Protecting our 2nd Amendment Rights

[Duck Dodgers]

The Texas House voted today for a Constitutional Carry bill, where if you can legally own a firearm, you can carry it for self-protection. This is a great win for gun rights, and now the bill moves onto the Senate for consideration. Halfway there!

Texas House Passes Constitutional Carry | GOA Texas

 

[bystander]

@Duck Dodgers

I've never owned a gun so I'm not up on the law. I do support the 2nd Amendment wholeheartedly as meaning you can own a gun without being in a militia.

But is there a federal law besides the 2nd Amendment in place today that would require some sort of background check and license or is any and all regulation "... reserved to the states..."

 

[Duck Dodgers]

Lots of Federal laws on guns.

To buy a firearm from a dealer (a gun dealer has a FFL - Federal Firearms License), you fill out a form 4473, which has questions related to criminal background, if you've been involuntary committed to a nuthouse, tossed out of the military (like Slow Joe's son was for being a drug fiend), or a drug addict (also like Hunter and his crack pipe).

Then, the dealer does what is called a NICS (National Instant Criminal Background Check System) that verifies that the buyer has no issues that would prevent them from buying a firearm.

No license on a Federal level to own a firearm, and the Federal government does not grant carry license - those are at a state level. The Texas License To Carry (LTC) allows you to carry in about 35-38 other states or so.

 

[bystander]

Lots of Federal laws on guns.

To buy a firearm from a dealer (a gun dealer has a FFL - Federal Firearms License), you fill out a form 4473, which has questions related to criminal background, if you've been involuntary committed to a nuthouse, tossed out of the military (like Slow Joe's son was for being a drug fiend), or a drug addict (also like Hunter and his crack pipe).

Then, the dealer does what is called a NICS (National Instant Criminal Background Check System) that verifies that the buyer has no issues that would prevent them from buying a firearm.

No license on a Federal level to own a firearm, and the Federal government does not grant carry license - those are at a state level. The Texas License To Carry (LTC) allows you to carry in about 35-38 other states or so.

Cool. I was just wondering about the minefield of a state passing a law that would supplant existing Federal law, meaning the state's legislation would be unconstitutional or arguably so.

 

[Duck Dodgers]

There are no Federal laws on the carry of firearms in non-Federal locations. It is against their law to carry on Federal property, even in the parking lot of a post office. You see, having that sign posted magically keeps bad dudes away - you should try that at home to keep crooks at bay.

So states are free to pass whatever carry laws they like.

Now there is a split in the Appeals Courts as to if there is a Constitutional right to carry a firearm. The 9th says there isn't, while the DC one, and whatever one covers Illinois says there is, to the point that those courts mandated that DC and Ill create a Shall-Issue handgun permit system.

You'd think this would be something that the Supreme Court would want to take up, but so far quiet as a church mouse about it. You know Roberts in pissing himself in fear that it'll be accepted by the Court, and he'll once again have to twist himself into a pretzel and be the subject of ridicule, so as follow the DC Ruling Classes wishes

 

[theiioftx]

The background check asks you more questions that will self incriminate you when you lie than actually prevent you from getting the gun. Of course, criminals and crazy people would never lie.

 

[UTChE96]

Funny how the "believe science" crowd will never objectively review the data that shows gun control laws have been abject failures. A scientific review of the Brady Act showed no reduction in overall homicide or suicide rates. Why are we here 27 years after the Brady Act was implement still talking about background checks? Why are Gun Control advocates never forced to explain why all of their other regulations have failed so spectacularly?

 

[bystander]

In Indianapolis Shooting, a Red Flag That Never Flew

"The case of Brandon Hole appeared, at first, to be exactly the kind of situation these laws were designed to address. Indeed, last March, when Hole’s mother raised alarms about his mental state, the police seized a shotgun from his home. It was never returned.

But a year later, the police say, Hole, 19, shot and killed eight people at a FedEx facility before killing himself, using rifles he had legally purchased not long after that incident in March 2020.

While many details are still unclear, Hole’s case is a sobering example of how even states with widely supported safeguards can fail to prevent dangerous people from obtaining firearms. The laws, experts say, are often used only as short-term solutions. In the days after the shooting, local officials have struggled to explain how a man who was deemed by law enforcement as too unstable to possess a weapon could go on to legally buy one months later.

“Any law is only as good as the people that are enforcing it,” said Brad Banks, a former prosecutor in Marion County, which includes Indianapolis, who is now in private practice. “Does it make sense we took away the gun because he’s too dangerous to have one, but we didn’t take the step to prevent him from going out and buying one the next day?

Red flag laws are in place in more than a dozen states, including Florida and New York. Their conditions vary widely; in California, for example, family members can directly petition to have firearms temporarily seized from their loved ones. But in Indiana, only law enforcement can initiate that process in court."

BUT GO AHEAD AND ATTACK HONEST CITIZENS OVER THEIR GUNS.

 

[Horns11]

In Indianapolis Shooting, a Red Flag That Never Flew

"The case of Brandon Hole appeared, at first, to be exactly the kind of situation these laws were designed to address. Indeed, last March, when Hole’s mother raised alarms about his mental state, the police seized a shotgun from his home. It was never returned.

But a year later, the police say, Hole, 19, shot and killed eight people at a FedEx facility before killing himself, using rifles he had legally purchased not long after that incident in March 2020.

While many details are still unclear, Hole’s case is a sobering example of how even states with widely supported safeguards can fail to prevent dangerous people from obtaining firearms. The laws, experts say, are often used only as short-term solutions. In the days after the shooting, local officials have struggled to explain how a man who was deemed by law enforcement as too unstable to possess a weapon could go on to legally buy one months later.

“Any law is only as good as the people that are enforcing it,” said Brad Banks, a former prosecutor in Marion County, which includes Indianapolis, who is now in private practice. “Does it make sense we took away the gun because he’s too dangerous to have one, but we didn’t take the step to prevent him from going out and buying one the next day?

Red flag laws are in place in more than a dozen states, including Florida and New York. Their conditions vary widely; in California, for example, family members can directly petition to have firearms temporarily seized from their loved ones. But in Indiana, only law enforcement can initiate that process in court."

BUT GO AHEAD AND ATTACK HONEST CITIZENS OVER THEIR GUNS.

Interesting how I got something else out of the article.

 

[iatrogenic]

Interesting how I got something else out of the article.

That the government is run by low IQ folks?

 

[EDT]

 

[Horns11]

That the government is run by low IQ folks?

Well, yeah. @bystander pointed out the portions that feed into the "don't try gun laws because they don't work," whereas I was more drawn to the idea that existing gun laws aren't enforced properly, or in the case of Hole, probably needed to be more harsh.

This is what the NYT does. It finds just enough "both sidesisms" to make sure that people keep reading and getting outraged.

 

[theiioftx]

 

[EDT]

 

[UTChE96]

Well, yeah. @bystander pointed out the portions that feed into the "don't try gun laws because they don't work," whereas I was more drawn to the idea that existing gun laws aren't enforced properly, or in the case of Hole, probably needed to be more harsh.

If a law cannot be enforced properly then is it not fair to say that the law doesn't work? For a law to properly function, it must be effective and enforceable. Red flag laws appear to be very problematic in terms of enforcement.

 

[EDT]

 

[EDT]

 

[iatrogenic]

My two knuckleheads would have a gunfight within two minutes of getting weapons.

 

[Duck Dodgers]

After a huge amount of grassroots efforts of contacting our reps, Texas gun owners have helped pass Constitutional Carry for the state of Texas.

It was a fun process. I went to Austin and testified at both the House and Senate committee hearings on Constitutional Carry. You only get two minutes to speak, so you need to know your speech and have the timing down.

Funniest part was seeing all the gun-grabbing shrills with their "Moms Demand Action!!" t-shirts on, babbling about how they're supporters of the 2nd Amendment, they just don't like guns or allowing people to carry them. Besides, the Capitol is the wrong place to demand action ladies - put on those 25 year old hot pants, suck that gut in if you can, and toddle off to 4th street for that.

After its signed by Gov. Abbott, as of 1 Sep legal gun owners will be able to carry a handgun, concealed or open carry, for self-defense.

It's a fantastic win for gun owners - the biggest victory since the passage of the 1995 Concealed Handgun Law. And a huge defeat for Nanny Doomberg, who spent millions of dollars in an attempt to infest this state with elected leftists, only to both fail at that, and his gun grabbing schemes.

GOA Celebrates Passage of HB 1927: Greatest TX gun rights victory since the Alamo! | GOA Texas

 

[Vol Horn 4 Life]

After a huge amount of grassroots efforts of contacting our reps, Texas gun owners have helped pass Constitutional Carry for the state of Texas.

It was a fun process. I went to Austin and testified at both the House and Senate committee hearings on Constitutional Carry. You only get two minutes to speak, so you need to know your speech and have the timing down.

Funniest part was seeing all the gun-grabbing shrills with their "Moms Demand Action!!" t-shirts on, babbling about how they're supporters of the 2nd Amendment, they just don't like guns or allowing people to carry them. Besides, the Capitol is the wrong place to demand action ladies - put on those 25 year old hot pants, suck that gut in if you can, and toddle off to 4th street for that.

After its signed by Gov. Abbott, as of 1 Sep legal gun owners will be able to carry a handgun, concealed or open carry, for self-defense.

It's a fantastic win for gun owners - the biggest victory since the passage of the 1995 Concealed Handgun Law. And a huge defeat for Nanny Doomberg, who spent millions of dollars in an attempt to infest this state with elected leftists, only to both fail at that, and his gun grabbing schemes.

GOA Celebrates Passage of HB 1927: Greatest TX gun rights victory since the Alamo! | GOA Texas

Great news! I'm curious to know how many concealed carry license instructors were against this. This will be a huge hit to their bank accounts.

 

[Duck Dodgers]

In other states that have gone to Constitutional Carry, the percentage of the population with carry licenses has actually gone up.

Hard to know exactly when you're dealing with a huge group of people, but factors may be:

Many of the people who carry after CC passes are not the ones who would have gone through the license process to begin with, so no net loss of training class participation.

A certain number of people who do carry after CC begin to do it as a habit, and then want the ability to carry when traveling in other states. A Texas license allows you to carry in about 15 other states that you could not without it. Plus serves as the background check when buying a firearm from a gun dealer, so no delay as they call into the NICS background check system to OK the sale.

I don't think instructors actually make a lot off the Texas carry class. They tend to treat it as more a loss leader for getting students for other training classes. Sort of like the state inspection for cars - auto shops don't make much off the 25 bucks or so they can charge, but do it to bring customers in.

The real hit to instructors was when Texas eliminated the every 4 years re-training class, as all 1.5 million of so license holders no longer had to go through that class.

There was a list of about 100 turncoat traitors who signed a document wringing their hands about CC - about a quarter of them were signed up under fraudulent circumstances and didn't want to be on the list. Hopefully their business dries up and blows away.

 

[Duck Dodgers]

Well, yeah. @bystander pointed out the portions that feed into the "don't try gun laws because they don't work," whereas I was more drawn to the idea that existing gun laws aren't enforced properly, or in the case of Hole, probably needed to be more harsh.

This is what the NYT does. It finds just enough "both sidesisms" to make sure that people keep reading and getting outraged.

Actually the NYT is entirely a leftist propaganda arm. This idea that somehow it stirs up controversy to get readers is something from about the 80's.

The daily purpose of it is to advance the leftist narrative, and when it strays off that purpose by accident, its staff dramatically posts mean things on Twatter, immediately causing the leadership to grovel and pledge to do so much better from now on.

As for the Indiana case, the police seized the guys shotgun, and the DA never went ahead with the court proceeding, as the person would have had the opportunity to contest the seizure - we still do, for the time being anyway, have some aspect of due process in America where the executive branch can't seize your possessions just because they want to.

The DA's claim was that he didn't have enough time to get a case going (14 days from seizure) before the firearm would be released to the guy if he lost the case, so the idea was to not file a case, and then if the guy did not himself petition the court for a hearing, the police could keep the shotgun.

To boil things down - police seize a person's property without due process, DA doesn't take it to court, and then others wonder why the subject of the proceedings isn't blacklisted from buying another gun, when no contested judicial proceeding has ever taken place.

I suppose they want both seizure and blacklist of a person's right to buy a firearm just from police suspicion, without even bothering to obtain a court order. Not how things are done in America, at least for now.

 

[mb227]

Great news! I'm curious to know how many concealed carry license instructors were against this. This will be a huge hit to their bank accounts.

There is still a measure of wisdom in having a CHL...likely helps with insurance claims payout AND the legal issues if one has cause to draw down and fire.

 

[Duck Dodgers]

There is still a measure of wisdom in having a CHL...likely helps with insurance claims payout AND the legal issues if one has cause to draw down and fire.

Possibly. It may help make a person look more respectable if they have a license to carry, but ultimately it depends on if the criminal industrial complex decides there's gain to try a person or not.

Remember, if you ever have to use a firearm to defend yourself there will be two assaults on your life. One from the criminal. The other from the criminal justice system. Both will destroy your life for personal gain. Act accordingly, both with the criminal, and the police / detectives / DA who assault you the second time.

 

[OUBubba]

Actually the NYT is entirely a leftist propaganda arm. This idea that somehow it stirs up controversy to get readers is something from about the 80's.

The daily purpose of it is to advance the leftist narrative, and when it strays off that purpose by accident, its staff dramatically posts mean things on Twatter, immediately causing the leadership to grovel and pledge to do so much better from now on.

As for the Indiana case, the police seized the guys shotgun, and the DA never went ahead with the court proceeding, as the person would have had the opportunity to contest the seizure - we still do, for the time being anyway, have some aspect of due process in America where the executive branch can't seize your possessions just because they want to.

The DA's claim was that he didn't have enough time to get a case going (14 days from seizure) before the firearm would be released to the guy if he lost the case, so the idea was to not file a case, and then if the guy did not himself petition the court for a hearing, the police could keep the shotgun.

To boil things down - police seize a person's property without due process, DA doesn't take it to court, and then others wonder why the subject of the proceedings isn't blacklisted from buying another gun, when no contested judicial proceeding has ever taken place.

I suppose they want both seizure and blacklist of a person's right to buy a firearm just from police suspicion, without even bothering to obtain a court order. Not how things are done in America, at least for now.

You lost me at propaganda arm with a concerted agenda yada, yada, yada... left leaning? Yes. Hell they catch hell from the leftists for not being left enough.

 

[iatrogenic]

You lost me at propaganda arm with a concerted agenda yada, yada, yada... left leaning? Yes. Hell they catch hell from the leftists for not being left enough.

Bubba, the inability of libs like yourself to recognize and/or acknowledge the obvious is your biggest weakness and destroys your credibility.

 

[Duck Dodgers]

Who said he ever had any credibility? Anyone who thinks that the NY Slimes is just left-leaning, instead of a propaganda rag, is living in a fantasy world. From when they covered up the genocide in Ukraine by their fellow leftist Stalin, to today, they've always been a propaganda outlet.

Back to the topic of guns. Gov. Abbott should sign all the pro-gun bills this week or early next. In addition to Constitutional Carry, about 6 other gun bills were passed this session, including ones that prevent companies that do business with the state of Texas from boycotting the firearms industry, preventing state and local governments from helping the Federal government enforce any new gun grabbing schemes, and a reform of the the Governors emergency powers to s prevent a future Gov from targeting firearms.

In all, it was a fantastically successful session for gun rights - best one since the 1995 one that created the Concealed Handgun License, maybe even better than that.

It was a humiliating defeat for Nanny Doombers and his Moms Demand Action!!! (isn't that part of the Brazzers Network?) crew of tired gun grabbing shrills. They knew they were going down in flames too - their testimony during the House and Senate hearings was laughable in their predictions of blood in the streets - same rubbish I've heard since Florida went to Shall Issue for carry permits in 1986.

 

[Duck Dodgers]

Full scorecard of 2A bills passed this session in the Texas Legislature, and onto the Governor for his signature.

The Big Ones:

Constitutional Carry, HB1927. Huge progun win, with national implications for gun rights. Texas is now the 21st state to allow for CC, and probably increased the number of citizens eligible for it by 50% due to the large size of this state. A fantastic accomplishment.

Sanctuary State, HB 2622. Defunds and prevents state and local law enforcement agencies from helping the Federal government carry out any new gun control laws.

Suppressor Freedom, HB957. De-criminalizes suppressors in state law, and allows for the possibility of a Texas-only made in Texas suppressor - we'll see if the courts are ready for a challenge to the over-reaching Commerce Clause interpretation.

Emergency Powers and 2A Reform, HB1500. This bill says that in a declared emergency or disaster, NO Governor can prohibit or restrict the sale, transportation, or use of firearms and/or ammunition

2A Anti-boycott, SB19. This is the bill that forbids state agencies from doing business with a company who has a practice or policy of discriminating against a firearm entity.

Hotel Carry, SB20. This bill allows lawful possessors of firearms and/or ammunition to transport the same directly to their hotel room and directly to their vehicle. (The establishment may make a provision for "cased" or "concealed" firearms, so bring your long gun case if you are traveling.)

Carry Options:

Holster Options, SB550. This bill changed the law to allow LTC holders to choose their holster, if they Open Carry.

Holster Options, HB2112. This bill also eliminates the requirement for which holster LTC holders use for Open Carry.

HB 1407. This allows for LTC's to keep their gun in a holster, but no longer requires the owner to keep the gun out of sight while in their vehicle, as long as the firearm and the LTC holder are in the vehicle.

Firearms Carry and Protective Orders:

HB2675. This would allow for expedited LTC's for those under protective orders for the duration of that protective order.

HB918. This bill allows for those over the age of 18 AND in possession of a protective order, to be eligible for a temporary LTC for the duration of the order.

Foster Parents:

House Bill 1387 by Representative Cody Harris allows Foster parents to store their firearms and ammunition in the same locked safe and removes the trigger lock requirement.

 

[OUBubba]

Texas mom accidentally shoots her own child while firing gunshots at roaming puppy
Good job Texas!

 

[Sangre Naranjada]

Maybe she procreated with an Okie and was trying to do the world a favor.