Reply
Go Back   TexasBowhunter.com Community Discussion Forums > Topics > Current Events - Politics and Such
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-13-2018, 10:14 PM   #51
100%TtId
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flywise View Post
Sounds good
It may sound good, but it will never be enforced. How many prosecutions were made for falsified 4473's? Answer: .04%

The report shows that, between 2008 and 2015, the FBI denied 556,496 gun purchases following background checks. During that time period, the report shows that only 254 false statements were even considered for prosecution, amounting to a 0.04 percent prosecution rate.

http://freebeacon.com/issues/prosecu...-fall-new-low/
100%TtId is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-13-2018, 10:14 PM   #52
Shane
Pope & Young
 
Shane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Abilene, TX
Hunt In: Mismatched camo
Default

There are good arguments on both sides. So what would a reasonable "due process" look like if we did have an acceptable process to document mental illness in a sufficient manner that would prohibit a person who shouldn't have firearms from having them? I guess I'm assuming that most people would agree that there are some truly unstable mentally ill people out there that shouldn't be allowed to own guns. If so, then what would a good "due process" look like?

Or would it be better to have no process in place for this at all in order to make sure that such a process wouldn't be abused, understanding the trade-off would mean that we wouldn't have a process in place to prevent potentially violent crazy people from having guns?

Hard questions.
Shane is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-13-2018, 10:29 PM   #53
Clay C
Ten Point
 
Clay C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Conroe
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttechdallas View Post
It hasn't been answered because the Florida shooting is just one example. Did you actually read what was proposed that the NRA supported? Do you really think our local law government and and law enforcement officers are going to systematically seek court orders, present to a judge, and try to take people's guns away one by one? Not going to happen.


Someone you upset, someone who just doesn’t like you or some crazy person reports you for something or another, then it’s their word against yours. There are several examples of this happening in California already. As systemnt pointed out, Texas is not California, but this is bigger than just Texas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Clay C is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-13-2018, 10:47 PM   #54
ttechdallas
Eight Point
 
ttechdallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Colleyville
Hunt In: Atoka County, OK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clay C View Post
Someone you upset, someone who just doesn’t like you or some crazy person reports you for something or another, then it’s their word against yours. There are several examples of this happening in California already. As systemnt pointed out, Texas is not California, but this is bigger than just Texas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I understand the concern. However, obtaining a court order is not a trivial process, nor is one pursued or issued on the basis of a simple complaint. Someone is going to have to make a sworn accusation - documented in writing and which would go before a judge, most likely with them having to speak/answer questions as well. Any fool petty enough to make a false or overstated claim is not going to fare very well in front of judges in our already backed up courts.
ttechdallas is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-13-2018, 11:01 PM   #55
sir shovelhands
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Houston
Hunt In: Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shane View Post
There are good arguments on both sides. So what would a reasonable "due process" look like if we did have an acceptable process to document mental illness in a sufficient manner that would prohibit a person who shouldn't have firearms from having them? I guess I'm assuming that most people would agree that there are some truly unstable mentally ill people out there that shouldn't be allowed to own guns. If so, then what would a good "due process" look like?

Or would it be better to have no process in place for this at all in order to make sure that such a process wouldn't be abused, understanding the trade-off would mean that we wouldn't have a process in place to prevent potentially violent crazy people from having guns?

Hard questions.
A very difficult question to answer.

Let's say due process could be followed for the revocation of gun rights based upon a documented and corroborated history of violence and mental issues.

Seung-Hui Cho, Jiverly Wong, Nidal Hassan, James Holmes, Jared Loughner, Aaron Alexis, Adam Lanza, and most recently Nikolas Cruz all had documented histories of mental illness. Might such a law have stopped them? Maybe, maybe not. Maybe they would've run people over or blown them up instead.

Now consider some of these individual's only history of mental illness is the psychiatrist they were seeing. Are they now going to be required to report on people? Well then people will stop going to therapy and we've got a separate problem on our hands.

Now consider these mental health conditions: depression, Anxiety, OCD, ADHD, Autism. Is some jerk politician going to consider these as bad enough to take your guns away? Probably.

And then, you've got cases where people have no history of mental illness. how do you deal with them? More draconian laws to make us safer at the expense of freedom or do nothing and what happens happens?

Regardless, even if such a law turned out perfectly, the harder question would be how one would even go about getting such a right back or appealing it?

There's just so many variables and problems with it.

I think if they do put something out, it would need a sunset and renewal clause, based upon the efficacy (how would you even measure that, number of mass shootings per year?).
sir shovelhands is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-13-2018, 11:05 PM   #56
Ironman
Pope & Young
 
Ironman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Wise County
Hunt In: Anywhere
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttechdallas View Post
I understand the concern. However, obtaining a court order is not a trivial process, nor is one pursued or issued on the basis of a simple complaint. Someone is going to have to make a sworn accusation - documented in writing and which would go before a judge, most likely with them having to speak/answer questions as well. Any fool petty enough to make a false or overstated claim is not going to fare very well in front of judges in our already backed up courts.
Really? California disagrees with you. As I stated earlier, we don't need such laws. We already have laws in place. How many of these mass shooters already had "red flags" before they acted? All of them? Most all of them? What law do you really think will change someone for committing such an act? Maybe we should just make murder illegal. Problem solved, right?
Ironman is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 12:29 AM   #57
flywise
Pope & Young
 
flywise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kempner,Tx
Hunt In: Blanco, Nacadoches,NewMexico,Colorado
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 100%TtId View Post
It may sound good, but it will never be enforced. How many prosecutions were made for falsified 4473's? Answer: .04%

The report shows that, between 2008 and 2015, the FBI denied 556,496 gun purchases following background checks. During that time period, the report shows that only 254 false statements were even considered for prosecution, amounting to a 0.04 percent prosecution rate.

http://freebeacon.com/issues/prosecu...-fall-new-low/
I would think that after the Florida shooting, which one could make a very good case they ( FBI) botched several opportunities to possibly prevent that act. That alone with some new leadership you just might see more of those prosecution's your referring too.
flywise is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 01:26 AM   #58
ttaxidermy
Pope & Young
 
ttaxidermy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brazoria county
Hunt In: Brady,McCulloch Cnty, Brazoria cnty, South Africa, Namibia
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SOLID EAGLE View Post
Just think Waco X 1000.
More like X millions..

Facebook is nothing more than a social experiment by the government.. They now have a highly detailed profile on anyone who uses FB.. It has helped them get DETAILED info on folks that they had no way of getting before.. It will be used in the future as a tool by our government in situations just like this...

They are using it to get into the minds of Americans.. They now know everything about you... Your religion and religious beliefs, how You vote, your stance on gun control, or not, your favorite sports teams, what, where and when you eat, who your friends with, who your friends are friends with, where you work, your political stance on EVERYTHING... Heck I even see people posting pics of their open gun safes and arsenals on FB all the time.. Heck I see that on here too... It boggles my mind.. This type of crap will be used in situations like these to determine who the government sees as what or who they deem as "a threat"... A "radical"..

You want to call BS.. Talk crazy on social media.. You will end up on "the no fly list" quick... Do you know anyone who has been put on a "no fly list" for reasons unknown to them??? I do.

Where is the first place they look when a person commits a crime?? You see it on the news all the time.. SOCIAL MEDIA accounts... Every single time. Think about it...

Last edited by ttaxidermy; 03-14-2018 at 01:45 AM.
ttaxidermy is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 05:49 AM   #59
Playa
Pope & Young
 
Playa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lubbock
Hunt In: Coleman
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttechdallas View Post
I understand the concern. However, obtaining a court order is not a trivial process, nor is one pursued or issued on the basis of a simple complaint. Someone is going to have to make a sworn accusation - documented in writing and which would go before a judge, most likely with them having to speak/answer questions as well. Any fool petty enough to make a false or overstated claim is not going to fare very well in front of judges in our already backed up courts.
Uhh yes it is. In my divorce process I had a court order against my wife to leave our domicile. That meeting included me, my attorney and the judge. No witnesses, no testimony, just me expressing that I felt she was a danger to my child. If the court can essentially make some homeless in a 30 min meeting like that, they won’t flinch to disarm someone.

Thankfully my wife and I reconciled. She got the help she needed and God changed my heart. But that was an eye opening experience into the court systems as a whole
Playa is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 06:45 AM   #60
J Sweet
Pope & Young
 
J Sweet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: The Woodlands
Hunt In: Leon/Madsion County
Default

I meant, what AR?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUslUKO7Zdo

Last edited by J Sweet; 03-14-2018 at 07:11 AM.
J Sweet is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 09:13 AM   #61
ttechdallas
Eight Point
 
ttechdallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Colleyville
Hunt In: Atoka County, OK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Playa View Post
Uhh yes it is. In my divorce process I had a court order against my wife to leave our domicile. That meeting included me, my attorney and the judge. No witnesses, no testimony, just me expressing that I felt she was a danger to my child. If the court can essentially make some homeless in a 30 min meeting like that, they won’t flinch to disarm someone.

Thankfully my wife and I reconciled. She got the help she needed and God changed my heart. But that was an eye opening experience into the court systems as a whole
With all due respect, if you were involved in a divorce proceeding then you already had a legal matter before the court and I would assume you were somehow bound to tell the truth before the judge. So unless a law is passed that lays out the groundwork to bypass the legal process for obtaining a court order while issuing the court order to remove guns from a home or individual, then it is not going to be as simple as some nut making an accusation and the police show up to take your guns.

I just believe that instead of arbitrarily rejecting anything and everything put forward that it would be far wiser to working to make sure that whatever is put in place if fair and effective.
ttechdallas is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 09:17 AM   #62
Ironman
Pope & Young
 
Ironman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Wise County
Hunt In: Anywhere
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttechdallas View Post
With all due respect, if you were involved in a divorce proceeding then you already had a legal matter before the court and I would assume you were somehow bound to tell the truth before the judge. So unless a law is passed that lays out the groundwork to bypass the legal process for obtaining a court order while issuing the court order to remove guns from a home or individual, then it is not going to be as simple as some nut making an accusation and the police show up to take your guns.

I just believe that instead of arbitrarily rejecting anything and everything put forward that it would be far wiser to working to make sure that whatever is put in place if fair and effective.
California says "watch this!"
Ironman is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 09:36 AM   #63
Playa
Pope & Young
 
Playa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lubbock
Hunt In: Coleman
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttechdallas View Post
With all due respect, if you were involved in a divorce proceeding then you already had a legal matter before the court and I would assume you were somehow bound to tell the truth before the judge. So unless a law is passed that lays out the groundwork to bypass the legal process for obtaining a court order while issuing the court order to remove guns from a home or individual, then it is not going to be as simple as some nut making an accusation and the police show up to take your guns.

I just believe that instead of arbitrarily rejecting anything and everything put forward that it would be far wiser to working to make sure that whatever is put in place if fair and effective.
With all due respect to you, you have no idea what you are talking about and I can only assume you have never been involved in a court order. Yes, I had to sign a sworn affidavit, but it was my “truth” which is to say my perspective. There was no competing party to dispute my claim. This occurred in a closed door session in the judges chamber. My wife nor her attorney had any idea this legal maneuver was being made until papers were served by a court officer. All I did was present a few instances where I felt she had endangered my child and identified a place where she could stay.

I could have said whatever and it would have been difficult for her to have fought it after the fact, in fact she didn’t.

In retrospect I would have handled it differently, but in the high emotion of a contentious divorce I did not have my clearest judgment about me.

Again, if it is this easy to remove someone from their home, how much easier will the court find it to deprive a gun owner their right to bear arms
Playa is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 10:29 AM   #64
ttechdallas
Eight Point
 
ttechdallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Colleyville
Hunt In: Atoka County, OK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Playa View Post
With all due respect to you, you have no idea what you are talking about and I can only assume you have never been involved in a court order. Yes, I had to sign a sworn affidavit, but it was my “truth” which is to say my perspective. There was no competing party to dispute my claim. This occurred in a closed door session in the judges chamber. My wife nor her attorney had any idea this legal maneuver was being made until papers were served by a court officer. All I did was present a few instances where I felt she had endangered my child and identified a place where she could stay.
You have your opinion, I have mine. But you wouldn't have been before a judge had there not been an official legal proceeding involving you and your spouse. If you want to assume that a similar court order to remove someone's guns would occur as you described without being known to the court and it's awareness of representation on both sides and their role in the process for filing to get on the court's docket, then that is your right.

My point remains that rejecting any and every proposed gun regulation on the basis of the assumption that it part of some sinister strategy to take our guns away is not serving us well in the court of public opinion - especially with regulations that appear to be pretty logical. And that we would be better off working toward, then supporting regulations that would be effective while protecting the second amendment rights of law abiding citizens.
ttechdallas is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 11:00 AM   #65
Playa
Pope & Young
 
Playa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lubbock
Hunt In: Coleman
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttechdallas View Post
You have your opinion, I have mine. But you wouldn't have been before a judge had there not been an official legal proceeding involving you and your spouse. If you want to assume that a similar court order to remove someone's guns would occur as you described without being known to the court and it's awareness of representation on both sides and their role in the process for filing to get on the court's docket, then that is your right.

My point remains that rejecting any and every proposed gun regulation on the basis of the assumption that it part of some sinister strategy to take our guns away is not serving us well in the court of public opinion - especially with regulations that appear to be pretty logical. And that we would be better off working toward, then supporting regulations that would be effective while protecting the second amendment rights of law abiding citizens.

You have you opinion, I have my EXPERIENCE! Do you see how one out ranks the other?

Now go see post #22 and try to keep up.

Last edited by Playa; 03-14-2018 at 11:10 AM.
Playa is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 11:03 AM   #66
systemnt
Pope & Young
 
systemnt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Montgomery
Hunt In: South Texas
Default

Fed's are gonna have to hire some serious manpower to search all the rivers, creeks, and lakes in Texas for these weapons.
Texas (bowhunter) has a high rate of unfortunate boating accidents in which firearms tend to get lost.
systemnt is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 11:05 AM   #67
Ironman
Pope & Young
 
Ironman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Wise County
Hunt In: Anywhere
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttechdallas View Post
You have your opinion, I have mine. But you wouldn't have been before a judge had there not been an official legal proceeding involving you and your spouse. If you want to assume that a similar court order to remove someone's guns would occur as you described without being known to the court and it's awareness of representation on both sides and their role in the process for filing to get on the court's docket, then that is your right.

My point remains that rejecting any and every proposed gun regulation on the basis of the assumption that it part of some sinister strategy to take our guns away is not serving us well in the court of public opinion - especially with regulations that appear to be pretty logical. And that we would be better off working toward, then supporting regulations that would be effective while protecting the second amendment rights of law abiding citizens.
Aren't "gun regulations" another way of saying "infringement?"

Obviously you have no clue as to what California is doing, although I have mentioned it several times. If you think the end game is NOT to disarm the citizens, then you would be wrong. It has been said by the democrats that that is exactly what they ultimately want. Why would you be willing to allow that to be easier to accomplish?

Do I think that disarming the citizens are even possible? No I don't, but by passing more gun control, it will not stop gun violence, which is what is being pushed. It will just make it "legal" to strip more citizens of their constitutional rights, whether justified are not. It's that slippery slope thing. Don't be fooled.
Ironman is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 12:38 PM   #68
ttechdallas
Eight Point
 
ttechdallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Colleyville
Hunt In: Atoka County, OK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Playa View Post
You have you opinion, I have my EXPERIENCE! Do you see how one out ranks the other?

Now go see post #22 and try to keep up.
If it makes you feel better to assume anyone who disagrees with you is either clueless or too ignorant to keep up, then more power to you. But I assure you I am neither and I am also very pro 2nd amendment.

The demographics of this country are rapidly changing and with each generation there is a greater percentage of the population with no experience, much less exposure to guns. If you cannot see the shift in public opinion favoring gun control then maybe you need to pay more attention. Right now, the majority are still pro 2nd amendment (even on the Democratic side) even if they support stronger controls. They are not in fear of this hypothetical "they" who are plotting to take our guns away and this argument turns more people away than it moves to our side. It is a losing argument today and will be more so with each graduating class of voter age adults for the foreseeable future.
ttechdallas is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 12:49 PM   #69
Playa
Pope & Young
 
Playa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lubbock
Hunt In: Coleman
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttechdallas View Post
If it makes you feel better to assume anyone who disagrees with you is either clueless or too ignorant to keep up, then more power to you. But I assure you I am neither and I am also very pro 2nd amendment.

The demographics of this country are rapidly changing and with each generation there is a greater percentage of the population with no experience, much less exposure to guns. If you cannot see the shift in public opinion favoring gun control then maybe you need to pay more attention. Right now, the majority are still pro 2nd amendment (even on the Democratic side) even if they support stronger controls. They are not in fear of this hypothetical "they" who are plotting to take our guns away and this argument turns more people away than it moves to our side. It is a losing argument today and will be more so with each graduating class of voter age adults for the foreseeable future.
I never implied you were ignorant and clueless, rather I’ll be blunt, you are naive and maybe a bit dense if you think that compromise is the solution. That is the beginning of the end. And you believe that this will not be abused, though I have given you 1st hand testimony to exactly how court orders of this nature can be abused.

I have explained what viable alternatives are to these regulations, the general public you speak of believe that every disqualifying crime is reported and that current laws are being enforced, and they are t. Additional laws just mean more that won’t be enforced or only penalize those who obey the laws

Last edited by Playa; 03-14-2018 at 12:57 PM.
Playa is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 12:57 PM   #70
Mike D
Pope & Young
 
Mike D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: North Texas
Hunt In: Haskell County, TX
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttechdallas View Post
If it makes you feel better to assume anyone who disagrees with you is either clueless or too ignorant to keep up, then more power to you. But I assure you I am neither and I am also very pro 2nd amendment.



The demographics of this country are rapidly changing and with each generation there is a greater percentage of the population with no experience, much less exposure to guns. If you cannot see the shift in public opinion favoring gun control then maybe you need to pay more attention. Right now, the majority are still pro 2nd amendment (even on the Democratic side) even if they support stronger controls. They are not in fear of this hypothetical "they" who are plotting to take our guns away and this argument turns more people away than it moves to our side. It is a losing argument today and will be more so with each graduating class of voter age adults for the foreseeable future.


There is no way you can be “very pro 2nd amendment” and support something like this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Mike D is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 01:31 PM   #71
J Sweet
Pope & Young
 
J Sweet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: The Woodlands
Hunt In: Leon/Madsion County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by systemnt View Post
Fed's are gonna have to hire some serious manpower to search all the rivers, creeks, and lakes in Texas for these weapons.
Texas (bowhunter) has a high rate of unfortunate boating accidents in which firearms tend to get lost.
ATFE is gonna need a freaking Submarine to recover all of mine out of Lake Conroe.
J Sweet is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 01:53 PM   #72
Clay C
Ten Point
 
Clay C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Conroe
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike D View Post
There is no way you can be “very pro 2nd amendment” and support something like this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
If you have to add in that qualifier before you make a statement, chances are you are not very pro 2A.
Clay C is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 01:54 PM   #73
ttechdallas
Eight Point
 
ttechdallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Colleyville
Hunt In: Atoka County, OK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike D View Post
There is no way you can be “very pro 2nd amendment” and support something like this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Let me re-phrase so it makes it easier to understand my position. I want to preserve our 2nd amendment rights. I do not believe every regulation, such as the one here which apparently even the NRA supports, infringes upon those rights. Every law and regulation has the potential to be abused - including those involving our constitutional rights. We don't fight everyone of them. We fight to make sure they are fairly established and enforced.
ttechdallas is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 02:21 PM   #74
Neck
Ten Point
 
Neck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Danbury, TX
Hunt In: DeWitt County
Default

Death by a thousand cuts.
Neck is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 03:18 PM   #75
GatorBait
Ten Point
 
GatorBait's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Moss Hill
Hunt In: Anywhere my wife lets me.
Default

Every law ever passed by our government has been abused. Look at the passing of the 16th amendment in 1909. The income tax has gone crazy, you can see how off the tracks it has gone. That is because people allowed it to happen. That is what government does when given power, they warp it and grow it to suit their needs.
GatorBait is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2018, 10:58 PM   #76
Thumper
Pope & Young
 
Thumper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Magnolia Texas
Default

The liberals are now pushing gun control to divide the right. This new bill is going to fragment the conservative vote, or at least keep voters home on election day. The school shootings are the perfect anti-gun platform liberals could ever hope to have. This is why the left is fighting so hard to keep the schools from arming the teachers and staff. Arm the teachers and staff you'll stop the school shootings, and stop the current anti-gun platform.
Thumper is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 07:14 AM   #77
systemnt
Pope & Young
 
systemnt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Montgomery
Hunt In: South Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttechdallas View Post
Let me re-phrase so it makes it easier to understand my position. I want to preserve our 2nd amendment rights. I do not believe every regulation, such as the one here which apparently even the NRA supports, infringes upon those rights. Every law and regulation has the potential to be abused - including those involving our constitutional rights. We don't fight everyone of them. We fight to make sure they are fairly established and enforced.
Let me help you.

Mike,
He doesnt understand what a "right" is.
systemnt is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 11:11 AM   #78
ttechdallas
Eight Point
 
ttechdallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Colleyville
Hunt In: Atoka County, OK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by systemnt View Post
Let me help you.

Mike,
He doesnt understand what a "right" is.
It may be worth re-visiting what a right is. Especially as it relates to that proposed and referenced in the original post. What is being described does not infringe on your 2nd amendment rights. Nor is it a violation simply because you fear it could be used unfairly against you or others. That doesn't mean you don't have the right to oppose nor I to support, which given the NRA's apparent support, I see no reason to oppose it.
ttechdallas is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 11:16 AM   #79
SaltwaterSlick
Pope & Young
 
SaltwaterSlick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Default

Then you're blind in one eye and can't see out the other...
This gubment of ours is WAY WAY too BIG. Giving it ANY additional power over individuals for ANY purpose is asinine and crazy.
SaltwaterSlick is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 11:18 AM   #80
Ironman
Pope & Young
 
Ironman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Wise County
Hunt In: Anywhere
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttechdallas View Post
It may be worth re-visiting what a right is. Especially as it relates to that proposed and referenced in the original post. What is being described does not infringe on your 2nd amendment rights. Nor is it a violation simply because you fear it could be used unfairly against you or others. That doesn't mean you don't have the right to oppose nor I to support, which given the NRA's apparent support, I see no reason to oppose it.
The only thing I can say about your post is, you just proved that systemnt's statement was spot on!
Ironman is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 11:27 AM   #81
systemnt
Pope & Young
 
systemnt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Montgomery
Hunt In: South Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironman View Post
The only thing I can say about your post is, you just proved that systemnt's statement was spot on!
Bingo.
systemnt is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 02:54 PM   #82
sir shovelhands
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Houston
Hunt In: Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorBait View Post
The income tax has gone crazy, you can see how off the tracks it has gone.
You must have started paying taxes in the Bush senior years (some of the lowest in history) to believe that. Federal income taxes since Regan have been significantly lower than nearly every year beforehand (with the exception of the first 4 years after the amendment passed, and 7 years during the coolidge and hoover admins).

https://files.taxfoundation.org/lega...ry_nominal.pdf

Take a look at the early 50s. You paid 22% straight out the gate from the 1st dollar you made. And the top tax rate was 91%!!!
sir shovelhands is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 03:09 PM   #83
jjaimes
Ten Point
 
jjaimes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Beaumont,TX
Hunt In: East Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzman View Post
Or vice-versa when a husband is trying to strip his ex-wife of the ability to defend herself.
Haha you never know with Liberals some of those guys are scared to even look at a gun
jjaimes is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 04:13 PM   #84
Encinal
Pope & Young
 
Encinal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Location, Location
Hunt In: Spite of Wife's Complaints
Default

Listen. They can take your kids with a court order and no charges.
Encinal is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 06:22 PM   #85
Playa
Pope & Young
 
Playa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lubbock
Hunt In: Coleman
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Encinal View Post
Listen. They can take your kids with a court order and no charges.
Yep, valid point
Playa is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 07:11 PM   #86
J Sweet
Pope & Young
 
J Sweet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: The Woodlands
Hunt In: Leon/Madsion County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Encinal View Post
Listen. They can take your kids with a court order and no charges.


You are right. There was a case some years back where the parents had taken photos of the kids playing in the bubble bath. Like 2 years old. The Walmart they took the film to for developing reported it to CPS. Kids were taken for a long time and they got registered as sex offenders. In Texas Im pretty sure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
J Sweet is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 08:16 PM   #87
fulmer34
Ten Point
 
fulmer34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Robert Lee, TX
Hunt In: Coke, Runnels, Val Verde counties
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J Sweet View Post
You are right. There was a case some years back where the parents had taken photos of the kids playing in the bubble bath. Like 2 years old. The Walmart they took the film to for developing reported it to CPS. Kids were taken for a long time and they got registered as sex offenders. In Texas Im pretty sure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It was Arizona I believe but pretty much how it went down circumstance wise.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
fulmer34 is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 08:39 PM   #88
Buff
Pope & Young
 
Buff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: AvingerTX
Hunt In: The World
Default

They as in no one will ever take my guns.....

What do you want to bet that there are folks that believe that that very statement qualifies me as being unfit to own fire arms
Buff is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 08:50 PM   #89
Mike D
Pope & Young
 
Mike D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: North Texas
Hunt In: Haskell County, TX
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttechdallas View Post
It may be worth re-visiting what a right is. Especially as it relates to that proposed and referenced in the original post. What is being described does not infringe on your 2nd amendment rights. Nor is it a violation simply because you fear it could be used unfairly against you or others. That doesn't mean you don't have the right to oppose nor I to support, which given the NRA's apparent support, I see no reason to oppose it.


Shall not be infringed is pretty **** clear to me. We collectively have given up a ton of our rights already by capitulating just as you are suggesting.

No one more inch as far as I’m concerned.

And this wouldn’t be the first time the NRA has sold gun owners down the river either. Just because they support it doesn’t make it a good thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Mike D is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 09:14 PM   #90
fulmer34
Ten Point
 
fulmer34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Robert Lee, TX
Hunt In: Coke, Runnels, Val Verde counties
Default

Exactly I've never sent a dime to the NRA, want to know why? They are a lobbying group/organization they will do what they see fit to keep the money flowing in. Gun owners be ****ed. They pass themselves off as our last hope, and have done a decent job. But in my eyes they are equal to a labor union for gun owners. They preach about all the good they do as long as they are collecting dues.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
fulmer34 is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 09:38 PM   #91
ttechdallas
Eight Point
 
ttechdallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Colleyville
Hunt In: Atoka County, OK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by systemnt View Post
Bingo.
Perhaps you should re-read the outline of what is being proposed and enlighten me as to how that infringes upon your 2nd amendment rights in any form or fashion. It doesn’t. It is certainly your prerogative to object to them just as it is mine to support, which I am currently inclined as apparently so is the NRA.

Your comments though remind me why I believe the greatest threat to our 2nd amendment rights isn’t from the left but instead comes from within our ranks with this default argument that any gun regulation must be opposed because it is part of some sinister plan to take our guns away. That anyone who disagrees with you is either flawed in character, intelligence or a closet liberal who supports this plan. That is not a winning argument and pushes away far more people than it wins over.

Who exactly is this nameless, faceless “they” working on this plan to disarm citizens anyway? So powerful they can overrun our democracy, overrule our constitution, and apparently operate secretly within our own government yet not be accountable to its executive or legislative branches.

It isn’t the Republican party. It isn’t the Democratic party. This country faces so many existential threats that not even a liberal whack job like Bill DeBlasio as president, with his equally whacked brother and sister leading majorities in the house and senate would even consider trying to disarm Americans. It would start a civil war, require the military to turn against its citizens and make us so vulnerable to foreign enemies that we might as well just raffle off the keys to the highest bidder.

It isn’t the citizens. Even the majority of Democrats support the 2nd amendment. They just want to keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have them. They don’t give a rat’s rear end about our guns. They don’t even believe there is an objective to take them away, outside some whacko’s on the fringe of their far left.

But keep up the argument, make sure nothing gets done, and insult the intelligence of anyone who disagrees with you, even those who agree with you on the importance of the 2nd amendment but maybe not on a particular issue or position. In 5 years, we’ll see how many more people's support of the 2nd amendment has weakened vs strengthened.

The demographics are already shifting away from us and we need to be winning people over to our side, not demonizing them. Because in 5 years we will be facing more stringent gun controls.

So insult away. I’ve already made a note to myself that it isn’t worth offering a different perspective on most subjects here.
ttechdallas is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 09:40 PM   #92
systemnt
Pope & Young
 
systemnt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Montgomery
Hunt In: South Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttechdallas View Post
Perhaps you should re-read the outline of what is being proposed and enlighten me as to how that infringes upon your 2nd amendment rights in any form or fashion. It doesn’t. It is certainly your prerogative to object to them just as it is mine to support, which I am currently inclined as apparently so is the NRA.

Your comments though remind me why I believe the greatest threat to our 2nd amendment rights isn’t from the left but instead comes from within our ranks with this default argument that any gun regulation must be opposed because it is part of some sinister plan to take our guns away. That anyone who disagrees with you is either flawed in character, intelligence or a closet liberal who supports this plan. That is not a winning argument and pushes away far more people than it wins over.

Who exactly is this nameless, faceless “they” working on this plan to disarm citizens anyway? So powerful they can overrun our democracy, overrule our constitution, and apparently operate secretly within our own government yet not be accountable to its executive or legislative branches.

It isn’t the Republican party. It isn’t the Democratic party. This country faces so many existential threats that not even a liberal whack job like Bill DeBlasio as president, with his equally whacked brother and sister leading majorities in the house and senate would even consider trying to disarm Americans. It would start a civil war, require the military to turn against its citizens and make us so vulnerable to foreign enemies that we might as well just raffle off the keys to the highest bidder.

It isn’t the citizens. Even the majority of Democrats support the 2nd amendment. They just want to keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have them. They don’t give a rat’s rear end about our guns. They don’t even believe there is an objective to take them away, outside some whacko’s on the fringe of their far left.

But keep up the argument, make sure nothing gets done, and insult the intelligence of anyone who disagrees with you, even those who agree with you on the importance of the 2nd amendment but maybe not on a particular issue or position. In 5 years, we’ll see how many more people's support of the 2nd amendment has weakened vs strengthened.

The demographics are already shifting away from us and we need to be winning people over to our side, not demonizing them.
So insulteh away. I’ve already made a note to myself that it isn’t worth offering a different perspective on most subjects here.
Youre free to do whatever you want with your freedoms.
Stay the **** away from mine.
Clear enough for you?
Probably not.
systemnt is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 10:05 PM   #93
JFISHER
Pope & Young
 
JFISHER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Brownwood
Hunt In: BWD
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Encinal View Post
Listen. They can take your kids with a court order and no charges.
true
JFISHER is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 10:29 PM   #94
Playa
Pope & Young
 
Playa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lubbock
Hunt In: Coleman
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttechdallas View Post
Perhaps you should re-read the outline of what is being proposed and enlighten me as to how that infringes upon your 2nd amendment rights in any form or fashion. It doesn’t. It is certainly your prerogative to object to them just as it is mine to support, which I am currently inclined as apparently so is the NRA.

Your comments though remind me why I believe the greatest threat to our 2nd amendment rights isn’t from the left but instead comes from within our ranks with this default argument that any gun regulation must be opposed because it is part of some sinister plan to take our guns away. That anyone who disagrees with you is either flawed in character, intelligence or a closet liberal who supports this plan. That is not a winning argument and pushes away far more people than it wins over.

Who exactly is this nameless, faceless “they” working on this plan to disarm citizens anyway? So powerful they can overrun our democracy, overrule our constitution, and apparently operate secretly within our own government yet not be accountable to its executive or legislative branches.

It isn’t the Republican party. It isn’t the Democratic party. This country faces so many existential threats that not even a liberal whack job like Bill DeBlasio as president, with his equally whacked brother and sister leading majorities in the house and senate would even consider trying to disarm Americans. It would start a civil war, require the military to turn against its citizens and make us so vulnerable to foreign enemies that we might as well just raffle off the keys to the highest bidder.

It isn’t the citizens. Even the majority of Democrats support the 2nd amendment. They just want to keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have them. They don’t give a rat’s rear end about our guns. They don’t even believe there is an objective to take them away, outside some whacko’s on the fringe of their far left.

But keep up the argument, make sure nothing gets done, and insult the intelligence of anyone who disagrees with you, even those who agree with you on the importance of the 2nd amendment but maybe not on a particular issue or position. In 5 years, we’ll see how many more people's support of the 2nd amendment has weakened vs strengthened.

The demographics are already shifting away from us and we need to be winning people over to our side, not demonizing them. Because in 5 years we will be facing more stringent gun controls.

So insult away. I’ve already made a note to myself that it isn’t worth offering a different perspective on most subjects here.
Simply because it is the wrong treatment for the problem at hand. Have guns been in America as long as the white man? Are mass shooting a relatively modern problem, not completely, but it’s rate of occurrence is.

Here, in 3 mins this man sums it all up

http://www.kentuckynewera.com/multim...c34d514e4.html
Playa is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-15-2018, 11:43 PM   #95
Artos
Pope & Young
 
Artos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Deep South TX
Hunt In: Deep South TX
Default

We don't even have any official language to support or fight unless I missed something...as the article is written, it is way to vague & ugly for patriots to stand behind. I'll surrender my life membership to the NRA if they support any legislation that bypasses our liberty. I just don't see them standing behind anything without due process as membership would come unglued.

It's all semantics right now...those so willing to let go of their liberty for perceived public safety need to remember all the pieces were in place to stop most all these mass shootings. Most all of the data that failed to complete the process was in the hands of those you are placing trust to fix. I'm all for any ideas that assist, but not at the expense of any more diluted liberty.

Again, other than the vague article which has no teeth...what exactly are they trying to implement??
Artos is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-16-2018, 01:27 AM   #96
ttechdallas
Eight Point
 
ttechdallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Colleyville
Hunt In: Atoka County, OK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Playa View Post
Simply because it is the wrong treatment for the problem at hand. Have guns been in America as long as the white man? Are mass shooting a relatively modern problem, not completely, but it’s rate of occurrence is.

Here, in 3 mins this man sums it all up

http://www.kentuckynewera.com/multim...c34d514e4.html
No gun control is ever going to stop mass shootings - in schools or otherwise. It is a totally false and ignorant argument to suggest that someone so hellbent on killing people that that they plan it for 6-12 months is going to abandon their plan simply because they can't buy an AR-15 at Walmart.

I never suggested the order as described would prevent mass shootings. But there are a lot of other shootings involving mentally and emotionally unstable people. If a family member is so concerned about the mental state of a fellow family member that he or she fears for the safety of others because of access to weapons, I have no issue making it easier for them to have the weapons temporarily removed as long as an appropriate process is followed.
ttechdallas is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-16-2018, 05:54 AM   #97
Playa
Pope & Young
 
Playa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lubbock
Hunt In: Coleman
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttechdallas View Post
No gun control is ever going to stop mass shootings - in schools or otherwise. It is a totally false and ignorant argument to suggest that someone so hellbent on killing people that that they plan it for 6-12 months is going to abandon their plan simply because they can't buy an AR-15 at Walmart.

I never suggested the order as described would prevent mass shootings. But there are a lot of other shootings involving mentally and emotionally unstable people. If a family member is so concerned about the mental state of a fellow family member that he or she fears for the safety of others because of access to weapons, I have no issue making it easier for them to have the weapons temporarily removed as long as an appropriate process is followed.
Round and round we will go.... In this situation will the court remove all weapons from the home to include knives, tools and sports equipment?

Stop me if you have heard this one, but FBI stats show common household objects are used as weapons for murder almost 2-1.

So your control measure admittedly won’t curb mass murders and per the numbers isn’t the weaopon of choice for domestic/related murders, what have you accomplished, other than drape a “security blanket” over your head?

Did you even watch the video?
Playa is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-16-2018, 08:20 AM   #98
muzzlebrake
Pope & Young
 
muzzlebrake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Euless, Texas
Hunt In: Sterling County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buff View Post
They as in no one will ever take my guns.....

What do you want to bet that there are folks that believe that that very statement qualifies me as being unfit to own fire arms
You don't need any guns as long as you have that 80lb Black Widow
And plenty of arras
muzzlebrake is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-16-2018, 11:46 AM   #99
SaltwaterSlick
Pope & Young
 
SaltwaterSlick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by muzzlebrake View Post
You don't need any guns as long as you have that 80lb Black Widow
And plenty of arras
Agreed! I've seen him shoot! If "they" are hogs, it's even worse!!
SaltwaterSlick is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-16-2018, 11:50 AM   #100
ttechdallas
Eight Point
 
ttechdallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Colleyville
Hunt In: Atoka County, OK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Playa View Post
Round and round we will go.... In this situation will the court remove all weapons from the home to include knives, tools and sports equipment?

Stop me if you have heard this one, but FBI stats show common household objects are used as weapons for murder almost 2-1.

So your control measure admittedly won’t curb mass murders and per the numbers isn’t the weaopon of choice for domestic/related murders, what have you accomplished, other than drape a “security blanket” over your head?

Did you even watch the video?
I've seen that video a dozen times. I've actually shared it. It is spot on. Look, it is easy to diffuse the left's false arguments. They are all about stirring emotion and fear, whatever it takes to get to more on the left mad and/or scared enough to make sure they vote. The NRA does the same. I just got a NRA fund raising call which led with they're coming after your guns.

Others can buy that, I don't. There are two things hard to hide from. First, while the frequency of mass shootings has not increased, they are becoming exponentially deadlier largely due to much deadlier weapons and accessories. Second, there are a lot of gun murders and suicides arising from temporary conditions - depression, disputes, etc. - and access to a gun.

I don't see an issue making certain weapons harder to get or making it easier to keep guns away from people who shouldn't have them. It can save lives without infringing on my rights so I am not sure how it infringes on others. To the average person on the other side, our argument comes across as - if a reg can't prevent every gun related death, then it violates our rights because it "could" be used by a dishonest government to take all our guns away.

That doesn't fly with the average person on the other side. We need a better position and strategy. One that wins people over, not assumes they are the enemy. One way to do that is to be stronger advocates for effective regulations that could actually save lives while working to ensure they are written effectively so they cannot be easily abused.
ttechdallas is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 1999-2012, TexasBowhunter.com