Jump to content

Constitutional Carry bill on its way to Governor Abbott’s desk

Armybrat

By Armybrat
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

workswithseed

workswithseed 2037

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

Forget that, wait til you mofos get a load of Mrs. Whiggins carrying. I have no clue what I'm doing. My daddy didn't think women could shoot straight so he wouldn't let me touch his weapons. Now that I can just buy one carry one, I think I'll buy two carry two. One for each hand. Does anyone know if you can use a cell phone and shoot simultaneously?

Go all 1800s and carry these.

https://www.bondarms.com/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13049

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

Go all 1800s and carry these.

https://www.bondarms.com/

Those look little. I would like to get two of those large James Bond type weapons. Maybe black metal? With the little clip thingies so I don't have to worry about bullets scattering around the aisles and making a big mess  if when I drop one. I'm a little clumsy.

No one will mess with me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
workswithseed

workswithseed 2037

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

Those look little. I would like to get two of those large James Bond type weapons. Maybe black metal? With the little clip thingies so I don't have to worry about bullets scattering around the aisles and making a big mess  if when I drop one. I'm a little clumsy.

No one will mess with me.

They shoot shotgun shells though, and Texan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brothahorn

Brothahorn 10085

Posted
Posted
Seriously, it's racist as shit. 


It’s BT level chickenshit.

 


Still won’t happen, but he can keep projecting. Seems like something he worries about more than the Republicans.

And that happened in California. A state that would never consider CC, anyway.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9935

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, workswithseed said:

Seriously, it's racist as shit. 

It is the Law. Reasonable regulation is permitted under the right bear arms. SC will determine what is and what is not reasonable under the Constitution.

Our enemies want civil war in the US. Turn the orientation outward and surprise them.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29402

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Continental Op said:

Per my understanding of this bill, a business owner has to verbally tell people they can't carry guns into their business and can't just post a sign.

If true, that seems like it's purposely designed to create confrontational situations between business owners/employees and patrons. As we've seen over the past year, there are a lot of customers who seem to not understand the rights of private property owners/businesses to dictate what goes on within their establishments or on their property.

It's almost as if they want someone to feel intimidated to not vocalize their opposition when faced with a potentially irrate individual who is armed with a deadly weapon.

I dunno. That seems weird to have been included as a precondition instead of just a simple sign (if true).

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bullneck

Bullneck 18987

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Brothahorn said:

 


It’s BT level chickenshit.



Still won’t happen, but he can keep projecting. Seems like something he worries about more than the Republicans.

 

Who is "he" in your first sentence?  Ronald Reagan?  He's dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bullneck

Bullneck 18987

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Brothahorn said:


He would be Atom. In the words of Let ‘me go Joe, “C’mon man.”

By posting the article were you willing to acknowledge that gun control is racist?

Sometimes gun control is racist.

Gun control is not always racist.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
workswithseed

workswithseed 2037

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

It is the Law. Reasonable regulation is permitted under the right bear arms. SC will determine what is and what is not reasonable under the Constitution.

Our enemies want civil war in the US. Turn the orientation outward and surprise them.  

What is the definition of "reasonable"? It seems very subjective. Hell only rich people are only able to own guns in New York City(4%). I think this great for poor people who usually get attacked by gangs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bullneck

Bullneck 18987

Posted
Posted (edited)
49 minutes ago, Brothahorn said:


I won’t jump to conclusions, so when is it racist and when is it not?

It was definitely racist in the instance I cited.  Wypipo loved their guns but the second they saw the scary dark people enjoying the same rights under the law they decided to dial things back.  Suddenly, nobody gets to carry guns.  

NYC has mandatory sentence for anyone caught carrying a handgun.*  That's the reality of a huge, dense, sprawling metropolis.  I do not believe you can pinpoint a race or ethnic group to "blame" for this.  

 

*

Quote

On December 22, 1984, four teens, Barry Allen, Troy Canty, Darrell Cabey, and James Ramseur, were shot and wounded by Bernhard Goetz on a New York City Subway train in Manhattan.[1][2][3][4]

Goetz surrendered to police nine days later and was charged with attempted murder, assault, reckless endangerment, and several firearms offenses. Initially Goetz was viewed by most as a victim and by some as a vigilante, and he received widespread public recognition and support. A grand jury refused to indict Goetz on the more serious charges, voting indictments only for criminal gun possession. However, public opinion about Goetz wavered due to statements and alleged damaging details of the incident that later were released by the prosecution.[5] Goetz was then re-indicted by a second grand jury on more serious charges. At a later jury trial he was found guilty of one count of carrying an unlicensed firearm, for which he served eight months of a one-year sentence. In 1996, Cabey, who had been left paraplegic and brain damaged as a result of his injuries, obtained a civil judgment of $43 million against Goetz,[6] though to date[when?] Cabey has yet to receive this money from Goetz.

The incident sparked a nationwide debate on crime in major cities, the legal limits of self-defense based on Cabey being shot once or twice, and the extent to which the citizenry could rely on the police to secure their safety.[3] Goetz, dubbed the "Subway Vigilante" by the New York press, came to symbolize New Yorkers' frustrations with the high crime rates of the 1980s. He was both praised and vilified in the media and public opinion. The incident has been cited as a contributing factor to the groundswell movement against urban crime and disorder,[7] and successful National Rifle Association campaigns to loosen restrictions for concealed carrying of firearms.[8]

 

Edited by Bullneck
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted (edited)

I mean if the castle doctrine was ever going to apply to something...I would think a healthy vagina would make a stronger case than a shitty double-wide in Trump country.  

Edited by Lobo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mchookem

mchookem 16224

Posted
Posted (edited)

sigh... so what does this stupid bill say anyway... anybody, anywhere, can carry anything, open or concealed, without any sort of class or certification?

i mean, the above sounds absolutely ridiculous, so i'm assuming it's correct - i honestly don't know, is it?

and i'm a CHL holder, does that even matter anymore?

yeehaw motherfuckers 🙄

Edited by mchookem
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt

DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Js1 said:

Easy to check off the small dick men on this board who need to carry their penis extension anywhere they go. 

Went fishing with a dude once and anytime we got out of the truck to fish a spot he would holster a handgun of some sort. We were in the middle of nowhere.

it was the saddest, most pathetic thing I’ve ever seen.

he was a stay at home dad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PenelopeWitherspoon

PenelopeWitherspoon 19092

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

Anti-liberty statements in support of liberty? What would Ron Paul say? 

I am not sure what I can make out of modern right-libertarian thought. There is a lot of circus surrounding it. The libertarians I knew said - find the wisdom, always. This modern variety is struggling to secure a pro-liberty stance on much of anything using the goobers speaking for you. That has knock on effects. 

This looks like a stunt.

The Second Amendment is there for a reason. And it sets standards. Follow them. 

 

 

Yeah.  Look, I definitely have libertarian leanings.  I always have.  But the people calling themselves libertarians these days, especially those running for office, were completely in support of building a fucking wall.  Sorry, but libertarian economic theory (which is based on the Austrian school) had basic ideas like the free movement of labor and capital.  I.e., a true libertarian would believe that barriers to people moving and working should be minimal.  A wall is counter to that.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PenelopeWitherspoon

PenelopeWitherspoon 19092

Posted
Posted (edited)

Also, I just want to say, Texas if fucking nuts to allow this.  So fucking glad I am no longer in that shithole state.  And I say that as a 5th generation Texan.  The infrastructure is crumbling, and the ledge, allegedly small government, wants to prevent people from life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Fuck Abbott, Fuck Goeb, Fuck Paxton, Fuck Sid Miller, etc...

Edited by PenelopeWitherspoon
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Js1 said:

We should be getting guns off the street, not putting more on them 

You’ve lost this battle 

12 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

“Constitutional” ha, what a joke 

“Affordable” care ha, what a joke

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Armybrat said:

Say, I just noticed my thread has been moved to the CR.

I posted it in the DT, so please mods, move it back there so it will get more readers than this forum.

This is funny because the first handful of posts had me wondering where all the regulars were. Now it makes sense.  

  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, marriedup said:

If I'm walking around anywhere in public and see someone with a gun, I'm not thinking they are there for my protection. I'm thinking get away from this loon and find a cop.

Username checks out, your white privilege is showing etc

  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goredho

Goredho 17349

Posted
Posted

I’m fairly conservative about guns.  I own a lot, have my CHL, shoot regularly, teach my kids to shoot, etc...  I think blanket National or even statewide laws like this generally suck.  What is sensible and appropriate for Austin isn’t for Rocksprings and vice versa.

But I have a question.  People in Texas have been owning and shooting guns since it’s inception.  Why is there a need for the state government to have this law on the books and why is it necessary now?  Why wasn’t this necessary in 1900 or 1953 or any other year on Texas’ timeline?  What deprivation is this restoring?

I’m just trying to understand how this is something other than a meaningless law that is more about politicians checking their pro-2A box than it does with protecting existing or re-establishing lost rights.  But maybe there’s something I don’t see.

If the ledge wants to help gun owners, they will socialize the manufacture and distribution of ammo.  Private enterprise ain’t fucking cutting it, lol.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
immamac

immamac 42519

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Username checks out, your white privilege is showing etc

People really don't like you because of posts like this. He is making a fine point about not wanting to be around guns in general and you are attacking him specifically for absolutely no reason completely unprovoked in a thread about carrying guns. 

This is why people don't like this legislation. People like YOU are in public carrying guns, because "ITS MAH RIGHT". Explain to me when a person who has wanted to carry has been unable to do? There's been a way to do it for a while now. Why isn't everyone a CHL holder? Because 100 bucks is too much and oppressive for what essentially amounts to a license to kill (in defense, if you can prove the threat). 

I'm all for freedoms and whatnot, but this isn't some huge win or even something that needed the focus of the current legislative session. We have crumbling schools, road projects that have spanned decades and still are not complete, property taxes without caps and valuations that are going insane. No publicly funded way for people to travel within the state for cheap. Very little modernization when it comes to anything state government related and we are sitting here spending time voting on whether people can carry guns or not? Like who fucking cares. There is 100 other things way more important than this. That's what is frustrating as a Texan. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fudge Nuggets

Fudge Nuggets 19151

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, midtown said:

I think it will be statistically insignificant. Just like open carry.

I don't expect millons of Texans who spent or would consider spending $400 on a firearm who didn't get a permit to wake up and start carrying

So you agree this was a complete waste of time that could have been spent addressing real issues?

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26284

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

If we are going to have open carry, then the gun should be either holstered (pistol) or slung over your shoulder (long guns). Carrying an AR in the ready position is pure, small dick intimidation tactics, nothing more.

 

This:

slings-1.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

 

not this:

 

0504_North_Carolina_Protest.jpg?alias=st

 

 

Your hand shouldn't be on the grip unless there is an actual emergency going down.

 

 

 

Somebody carrying in a ready position is demonstrating an intent to shoot and should be considered a threat. Period. 

It’s part of my concern about “good guys with guns.” My dad is a good guy with a gun. Carries a Glock 23 all the time. He’s  repeatedly said that if he sees anybody enter a place in a ready position he’s assuming it’s a mass shooter and will drop them. I’d probably just go tell them to stop acting like a moron, but he’s in his 70’s, and for what it’s worth he’s right.

10 hours ago, bolverk said:

Much like the abortion bill that was signed, it appears most Texans oppose this one:

Capture.jpg

https://www.texastribune.org/2021/05/03/texas-voters-legislature-poll/

Sure, but only Republicans have a functional political party capable of representing their coalition. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fudge Nuggets

Fudge Nuggets 19151

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Brothahorn said:


a9113a982597bdf8cf102c0db0806d2e.gif

Hate to tell you but minority gun ownership is on a steady rise. All while more states adapt constitutional carry.


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/apr/05/us-gun-ownership-black-americans-surge

Ronald Reagan as Gov of CA got strict gun control laws passed once the Black Panthers showed up at the statehouse exercising their 2nd amendment rights.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, immamac said:

People really don't like you because of posts like this. He is making a fine point about not wanting to be around guns in general and you are attacking him specifically for absolutely no reason completely unprovoked in a thread about carrying guns. 

This is why people don't like this legislation. People like YOU are in public carrying guns, because "ITS MAH RIGHT". Explain to me when a person who has wanted to carry has been unable to do? There's been a way to do it for a while now. Why isn't everyone a CHL holder? Because 100 bucks is too much and oppressive for what essentially amounts to a license to kill (in defense, if you can prove the threat). 

I'm all for freedoms and whatnot, but this isn't some huge win or even something that needed the focus of the current legislative session. We have crumbling schools, road projects that have spanned decades and still are not complete, property taxes without caps and valuations that are going insane. No publicly funded way for people to travel within the state for cheap. Very little modernization when it comes to anything state government related and we are sitting here spending time voting on whether people can carry guns or not? Like who fucking cares. There is 100 other things way more important than this. That's what is frustrating as a Texan. 

 

I don’t plan on carrying guns in public. 
 

People don’t like me here for a multitude of reasons. When I read the post about calling the cops, I immediately thought of a Chris Rock bit. What’s a big difference between white and black people? When white people call the cops they expect things to get better. Oh thank God you’re here. And that’s true.
 

Poor attempt at humor. I blame the 3 year old waking me up at 6am on a fucking Saturday.  

  • Fuck You 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brothahorn

Brothahorn 10085

Posted
Posted
Ronald Reagan as Gov of CA got strict gun control laws passed once the Black Panthers showed up at the statehouse exercising their 2nd amendment rights.
That was then, I'm talking currently. If Republicans were worried about armed black people, they would be making it harder to get and carry guns. On that point his post missed the mark.

I guess Ronald Reagan would make a great Democrat, today.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85112

Posted
Posted

I have a lot of issue calling it “constitutional” carry instead of permitless carry (i.e. no licensing requirement) since the constitution says WELL REGULATED. 

Didn’t realize a $100 license was such a burden to someone keeping and bearing arms. I guess next is drivers licenses? NO GOVERNMENT GONNA TELL ME I NEED A LICENSE TO DRIVE A CAR

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Walser

Walser 1107

Posted
Posted

This idea is bad.

Take open carry. We didn't need it. I rarely see anyone open carrying. But I see a metric fuckton more 30.06 signs that went up with the new 30.07s. Thanks a lot, assholes.

Should have just left original CHL law in place, although I didn't agree with all of the restrictions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NotActuallyALonghorn

NotActuallyALonghorn 4968

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Js1 said:

I have a lot of issue calling it “constitutional” carry instead of permitless carry (i.e. no licensing requirement) since the constitution says WELL REGULATED. 

Didn’t realize a $100 license was such a burden to someone keeping and bearing arms. I guess next is drivers licenses? NO GOVERNMENT GONNA TELL ME I NEED A LICENSE TO DRIVE A CAR

Would it be a burden to vote?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tx 3 putt

tx 3 putt 76401

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Walser said:

This idea is bad.

Take open carry. We didn't need it. I rarely see anyone open carrying. But I see a metric fuckton more 30.06 signs that went up with the new 30.07s. Thanks a lot, assholes.

Should have just left original CHL law in place, although I didn't agree with all of the restrictions.


all those signs are useless now ? 

people must be told verbally they can’t open carry ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chooky

Chooky 13302

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

Went fishing with a dude once and anytime we got out of the truck to fish a spot he would holster a handgun of some sort. We were in the middle of nowhere.

it was the saddest, most pathetic thing I’ve ever seen.

he was a stay at home dad.

The only way for you to redeem yourself for fishing with this guy is to pick him up again and carry a fish around in a shoulder holster without ever explaining why.

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Longhorn_Fan68

Longhorn_Fan68 33843

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, Lobo said:

Welp, Wal-Mart just got a helluva lot more adventurous to visit.  

Hence why i never go there

14 hours ago, Lobo said:

Can a woman trying to enter an abortion clinic open fire on protestors?  

I sure hope so. Let them meet their god early. It's what they want

Link to comment
Share on other sites
workswithseed

workswithseed 2037

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Js1 said:

I have a lot of issue calling it “constitutional” carry instead of permitless carry (i.e. no licensing requirement) since the constitution says WELL REGULATED. 

Didn’t realize a $100 license was such a burden to someone keeping and bearing arms. I guess next is drivers licenses? NO GOVERNMENT GONNA TELL ME I NEED A LICENSE TO DRIVE A CAR

I see, we should put a poll tax since you can probably pay for it.

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...