legal to carry a firearm in your vehicle in Texas without a carry permit for decades. Constitutional carry will not have any impact on road rage incidents.
Running background checks on all gun sales including second hand gun sales along with a mental fitness test to get a gun would indeed cut down on road rage incidents . Its called doing something about the problem.
You can’t have universal background checks on every sale between private individuals without gun registration. Otherwise there is no way to enforce it. That is why pro 2A folks are against it. History has shown that gun registration ALWAYS leads to confiscation.
That’s it, I’ve heard enough, I’m turning in all my guns to be destroyed to do my part to reduce gun violence. After that, I’m going to hang myself in my garage to prevent myself from getting cancer but just before that, I’ll burn the house down so it doesn’t catch fire.
Sure hope I’m dead before the fire reached the garage where I’m hanging around.
“That’s it, I’ve heard enough…”
You have a lot on your plate. I’ll turn your guns in for you…
If Mexico is so concerned about Texas “gun violence” spilling onto their side of the border, maybe they should consider putting up a border wall 🤔.
“If Mexico is so concerned about Texas “gun violence” spilling onto their side of the border, maybe they should consider putting up a border wall”
And make Mexico pay for it.
If the drug legalization crowd thinks that the Mexican drug cartels are going to sit by and allow “competition” in Mexico they are fooling themselves. Making drugs legal does not eliminate crime. There were news reports several years ago of Mexican drug cartels starting forest fires in California. They were attempting to burn the legalized marijuana Farms to the ground. And it wouldn’t surprise me if some of these forest fires in California now where in fact started by illegal alien Invaders. Who are trying to do harm to their legal marijuana competition in the United States.
People have over used the term Cutthroat capitalist in the United States. I can tell you that there are real Cut Throat capitalists in Mexico when it comes to the marijuana business.
“Legal U.S. marijuana is pouring into Mexico. It’s pricey, popular and has names like ‘Bubba Kush.’ ”
“There were news reports several years ago of Mexican drug cartels starting forest fires in California. They were attempting to burn the legalized marijuana Farms to the ground. ”
They were/are going about it all wrong. The Mob figured it out long ago: no-show jobs, protection, vig, fake invoices, and a bunch of other profit lines.
The Mexicans and Columbians are not Americans of Italian ancestry. They are different societies with different histories. MS-13 likes the illegal side of things. They are not interested in getting a nice movie made of them like the “Godfather” films. The “American Me” film got several of the film makers murdered by the Mexican gangs. Because they didn’t like how they were portrayed.
“The Mexicans and Columbians are not Americans of Italian ancestry.”
Seems amassing more money would be preferable to amassing more bodies.
“Making drugs legal does not eliminate crime.”
But it will turn American gangsters into entrepreneurs who will want to do everything by the book (since it’s now legal) and give back to their community, right? Right?
No. Criminals will steal your limited resources to continue in their activites. You have water. They want it for their pot farms.
“California’s desert becoming a hotbed for water bandits: Watch”
To the Dude
Pure nonsense and ignorance of history, European history that is. Drug crime went down dramatically when drugs were decriminalized in various European states. When people get drugs for free they do not need to buy them from drug gangs and drug gangs cannot sell drugs when there is a vastly declining market for them. The amount of money saved in hiring armies of jackbooted thug cops and putting people in prison for years for non-violent crimes like just being in possession of single marijuana cigarette saves millions and more than finances government Socialist drug programs. Its called being civilized that the key to civilizing Capitalvania is Socialism.
Well hell……decriminalization of murder would murder crime go down.
Genius socialist logic.
We’ve already seen a decrease in property crime where they have quit prosecuting theft under a certain dollar amount.
It does wonders for reducing crime stats but little to help the people who stuff is being taken.
Socialist are great at taking …… not so much in producing.
Long live the republic…….down with the neo fascist-socialist movement.
“When people get drugs for free they do not need to buy them from drug gangs and drug gangs cannot sell drugs when there is a vastly declining market for them.”
They get them for free? Nothing’s free. Wait, let me guess…I’ll have to buy them for the druggies. So extra work hours for me so the druggies will be happy. When do they start working overtime so they can give me stuff? I have wants too ya know.
When the drug gangs can no longer sell drugs do to the dwindling market, is that the point that they decide to go back to school and be their best selves?
“But it will turn American gangsters into entrepreneurs who will want to do everything by the book (since it’s now legal) and give back to their community, right? Right?”
Yes. Why is this so difficult for so many to grasp?
Oh thank God! Everything’s going to be okay, isn’t it?
“Oh thank God! Everything’s going to be okay, isn’t it?”
Of course. Think happy thoughts. Indeed….
“Sing, sing a song
Sing out loud
Sing out strong
Sing of good things not bad
Sing of happy not sad.”
Because people like me understand that there are tyrants in the world. These tyrants like to kill. They like to rape little boys or rape little girls in front of their parents. They like “the power that flows out the end of a gun barrel”.
They enjoy cutting up a human body while it’s still alive. Much of Mexico is now controlled by tyrants like this. These tyrants are now murdering avocado farmers so they can take over a legal business by deadly force.
The best way to deal with dedicated criminals is to arm the law abiding.
@Sam I Am wrote:
“Yes. Why is this so difficult for so many to grasp?:
@Chris T in KY wrote:
“Because people like me understand that there are tyrants in the world…”
Maybe you should reread Sam’s comment standing up. The gag sailed completely over your head. Skim reading will do that.
Except the jokes on them; Texas doesn’t have Constitutional Carry. The lobbyists sold out for far less. Texas won’t have Constitutional Carry until the North American continent sees total anarchy.
” Texas won’t have Constitutional Carry until the North American continent sees total anarchy ”
Well, that shouldn’t take very long.
“safety training part if the standard public highschool program so EVERYBODY is trained in how to be safe around guns , the anti’s shit up about training”
Not at all, I’ve stated many times I am in favor of high school firearms law and skills training. The part that sets off you right wingers is when I say one should not be allowed to carry that weapon in public spaces until they have actually successfully completed these classes, including a classroom component on rights and obligations as well as live-fire proficiency testing.
And yes, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of untrained individuals wounding or killing themselves or others with accidental/negligent discharges every month here in the United States.
I agree 100 percent.
I like to often reference the fanatical German Training. Cops get 3 years of intensive training and mental vetting before ever being allowed to become a cop. In 2012 the German cops killed just 12 people while the same year in Capitalvania the untrained cops killed 1,300 people.
In Germany the testing just to get a fishing license would result in most Americans never passing the test. Their tests to get a gun license to purchase a gun is just as rigorous and they have safe storage laws like most other European countries do.
Only the ignorant Far Right fear training and education because that is exactly why they are ignorant and Far Right.
I don’t fear training.
I am concerned that smug, smarmy pukes like you would use the “process” to limit ownership of guns.
Limiting guns would limit the ability of citizens to defend themselves against thugs……and smug, smarmy bureaucratic pukes.
Training is fine but let’s not make an idol of it.
Instead let’s hold people responsible for their actions. Let them decide what training they need.
The kind of training you suggest for owning or carrying a firearm is discriminatory to those who need a firearm for protection the most. The one’s who can’t afford to pay hundreds of dollars for training and licenses in addition to the cost of the firearm and ammo. The people that live in an area where the police have been defunded and criminals are released from jail without bail. It is a tax on a constitutional right. No different than a poll tax. Should we have mandatory training on how to vote? We experienced the danger of reckless and ignorant voting in the outcome of the last presidential election.
In Texas we have plenty of snakes, mostly rattle snakes and coral snakes. Gray fox in some places, Bob cats and raccoons, coyotes
Every so often The Gray Fox comes down with rabies. In Gillespie County, you will hear helicopters dropping rabies prevention chews for the Fox.
It’s not just humans than can mess you up.
It’s also wildlife
That said I assume you can renew your LTC, if you choose?
Texas Lady, yes you can renew your LTC if you choose and new LTCs are still being issued. I will continue to renew mine.