TexasCHLforum.com

Hoi Polloi wrote:

VoiceofReason wrote:OK, I have been exposed. Don’t be too hard on me for using a little sarcasm occasionally. I don’t make a habit of it.

Your rational well considered reply is appreciated.

We're all a little facetious sometimes, aren't we?

Hoi Polloi wrote:

VoiceofReason wrote:I just realized I have been looking at this all wrong. I have been trying to get my wife to go to the range with me, learn to shoot and get her CHL. She won’t do it.

With a Utah license, she won’t have to shoot. I can buy her a 9mm and a 16 round clip, load it for her and tell her “just point it at the BG and keep pulling the trigger until he falls down or the gun is empty”. With a 16 round clip she won’t even have to know how to change clips.

This might solve my problem.

That's all that is needed for car carry. It hasn't seemed to create a rash of improperly trained housewives shooting up the street and innocent bystanders. I know you were being sarcastic, but that method seems to be working out OK for many.

Now I'm not arguing that it couldn't be handled better. But how much needs to be legislated as a governmental requirement and how much can be left to personal responsibility? From a practical standpoint, she's less likely to use it or to be successful in its use without practice. It seems the average citizen having a gun, even without more training, does not lead to concerning situations from a governmental standpoint, though.

Hoi Polloi wrote:There's a lot of talk of potential abuses. What is the reality of the situation? Do we have an epidemic of old, blind, shaking guys getting CHLs and then using them indiscriminately shooting up parking lots and taking out bystanders? Do we have an epidemic of non-resident CHL holders claiming that the reason they violated TX laws and had their licenses revoked was because they didn't know TX law?

It seems like we're shooting at ghosts here. I can understand that the media is doing it, but am surprised that it is gaining ground here.

It seems that those people who are knowledgeable enough about CHLs and who go through the process and then actually get the licenses (there are several threads here saying people regularly do everything except send off for the license) are motivated and self-policing so much so that they are less likely to commit a crime than a police officer. If that's the case, why not promote this and do PR to counter the illogical attack instead of perpetuating this fearmongering of what-if?

You know, the statutes don't exclude extraterrestrial lifeforms from getting a non-resident permit. Who is to say that they can handle guns designed for human hands? Haven't you seen Mars Attacks? I think we should exclude them from concealed carry as well. And we definitely shouldn't offer reciprocity to aliens!

CollinLeon wrote:

VoiceofReason wrote:So when I’m 96, my hands shake, and I can’t see ten feet with thick glasses, I can get a Utah license and carry in Texas? That’s good to know. Yall be safe now.

Well, isn't that better than just painting a Scarlet "V" (for "victim") on your forehead?

For that matter, why shouldn't someone who is confined to a wheelchair and totally blind not be able to defend themselves? I don't seem to remember the Founding Fathers saying anything about age or infirmity in the 2nd Amendment. In fact, I'm pretty sure that they said, "SHALL NO BE INFRINGED". As such, even the requirement to get a CHL is an infringement on our 2nd Amendment rights.