View Poll Results: Which petitioning State will turn Gold first?

Voters
26. You may not vote on this poll
  • Florida

    9 34.62%
  • South Carolina

    1 3.85%
  • Oklahoma

    5 19.23%
  • Texas

    10 38.46%
  • Arkansas

    1 3.85%
Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Who turns Gold next?

  1. #1
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Who turns Gold next?

    Texas - Florida - Oklahoma - South Carolina - Arkansas

    Which do you think will be the first to turn Gold?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510
    I voted for OK, but AR is neck and neck, with FL also showing strong.

    TX and SC will be the last to fall. TX might not be last, but it definitely won't be first.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    I heard a discouraging report on TX, something like tens of thousands of signatures on a petition which the state legislature completely ignored. Yeah, it's a big state, but when's the last time that many people in TX signed a petition? See you next election, you anti-representatives...

    I've some doubts about S. Carolina, too, which still seems to be struggling with the idea of allowing any non-Caucasian to walk the streets while openly carrying a firearm.

    Arkansas, well, I have an attorney who did quite good in some ways, but still failed to perfect when it comes to enforcing a rather upfront and simple divorce decree, and a judge who apparently is driven by little else than the wind blowing from the opposing attorney's lips, as she's yet to enforce a SINGLE iota of the decree which she, herself, signed.

    Let's just say with a justice system in such a serious and injurious state of disarray, I'm not holding my breath on Arkansas becoming the next state to demonstrate a glimmer of hope with respect to respecting our Constitutional rights.

    I think Florida stands the best chance of coming in second, as from what I gather, both the voters as well as the legislature, is fed up with the reduction of their own crime stats coming in a distant second as compared to the reduction of other states' crime stats who've decided to fully respect our the Second Amendment's prohibition against any infringement on the right to keep and bear arms.

    Ok, Oklahoma? I think you're the sleeper, here. You've long been a state with your finger on the pulse of the nation, and generally respective, if not hands off, on people's rights. To date, that seems to have served you well, but I don't think you want the criminals fleeing from other recent OC states to come flocking to yours.

    Half of my kin are from Oklahoma, and I've been there, and through there, many times. I actually like the place, and danced a whirling dirvish when my Mom sold her third of a bunch of acres south of Oklahoma City a few years back. It's not so much that I wanted to live there as it is that I would have had an option to do so. As the land was as yet undeveloped (farmland, except for a dilapidated acre plot), I could have easily built a beautiful tornado-proof home/shelter for actually less (a lot less) than what the average same-sq ft home price is going for (I'd been tweaking the plans since 1983).

    Unless another house landed on it, of course. :rollseyes:

    Rule #1: Don't EVER sell land, especially in a selfish pitch for an ocean cruise during the last 10 years of a very long, happy, and fulfilled life... Over time, that land will only become more valuable, and that's something the pics from the ocean cruise just don't cut it for me and my kin which must survive the kin that sold it for a freakin' cruise! It's a little hard to "live off the land" when the land you expected to live off was sold out from underneath you to pay for a freakin' round the world cruise.

    How many kin do you suppose 140 acres would support? Hmm??? I'm thinking it would support more than we actually had in line to inherit the plot, but as of a couple of years ago, that part of my inheritance became wind.

    Seriously, folks - this is not a rant against what happened in my family. It's a warning to prevent the same from happening in yours. Land, especially arable land, is scarce. Developers would have you believe that it's only worth $x an acre, but if that were true, they wouldn't be offering that price to you (they're in it for the money, not to "take it off your hands.")

    Hang onto it for all it's worth, which is considerably, potentially vastly more than any stated value.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  4. #4
    Regular Member OldCurlyWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    912
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    Ok, Oklahoma? I think you're the sleeper, here. You've long been a state with your finger on the pulse of the nation, and generally respective, if not hands off, on people's rights. To date, that seems to have served you well, but I don't think you want the criminals fleeing from other recent OC states to come flocking to yours.

    Half of my kin are from Oklahoma, and I've been there, and through there, many times. I actually like the place, and danced a whirling dirvish when my Mom sold her third of a bunch of acres south of Oklahoma City a few years back. It's not so much that I wanted to live there as it is that I would have had an option to do so. As the land was as yet undeveloped (farmland, except for a dilapidated acre plot), I could have easily built a beautiful tornado-proof home/shelter for actually less (a lot less) than what the average same-sq ft home price is going for (I'd been tweaking the plans since 1983).

    Unless another house landed on it, of course. :rollseyes:

    Rule #1: Don't EVER sell land, especially in a selfish pitch for an ocean cruise during the last 10 years of a very long, happy, and fulfilled life... Over time, that land will only become more valuable, and that's something the pics from the ocean cruise just don't cut it for me and my kin which must survive the kin that sold it for a freakin' cruise! It's a little hard to "live off the land" when the land you expected to live off was sold out from underneath you to pay for a freakin' round the world cruise.

    How many kin do you suppose 140 acres would support? Hmm??? I'm thinking it would support more than we actually had in line to inherit the plot, but as of a couple of years ago, that part of my inheritance became wind.

    Seriously, folks - this is not a rant against what happened in my family. It's a warning to prevent the same from happening in yours. Land, especially arable land, is scarce. Developers would have you believe that it's only worth $x an acre, but if that were true, they wouldn't be offering that price to you (they're in it for the money, not to "take it off your hands.")

    Hang onto it for all it's worth, which is considerably, potentially vastly more than any stated value.
    You would have been welcome.

    Of course undeveloped land far enough out from town can be had for less than $500/acre if you really work at it. It can easily be found from $800-$1,000/acre.

    I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do those things to other people and I require the same of them.

    Politicians should serve two terms, one in office and one in prison.(borrowed from RioKid)

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    FL isn't even attempting to go for Gold. They're going for Green with a Suspicion-less stop and ID on demand clause, to boot. It also throws in a requirement for all firearm sales to go through NICS.

    New Jersey with Palm Trees. Those caveats in the Bill eliminate more Rights in exchange for a mildly augmented Privilege. I say it's a crappy trade that sets us back several steps in the broader context of Rights, while pretending to take a step forward with OC.

    If all you care about is carrying a gun where it can be seen, and are willing to give up actual Rights to get that... It's a lot like giving up freedom for safety, wouldn't you say? Pay, beg for permission, be treated like a child molester for life, have no 4th or 5th Amendment protections anymore, and no more private transfers, just so you can show your gun to people...

    At least with FL's current situation, while no OC, we can still do private transfers without calling NICS and we still have a 4th and 5th Amendment... If HB 234 passes, we'll lose those in favor of an state-appointed only-one's privilege to OC...

    Not worth it. Not even close.

  6. #6
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lebanon, VA
    Posts
    676
    Quote Originally Posted by ixtow View Post
    FL isn't even attempting to go for Gold. They're going for Green with a Suspicion-less stop and ID on demand clause, to boot. It also throws in a requirement for all firearm sales to go through NICS.

    New Jersey with Palm Trees. Those caveats in the Bill eliminate more Rights in exchange for a mildly augmented Privilege. I say it's a crappy trade that sets us back several steps in the broader context of Rights, while pretending to take a step forward with OC.

    If all you care about is carrying a gun where it can be seen, and are willing to give up actual Rights to get that... It's a lot like giving up freedom for safety, wouldn't you say? Pay, beg for permission, be treated like a child molester for life, have no 4th or 5th Amendment protections anymore, and no more private transfers, just so you can show your gun to people...

    At least with FL's current situation, while no OC, we can still do private transfers without calling NICS and we still have a 4th and 5th Amendment... If HB 234 passes, we'll lose those in favor of an state-appointed only-one's privilege to OC...

    Not worth it. Not even close.
    Actually, SB 234 does not affect intrastate private sales. Lines 159 through 166 that prescribe a NICS background check only apply to out-of-state long gun sales. This language is intended to enable Florida residents, like residents of many other states, to purchase long guns through out-of-state FFLs by providing that the Florida state background checks do not apply to out-of-state FFL transactions that go through NICS. Because federal law requires FFL sales to nonresidents to comply with the laws of both the state in which the transfer occurs and the transferee's state of residence, the current Florida law does not permit out-of-state FFLs to sell or transfer long guns to Florida residents.

    SB 234 doesn't make anything in Florida law more restrictive than it is now. It allows carrying at all colleges & universities, repeals the private school carry ban (which affects many churches that have their own schools on site), legalizes long gun purchases at FFLs in other states, and legalizes OC for all CWFL holders. While I wouldn't mind more (e.g., repealing more of the "locations off limits," abolishing the redundant state background checks for FFL transactions, "gold star" OC (not to mention full right to carry), etc.), SB 234 is a decent increment of progress that everyone who is pro-gun should be supporting . . . then return for more.
    James M. "Jim" Mullins, Jr., Esq.
    Admitted to practice in West Virginia and Florida.

    Founder, Past President, Treasurer, and General Counsel, West Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.
    Life Member, NRA

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    I'd like to think so, but I've lived here too long to think it won't be taken wildly out of context.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Maryland will turn "Gold" sometime after Pyongyang (North Korea) adopts Vermont-style Constitutional Carry, I predict...

    Of course, right before that happens, there will be snowcone vendors in Hades, Al Gore will admit the whole Global Warming thing was just a big joke, and Dick Cheney will have a normal, human pulse and a soul...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  9. #9
    Regular Member rotorhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    862
    The better poll question is which "Gold" state will actually act like one for once?

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    I was trying to get a head's up on who was really paying attention....

    Which states are even trying to be Gold as opposed to Green? Does anyone even know? Yet the voting has occurred...

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,558
    Texas
    Last edited by zack991; 01-05-2011 at 04:30 PM.
    -I come in peace, I didn't bring artillery. But I am pleading with you with tears in my eyes: If you screw with me, I'll kill you all.
    -Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.
    Marine General James Mattis,

  12. #12
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Quote Originally Posted by rotorhead View Post
    The better poll question is which "Gold" state will actually act like one for once?

    Or which states should be downgraded from Gold to Green.

    My state--NC--is a case in point...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by ixtow View Post
    I was trying to get a head's up on who was really paying attention....

    Which states are even trying to be Gold as opposed to Green? Does anyone even know? Yet the voting has occurred...
    Not Colorado, apparently. Too many liberals have moved here from California in recent decades. Spoils the voting for legislators and governor.

    If we can just unlock the state supreme court's locked decision, we'd probably return to gold status.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Little Axe, Oklahoma
    Posts
    137

    Going Gold

    Hopefully us in Oklahoma. Depends on this new governor. If she signs the constitutional carry that will be great and we will be gold. If she signs the licensed open carry although a step in the right direction it will only make us silver.
    Right now were bronze with licensed concealed carry. At least were able to defend ourselves. We have a great law enforcement here but they are a minimum of 5 minutes away. That makes them after the fact. When it comes to protecting yourself it is left up to you.

  15. #15
    Regular Member rushcreek2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs. CO
    Posts
    924
    Sticking my neck out a bit- predicting TEXAS as the next 14 K GOLD winner - as strange as that may seem given the conventional "wisdom" that OC is "illegal" in Texas.


    The preamble of Article I (Bill of Rights) of the Texas Constitution states:

    That the general, great, and essential PRINCIPLES of LIBERTY AND FREE government may be RECOGNIZED and ESTABLISHED , WE DECLARE :

    Section 23-
    THAT EVERY CITIZEN SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS IN THE LAWFUL DEFENSE OF HIMSELF OR THE STATE, BUT THE LEGISLATURE SHALL HAVE POWER BY LAW TO REGULATE THE WEARING OF ARMS WITH A VIEW TO PREVENT CRIME.

    ( personal commentary on Article I, Section 23)

    WE (THE PEOPLE OF TEXAS) DECLARE: (what Article I, section 23 REALLY states)

    That the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of himself or the State is hereby RECOGNIZED as a PRINCILPLE of LIBERTY, and is to be forever PRESERVED under the FREE government herein established. WE (THE PEOPLE OF TEXAS) further recognizing the threat that human criminal endeavor presents to public health, safety, and morals hereby grant LIMITED power to the Legislature to provide for such regulation of the wearing of arms that PREVENTS, REDUCES, or demonstrates EFFECTIVE DETERENCE to CRIME. Whereas the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in the LAWFUL DEFENSE of himself or the State constitutes the first line of DEFENSE, and DETERENCE against criminal conduct, nothing in this section shall be construed in such a manner as to empower the Legislature to disarm a peaceful, and orderly citizen.


    Respecting the above INTENT of the PEOPLE expressed in Article I , Section 23 of the Texas Constitution:


    A proposal to amend Title 10, Chapter 46 of the Texas Penal Code to insert after :

    Penal Code Chapter 46. Weapons.

    Penal Code

    Title 10. Offenses against public health, safety, and morals.

    Chapter 46. Weapons

    the following:

    " Under the provision of Article I, Section 23 of the Texas Constitution whereby the people of the State of Texas have granted limited power to the Legislature to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime, nothing in this section shall be construed in such a manner as to empower the Legislature to disarm a peaceful, and orderly citizen."

    Such a qualification provision for CONSTITUTIONAL application of Chapter 46, would pretty much set Texas on a path to picking up the "Gold".

    Is it conceivable that 51 % of the 111th Texas Legislature could agree to this ?

    Interestingly this proposal involves the insertion of only " 23 " words at the beginning of the statute, perhaps a fitting reference out of respect for Section 23.
    Last edited by rushcreek2; 01-07-2011 at 03:01 PM.

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    I put my money where my mouth is.

    I have land in TX.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510
    Quote Originally Posted by ixtow View Post
    I put my money where my mouth is.

    I have land in TX.
    Me too. I live in Texas. But I wouldn't bet a plugged nickel that Texas will be the next to turn Gold. I wouldn't even bet they'll be next to legalize licensed OC.
    Last edited by KBCraig; 01-15-2011 at 06:24 AM.

  18. #18
    Regular Member dedeye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    Me too. I live in Texas. But I wouldn't be a plugged nickel that Texas will be the next to turn Gold. I wouldn't even bet they'll be next to legalize licensed OC.
    one can only hope!

Posting Permissions

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