• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Pro Open Carry Letter to the Editor Published in the Galveston Daily News

S

SilentKTexan

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Nov 30, 2008
Messages
141
Location
Euless, Texas, USA
imported post

I don't want felons and mentally challenged carrying guns around. But I am not for laws that forbid them from doing so. I'm not a judge nor juror. I know some felons that have been rehabilitated and I would trust them with a gun more than one of my peers that as you said "is worried about where he is going to get his next fix" There may also be a person that has had some mental issue but has obtained counseling and is now considered normal. I'm not saying I can make that determination, but the government surely can't.



The point I am trying to make is that our government is the most inefficient organization in the country. Let society work it out. This government can't even handle what it has on its' plate now, why add more regulation it has to attempt to enforce and add more cases to the already high case load our judicial system has.

People have to rely on the government for far too much. This is not what our founding fathers intended to happen. We are so far from what they had in mind that its scary.
 
S

SilentKTexan

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Nov 30, 2008
Messages
141
Location
Euless, Texas, USA
imported post

Think about this...

Right now police will check your record simply because you are driving a car...

OC with restrictions only gives police a reason to stop and check you out. Wouldn't they have better things to do? More power = more corruption... Just look at the governor of Illinois.
 
R

RETIREDEOD

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
24
Location
, ,
imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:
If a felon may properly be disbarred his rights under color of law then we all can be legally disarmed by sufficiently lowering the bar of felony - even to mere allegations of mental defect or domestic difficulties.
Click to expand...

OK, thanks. I understand your position now. I must say that Idid not expect it though. I personally think that view, though absolutely 100% 2A, is not a view I share (abolishing laws regulating felons/retarded). I do believe some people loose their rights and deserve so, and cannot support the stand that would put (legally) weapons into the hands of felony criminals and those that have mental disqualifications. It is completely counter to what i think makes sense.I do think some laws are necessary, and you think any laws are wrong. I think I'll just have to agree to disagree, sir.

Thank you for stating your position clearly for me. I hope our lack of agreement does not stand in the way of us working together, as we can, to bring OC to Texas and the other states that currently criminalize it.
 
M

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

RETIREDEOD wrote:
Doug Huffman wrote:
If a felon may properly be disbarred his rights under color of law then we all can be legally disarmed by sufficiently lowering the bar of felony - even to mere allegations of mental defect or domestic difficulties.
Click to expand...

OK, thanks. I understand your position now. I must say that Idid not expect it though. I personally think that view, though absolutely 100% 2A, is not a view I share (abolishing laws regulating felons/retarded). I do believe some people loose their rights and deserve so, and cannot support the stand that would put (legally) weapons into the hands of felony criminals and those that have mental disqualifications. It is completely counter to what i think makes sense.I do think some laws are necessary, and you think any laws are wrong. I think I'll just have to agree to disagree, sir.

Thank you for stating your position clearly for me. I hope our lack of agreement does not stand in the way of us working together, as we can, to bring OC to Texas and the other states that currently criminalize it.
Click to expand...
Most states do not require a license to open carry. It is arguable that absent a reason to beklieve that an open carrier is not licensed, police may not constititonally demand to see hislciense, state statute notwithstanding. An emerging case in georgia may provide clues on this question.
 
S

SANDCREEK

Regular Member
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
234
Location
Arlington, Texas, USA
imported post

The laws criminalizing possession of a firearm by those citizens convicted of felony offenses serve only to discourage said possession by those inclined to obey laws.

Violent offenders are not the least deterred by these same laws. Imake no apology for favoring full restoration of all civil rights to anyone deemed fit enough for release back into society from incarceration or institutionalization. If they pose a risk to the public they should not be released. They are free to walk into any store and purchase a baseball bat - one of the deadliest weapons available to anyone of any age. Nothing irks me more than this "felon" issue constantly tossed about like the proverbial end - to end all of every debate over the 2A - as the ultimate offering of the no right is absolute constituency. The right to keep and bear arms is the only enumerated right singled out for treatment under the caveat "shall not be infringed". That's as absolute as it gets.
 
R

RETIREDEOD

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
24
Location
, ,
imported post

SANDCREEK wrote:
The laws criminalizing possession of a firearm by those citizens convicted of felony offenses serve only to discourage said possession by those inclined to obey laws.

Violent offenders are not the least deterred by these same laws. Imake no apology for favoring full restoration of all civil rights to anyone deemed fit enough for release back into society from incarceration or institutionalization. If they pose a risk to the public they should not be released. They are free to walk into any store and purchase a baseball bat - one of the deadliest weapons available to anyone of any age. Nothing irks me more than this "felon" issue constantly tossed about like the proverbial end - to end all of every debate over the 2A - as the ultimate offering of the no right is absolute constituency. The right to keep and bear arms is the only enumerated right singled out for treatment under the caveat "shall not be infringed". That's as absolute as it gets.
Click to expand...

I understand this position also. I was not trying to argue the point of whether or not a felon intent on having a weapon would follow the law or not, as I fully agree they wont. I was however trying to make my point that some laws do make sense to me. I also did not try to introduce a view that you have said keeps comming up as the "end all". It was simply my thoughts on the issue, not having read the million posts in the forum.

Again, I hope that despite our differences in view, we can work together to accomplish OC where it is not permitted now.

Gentlemen, I bid you good evening.
 
S

SilentKTexan

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Nov 30, 2008
Messages
141
Location
Euless, Texas, USA
imported post

RETIREDEOD wrote:
...I was however trying to make my point that some laws do make sense to me...
Click to expand...

Your comment strikes me at the core. This belief is what fuels our lawmakers into getting away with the advances they make on limiting our rights. You add a little bit more they can bite at...all those bites over the past several decades have added up and look at the situation we are in now.

Let the people work it out.
 
C

cccook

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
429
Location
DFW, Texas, USA
imported post

If I understand your question correctly, and my only choices are (1.) anyone and everyone shall have the right to keep and bear arms or (2.) anyone and everyone may have their right infringed, the choice is clear. I choose the unimpinged right for all. Freedom is not free and is often messy. Liberty is not doled out by any government.

The felon and mental invalid will no doubt convict themselves by their own actions. Any law regarding firearms will not impede the inevitable. Nor will restricting the rights of the law abiding.

Oh and, good letter SilentKTexan.
 
F

FreedomJoyAdventure

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
138
Location
Austin, Texas, USA
imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:
If a felon may properly be disbarred his rights under color of law then we all can be legally disarmed by sufficiently lowering the bar of felony - even to mere allegations of mental defect or domestic difficulties.
Click to expand...

Exactly what Frank Lautenberg tried to accomplish with his noxious law.
 
D

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

RETIREDEOD wrote:
Thank you for stating your position clearly for me. I hope our lack of agreement does not stand in the way of us working together, as we can, to bring OC to Texas and the other states that currently criminalize it.
Click to expand...
I cannot 'work together' with Anony Mouse and will not work with one so careless of his history as to write "Lt. CMDR.[sic]" as past XO of a major military installation, he should know better. It does nothing for ones credibility to make a false first impression.

Mark Edward Marchiafava is my respected peer and is in no way an anonymous citizen under a false flag of respect and authority.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA KMA$$
 
S

SANDCREEK

Regular Member
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
234
Location
Arlington, Texas, USA
imported post

Some laws do make sense to me .

" A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep (purchase, own, possess without government persmission)) and bear (carry, wear, transport with them at all times to ensure personal safety- in lieu of a license))arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED".

Theday of reckoning has arrived folks. January 20th a man - who may very well violate the US Constitution by allowing himself to be sworn in (natural born citizen issue)will test thevery foundations of this constitutional republic.

The "reasonable laws" apologists will be working over-time tryingto persuade the otherwise law-abiding among us to "compromise a little" for the "good of all". I'm sorry - when these tyrannts start respecting THE LAW (state & federalconsitutions) - then I might consider signing on.
 
R

RETIREDEOD

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
24
Location
, ,
imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:
RETIREDEOD wrote:
Thank you for stating your position clearly for me. I hope our lack of agreement does not stand in the way of us working together, as we can, to bring OC to Texas and the other states that currently criminalize it.
Click to expand...
I cannot 'work together' with Anony Mouse and will not work with one so careless of his history as to write "Lt. CMDR.[sic]" as past XO of a major military installation, he should know better. It does nothing for ones credibility to make a false first impression.

Mark Edward Marchiafava is my respected peer and is in no way an anonymous citizen under a false flag of respect and authority.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA KMA$$
Click to expand...

I do not know what this "False Flag" is you are speaking of. I've said nothing with regards to a false first impression.

As for the label "Tyrants" for those that think some laws make sense, all I can say is WOW... As a gentleman, I said I hoped that despite our differences we could work together to accomplish OC, and basically got spit in the face, by multiple posts. Your views are a little too hardcore given the fact you think laws prohibiting criminals/mentally ill should be abolished and they returned their guns.

I have been attacked both times I have posted to this forum. I think I understand now that this is not a place for a friendly discussion and debate, but rather a place to attack and slander anyone that does not fully agree with your views.

I've had my fill gentlemen, and as any deviation from YOUR mindset will only cause you to sling more insults and accusations, I bid you farewell.
 
T

Thomas84

New member
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
2
Location
Houston, Texas, USA
imported post

SilentK, I just turned 24 and wish that I had even a fraction of the patience and dedication you have in the face of these coming times.

If a certain "president" brings this country into revolution, I feel it's the best possible way for us to be able to start over, as mentioned before. This revolution may not take to open fields and cannon fire; it may not even bring violence; but we will have our freedom.
 
S

SilentKTexan

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Nov 30, 2008
Messages
141
Location
Euless, Texas, USA
imported post

Thomas84, I've seen too much and have heard too much from elders that I respect and look up too. Many of them don't have enough in them to put up a fight because their time here on Earth is limited. So ifwe don't educateourself and fight for issues like this then who will? The majority of my peers don't have a clue about the world around them, which became very evident to me during my government course in college.

I'd like to run for a senator seat but what it would take to get there is not who I am or what I want to be, even for a short period of time. I would never ask for money in a campaign or accept money. If I win it would only be because of word of mouth and my own words from personal contact.

I'm looking into running for Texas State Rep during the next election because I will not be old enough to fun for a Senate position. State Rep requirement is only 21.
 
B

Blkwdw86

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
40
Location
Gladewater, Texas, USA
imported post

SilentKTexan wrote:
I'm looking into running for Texas State Rep during the next election because I will not be old enough to fun for a Senate position. State Rep requirement is only 21.
Click to expand...
Well hurry up and get old enough to run for Senate and displace Leticia Van de Putte. That nitwit wants to license and register Tasers and stun guns; I doubt if she'll be sympathetic to unlicensed open carry. Or any carry. Of anything.
 
deepdiver

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
imported post

RETIREDEOD wrote:
I have been attacked both times I have posted to this forum. I think I understand now that this is not a place for a friendly discussion and debate, but rather a place to attack and slander anyone that does not fully agree with your views.

I've had my fill gentlemen, and as any deviation from YOUR mindset will only cause you to sling more insults and accusations, I bid you farewell.
Click to expand...
There are over 13,000 members of OCDO and over 320,000 posts. There are many, many times more members who have written nothing negative towards you, insulted or accused you of anything than those who might have done any such thing and many more substantive posts than bickering and sniping. I suggest you agree to disagree with certain people whether or not they reciprocate or just ignore them and instead focus on interactions with the other 13,000 members who have not and probably won't attack you or anyone else although they may disagree with you and engage in a spirited debate.

Lots of really good people here. Some jerks. Some who are just sometimes jerks, intentionally or not, including myself as is most every other human on the planet. Find me a group of 13,000+ people anywhere in the world where this is not true.
 
T

Tex

New member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
111
Location
, ,
imported post

the question of training seems all too easy to solve, education for all children is already required, simply make arms training (pistol and long arm) a requirement for graduation. along with a firm grasp of the constitution, that way we wouldn't have young folks voting for constitutionally ineligible candidates. is this really going to be allowed to happen?:cuss:
 
S

SilentKTexan

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Nov 30, 2008
Messages
141
Location
Euless, Texas, USA
imported post

Tex4OC wrote:
the question of training seems all too easy to solve, education for all children is already required, simply make arms training (pistol and long arm) a requirement for graduation. along with a firm grasp of the constitution, that way we wouldn't have young folks voting for constitutionally ineligible candidates. is this really going to be allowed to happen?:cuss:
Click to expand...

Now that is the best idea of heard yet... But the problem is that schools can't even teach what they are already supposed to be teaching right now. The education system will not improve until these state wide tests are out of the picture.

If grade school teaching was like the college style of teaching I would have learned much more back then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top