TexasCHLforum.com

carlson1 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2019 11:52 am

Txtension wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2019 11:46 am

ralewis wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2019 10:48 am i"m also ok trying increase awareness so that folks feel empowered to make a phone call on somebody they think shouldn't' have access to a gun so the Police can do a welfare check. I'm not settled on the idea of "red flag' laws, but I personally would definitely call the police if somebody i knew with access to firearms was behaving significantly out of the norm.

Sounds like normalizing Swatting gun owners, while sacrificing a good amount of 4th and 5th amendment.

There's nothing wrong with taking somebody's weapons, as long as that person has been convicted first, by a jury. Otherwise red flag laws are just a means for the anti's to weaponize the law/government against people and behavior, THEY, don't like.

This guy calls the FBI over 100’s of times. They didn’t do anything. He is shooting from the second story of his shack, points a gun at his neighbor, and they call 911 and the Sheriff’s Department doesn’t even show up. What else do you want? How many more red flags can you have? This is a case where the Government dropped the ball AGAIN and their answer is to take more of my liberties.

Yup. I think it's crazy how many times we've seen examples where we should have been pretty close to preventing an event. I don't know if it's our reticence to interfere with peoples lives or just not taking things as seriously as we should. Of course, had the FBI or local law enforcement went to this guys house and took his guns away, we'd probably be having the argument her about lack of due process. Its impossible to prove what you could have prevented, only evaluate what happened.

Russell wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:21 pm

ralewis wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2019 10:48 am
As for background checks, LTC folks have that covered as we voluntarily submit to them every 5 years. I can't get too upset by expanding background checks since I have voluntarily done so 3 times here in TX (and multiple times in the military with security clearances.). If i have to pay $25 to get give my son a gun, so be it - maybe we negotiate for a sales tax credit or something to offset.

How do we document that this background check was done? Are you required to hold on to the paperwork now forever, lest you or your son be charged with the illegal transfer of a firearm?

That sounds silly to expect you Mr. Citizen to have to hold on to something so important that it keeps you out of jail. You already had to do the background check with a governmental entity, so let's just let them hold on to it instead. We'll label it as a background check for the transfer of a firearm that way we know that's what it was done for. The background check needs to be for each firearm though, so let's put the serial number for the firearm here so that it doesn't get lost....

Totally not a State-run gun registry. I promise.

yeah so how about a background check card. Or maybe check a box on your drivers license renewal to request a background check. As long as you have an active valid background check you can possess or receive a firearm. Tie the background check to the individual not the firearm.

I do this for my kids school. I don’t need a new background check for every school volunteer event.

I use my LTC this way when I buy a gun.

Russell wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2019 12:21 pm

ralewis wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2019 10:48 am
As for background checks, LTC folks have that covered as we voluntarily submit to them every 5 years. I can't get too upset by expanding background checks since I have voluntarily done so 3 times here in TX (and multiple times in the military with security clearances.). If i have to pay $25 to get give my son a gun, so be it - maybe we negotiate for a sales tax credit or something to offset.

How do we document that this background check was done? Are you required to hold on to the paperwork now forever, lest you or your son be charged with the illegal transfer of a firearm?

That sounds silly to expect you Mr. Citizen to have to hold on to something so important that it keeps you out of jail. You already had to do the background check with a governmental entity, so let's just let them hold on to it instead. We'll label it as a background check for the transfer of a firearm that way we know that's what it was done for. The background check needs to be for each firearm though, so let's put the serial number for the firearm here so that it doesn't get lost....

Totally not a State-run gun registry. I promise.

Slippery slope I know... but I'm a pragmatist. Anyone evaluating the tea leaves should conclude this is the direction we're going, so it seems better to provide constructive suggestions to influence the outcome.

Txtension wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2019 11:46 am

ralewis wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2019 10:48 am i"m also ok trying increase awareness so that folks feel empowered to make a phone call on somebody they think shouldn't' have access to a gun so the Police can do a welfare check. I'm not settled on the idea of "red flag' laws, but I personally would definitely call the police if somebody i knew with access to firearms was behaving significantly out of the norm.

Sounds like normalizing Swatting gun owners, while sacrificing a good amount of 4th and 5th amendment.

There's nothing wrong with taking somebody's weapons, as long as that person has been convicted first, by a jury. Otherwise red flag laws are just a means for the anti's to weaponize the law/government against people and behavior, THEY, don't like.

I as a citizen am aware enough to make a phone call if somebody I know has become unstable and likely dangerous. This is just being observant and taking action same as I would if I heard glass breaking in my neighbors house. This will likely be labeled "red flag", but at some point it's just necessary to identify risk and take action. Not sure what label we end up with, but in all of these cases it seems like there was somebody (or the authorities) who were not surprised somebody went nuts an shot something up.

Oldgringo wrote: ↑Tue Sep 03, 2019 10:08 pm

locke_n_load wrote: ↑Tue Sep 03, 2019 9:18 pm

ScottDLS wrote: ↑Tue Sep 03, 2019 9:16 pm

Oldgringo wrote: ↑Tue Sep 03, 2019 8:25 pm I've never been a proponent of OC; therefore, 30.07 in any form upsets me not a bit.

I’ve never been a fan of revolvers so if Texas were to ban them, I wouldn’t care a bit.

Exactly. Just one more step closer to banning all carry. Normalize banning one, the other doesn't seem so hard to get rid of.

This is 2019, not 1856. I've never, intentionally, gone out of my way to attract attention.

Rightfully, or wrongly, I feel that in this day and time, civilian OC in heavily public places; e.g., shopping, entertainment, religious places, just ain't promoting, nor preserving, our overall 2A interests. YMMV?

I completely agree with Oldgringo here. Whataburger, HEB, Target, and many others with these policies appear to me to be saying we're ok with being agnostic to concealed carry. Doesn't seem that inconvenient to plan for this and just put your shirt over your holster when you go into one of these places. I have never been a fan of the 'lets educate the public' tactics of open carry. The public - even my liberal friends - seems to be mostly ok with Concealed Carry as it's not in their face.

We're fighting a perception problem, and no amount of rational discussion with statistics is going to convince the headline obsessed/political opportunistic class what the reality is. Statistically there is a 0% chance (well, more like 0.002% you are going to be impacted by terrorism and look at what where we are with TSA and overhead introduced with no-fly lists etc.

I just saw the TX Dems are pressing our Gov for a special session on gun violence. It may not happen, but the stage is being set for some serious attempts at legislative 'solutions'. My opinion at this point in time is we deal with the world the way it is and showcase the success of the CHL/LTC program and the complete absence of criminal activity by licensees. Maybe we can actually gain a little for the LTC folks by horse trading expanding Concealed Carry in return for what seems to be the inevitability of at least open carry restrictions -- specifically open carry Rifles.

As for background checks, LTC folks have that covered as we voluntarily submit to them every 5 years. I can't get too upset by expanding background checks since I have voluntarily done so 3 times here in TX (and multiple times in the military with security clearances.). If i have to pay $25 to get give my son a gun, so be it - maybe we negotiate for a sales tax credit or something to offset.

I"m also ok trying increase awareness so that folks feel empowered to make a phone call on somebody they think shouldn't' have access to a gun so the Police can do a welfare check. I'm not settled on the idea of "red flag' laws, but I personally would definitely call the police if somebody i knew with access to firearms was behaving significantly out of the norm.

Seems to be we're better off coming up with some constructive suggestions rather than being in defensive retreat.We're not going to like where this ends up if all we play is the 'shall not infringe' card.