TexasCHLforum.com

This "constitutional carry" argument is wearing me out. I can see both sides as being somewhat right/correct.

tommyg wrote:While I'm about as pro gun as anyone can get, I think that to carry a person should have
to at least demonstrate that He/She has a basic understanding of how to use a gun.

There are people out there that do not know how to load and fire. Licenses are needed classes
and firing tests are still needed

{snip]

With all due respect, I am in total agreement with tommyg above.

OlBill wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:

OlBill wrote:Going back to the Constitution is always a good idea.

Amen to that.

I am not convinced that federal judges should be appointed for life and I also believe there should be definite TERM LIMITS for congressional offices. Other than that....meh.

Both of which I believe would require Constitutional amendments, but I could be wrong.
Meh?

Yes. There have been 27 Constitutional Amendments thus far and at least one more is sorely needed.

'Meh' signals that the rest of it is pretty much okay; however, I'm not really for pushing this constitutional carry thinghy overly far. There's still more of them than there are us and, as you know, the majority rules. I'm perfectly okay with licensed OC and CC.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

OlBill wrote:Going back to the Constitution is always a good idea.

Amen to that.

I am not convinced that federal judges should be appointed for life and I also believe there should be definite TERM LIMITS for congressional offices. Other than that....meh.