Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: TMPA says that HB910 has nothing to do with your rights

  1. #1
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318

    TMPA says that HB910 has nothing to do with your rights

    http://www.tmpa.org/news-article/tmp...rry-amendment/

    "The supporters of the amendment – even members of the Legislature – have misquoted and misinterpreted the U.S. Constitution in their efforts to garner support for what at best can be described as bad public policy. They have repeatedly and incessantly tried to argue a question of gun “rights.”"
    ...
    "This bill has nothing to do with gun rights. HB 910 attempts to amend the current gun-licensing process in Texas. Which means it is a licensing issue – not a rights issue."
    Advocate freedom please

  2. #2
    Regular Member HPmatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    1,597

    TMPA says that HB910 has nothing to do with your rights

    Blue Line doesn't like citizens exercising their rights and reminding officers for whom they work. Cop orgs didn't refer to how 45 other states cope with such 'lawlessness'. Next Legislature needs to pass unlicensed OC so the 96% Texas non-felons can exercise their 2A.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by HPmatt; 05-31-2015 at 02:35 PM.
    “Men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them"
    -Thomas Hobbes 1651

  3. #3
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    You know, it's always funny when the statists make these sort of outrageous assertions that contradict other false assertions that they otherwise hold, and they don't realize it.

    The assertion has generally been, of course, that the CHL satisfies 2a obligations and therefore all of the other regulations on RKBA in Texas are permissible. If HB910 has "nothing to do" with the right to keep and bear arms, then neither does the CHL on which HB910 builds, which means that the state is in obvious outright violation of the 2a (and section 29 of article 1 of TX Constitution) with their prohibition(s). The CHL "allowance" doesn't save them from this violation, since by their own admission HB910 (and therefore necessarily the underlying CHL), has "nothing to do with" your rights.

    So, it would seem that, even besides being obvious to anyone that understands what their rights actually are, it isn't quite so easy to dismiss that open carry or this legislation has something to do with the rights of Texans. The statists in general would indeed need to drastically modify, if not completely scrap and replace, many other false assertions they hold to make this new assertion consistent.

    Oops. Guess they need to hire a new lie writer, cause their current one done screwed up.
    Advocate freedom please

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    796
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    You know, it's always funny when the statists make these sort of outrageous assertions that contradict other false assertions that they otherwise hold, and they don't realize it.

    The assertion has generally been, of course, that the CHL satisfies 2a obligations and therefore all of the other regulations on RKBA in Texas are permissible. If HB910 has "nothing to do" with the right to keep and bear arms, then neither does the CHL on which HB910 builds, which means that the state is in obvious outright violation of the 2a (and section 29 of article 1 of TX Constitution) with their prohibition(s). The CHL "allowance" doesn't save them from this violation, since by their own admission HB910 (and therefore necessarily the underlying CHL), has "nothing to do with" your rights.

    So, it would seem that, even besides being obvious to anyone that understands what their rights actually are, it isn't quite so easy to dismiss that open carry or this legislation has something to do with the rights of Texans. The statists in general would indeed need to drastically modify, if not completely scrap and replace, many other false assertions they hold to make this new assertion consistent.

    Oops. Guess they need to hire a new lie writer, cause their current one done screwed up.
    NRA Life Member

    "The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    453
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    http://www.tmpa.org/news-article/tmp...rry-amendment/

    "The supporters of the amendment – even members of the Legislature – have misquoted and misinterpreted the U.S. Constitution in their efforts to garner support for what at best can be described as bad public policy. They have repeatedly and incessantly tried to argue a question of gun “rights.”"
    ...
    "This bill has nothing to do with gun rights. HB 910 attempts to amend the current gun-licensing process in Texas. Which means it is a licensing issue – not a rights issue."
    These Police organizations don't recognize the right to carry as a Constitutional right. The DPS teaching material in the CHL class states the permit is a privilege not a right! The original permit system was created many years before McDonald v Chicago which incorporated the Second Amendment to apply to the states. Before then it was recognized that through the Fourteenth Amendment the First, Fourth and Fifth apply to the states, but not the Second.

    That changed. The teaching material should reflect that.

    See this from Oyez.org:

    Facts of the Case
    Several suits were filed against Chicago and Oak Park in Illinois challenging their gun bans after the Supreme Court issued its opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller. In that case, the Supreme Court held that a District of Columbia handgun ban violated the Second Amendment. There, the Court reasoned that the law in question was enacted under the authority of the federal government and, thus, the Second Amendment was applicable. Here, plaintiffs argued that the Second Amendment should also apply to the states. The district court dismissed the suits. On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed.

    Read the Briefs for this Case
    Question
    Does the Second Amendment apply to the states because it is incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges and Immunities or Due Process clauses and thereby made applicable to the states?

    Argument
    McDonald v. Chicago - Oral Argument
    McDonald v. Chicago - Opinion Announcement
    Conclusion
    Decision: 5 votes for McDonald, 4 vote(s) against
    Legal provision: U.S. Constitution, Amendment 2
    The Supreme Court reversed the Seventh Circuit, holding that the Fourteenth Amendment makes the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense applicable to the states. With Justice Samuel A. Alito writing for the majority, the Court reasoned that rights that are "fundamental to the Nation's scheme of ordered liberty" or that are "deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition" are appropriately applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court recognized in Heller that the right to self-defense was one such "fundamental" and "deeply rooted" right. The Court reasoned that because of its holding in Heller, the Second Amendment applied to the states. Here, the Court remanded the case to the Seventh Circuit to determine whether Chicago's handgun ban violated an individual's right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.

    Justice Alito, writing in the plurality, specified that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment right recognized in Heller. He rejected Justice Clarence Thomas's separate claim that the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment more appropriately incorporates the Second Amendment against the states. Alito stated that the Court's decision in the Slaughterhouse Cases -- rejecting the use of the Privileges or Immunities Clause for the purpose of incorporation -- was long since decided and the appropriate avenue for incorporating rights was through the Due Process Clause.

  6. #6
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    More people are waking up but not enough. People seem to believe what they want to be true. There also seems to be a tendency to treat everything as isolated events with a concomitant inability to generalize, as opposed to a healthy reluctance to "paint with a broad brush". Police officialdom are seldom the good guys. They're the people telling women to get rape whistles and stuff like that. Police culture is full of rot and we need to stop electing their confreres into office unless they've been thoroughly vetted. If someone was a DA or sheriff, etc they are guilty until proven innocent. In today's Amerika, they're heroes until they do literally commit forcible felonies.

    Anything less is A-okay. http://truthvoice.com/2015/05/palm-b...-course-party/
    “If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? ” -Bastiat

    I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Big D
    Posts
    1,059
    I view the new OC and CC as steps toward normalizing guns in public. It is a natural next step or two from the CHL rules from a decade ago. We should not expect nor want to dive in head first when people are largely not familiar with guns. Most people these days did not grow up around them and don't know how to handle them, what not to do with them, etc.
    In states where seeing guns has been the norm for a century or more view these things differently from those in a state like Texas where, contrary to the public perception, guns have been largely absent from the public square for that century.

    We don't have more rights today, but once the talking heads and fearmongers see that there isn't blood in the streets, the last step to constitutional carry will be a small step. In out case, since the only permissible restriction on gun in the state constitution is "with a view to prevent crime", all that needs to be done is to show that carrying and wearing guns does not significantly increase crime. We then can restore the rights we have but are not allowed to exercise. That's how I see it.

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    453
    Agree Nonameisgood! The education aspect of Open carry is probably the biggest reason for it!!!! Normalize the sight of guns! They are like cell phones or any other tool you carry on your belt. They all have their own functions.......

  9. #9
    Regular Member HPmatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    1,597
    Agree on education and exposure.. Had dinner w friends tonight. Topic of OC and Campus Carry came up. All college grads, 3 from Tx, 3 grew up in Wi/Oh. Of 6, two (women) were questioning sanity of Legislature.

    Went over the facts - Tx is one of only 6 states w/o OC; just a few weeks ago in SMU area there was driveby shootings on street w $5M homes; Campus carry could help prevent a VA Tech on any Texas college campus; and facts that states like MD and IL - gun control is not adhered to by criminals. I think a few eyes bugged when my wife said I carry. Told them I wasn't carrying in their house, but do CC.

    One of the guys (Wi) asked me about learning shoot shotgun...Look forward to introducing him to sporting clays, then 'how about we shoot a few 22lr and 9mm while there'....then 'how about we get the girls to come'...Heading in the right direction 4Sure[emoji1]


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    “Men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them"
    -Thomas Hobbes 1651

  10. #10
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,886
    Quote Originally Posted by HPmatt View Post
    Agree on education and exposure.. Had dinner w friends tonight. Topic of OC and Campus Carry came up. All college grads, 3 from Tx, 3 grew up in Wi/Oh. Of 6, two (women) were questioning sanity of Legislature.

    Went over the facts - Tx is one of only 6 states w/o OC; just a few weeks ago in SMU area there was driveby shootings on street w $5M homes; Campus carry could help prevent a VA Tech on any Texas college campus; and facts that states like MD and IL - gun control is not adhered to by criminals. I think a few eyes bugged when my wife said I carry. Told them I wasn't carrying in their house, but do CC.

    One of the guys (Wi) asked me about learning shoot shotgun...Look forward to introducing him to sporting clays, then 'how about we shoot a few 22lr and 9mm while there'....then 'how about we get the girls to come'...Heading in the right direction 4Sure[emoji1]


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    excellent segue towards introduction of non-shooters to the shooting sports...congratulations on your dialogue and effort.

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Big D
    Posts
    1,059
    I guess I should add that the guy with the gun always wants to be the only one with a gun. Luckily, we don't allow the people with the guns to make those decisions for us.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •