TexasCHLforum.com

OK, this has really gone off topic (and I must admit i contributed to the off-topic portion). Let's get this back to how to improve the CHL program with constructive posts.

I, for one, think the fees should be lower and allow for earlier application on renewal.

chabouk wrote:
Keith B wrote:
chabouk wrote:See where I'm going? The argument is the same. Some of those things are illegal in Texas, while others are illegal in other states. Where do you draw the line? I draw it at personal responsibility and accountability for your own actions, instead of punishing or restricting people based on what someone else might do.
I don't see consistency at all. I am stating that carry while intoxicated should be illegal (as it is) and no different than operating a motor vehicle.
The difference is that having a gun is not the same as operating a gun. To be consistent, you should want people charged with DWI for having car keys in their pockets even if there's no evidence they intended to drive.

OK, one last thing; if I am out with friends, and I know one of them is going to start drinking quite a bit, I take the keys from them before they start so they won't be able to make a bad decision and potentially drive.

chabouk wrote: No matter how impaired someone's judgement and motor skills might be, the legal standard for justification does not change. You assume that people will be more likely to act without justification while intoxicated; I don't share that assumption. Sure, some might; others might have the opposite reaction and be more hesitant because they're worried about their judgement.

My point is this: no matter the degree, when you argue that carry should be prohibited because of how some people might act, you're using Brady logic. Please understand I don't mean that as a personal insult, I'm just trying to get you to see the consistency.

"Because some people might act rashly in {Circumstance X}, no one should be able to carry a gun in {Circumstance X}."
Now, for {Circumstance X}, substitute:
- while intoxicated
- after a single drop of alcohol
- at a sporting event
- at a parade
- at a political rally
- inside a 51% business, even while not drinking
- at church
- in a hospital
- unless a LEO or member of the military

See where I'm going? The argument is the same. Some of those things are illegal in Texas, while others are illegal in other states. Where do you draw the line? I draw it at personal responsibility and accountability for your own actions, instead of punishing or restricting people based on what someone else might do.

I don't see consistency at all. I am stating that carry while intoxicated should be illegal (as it is) and no different than operating a motor vehicle. Just getting behind the wheel intoxicated is illegal, even if you don't move the vehicle. The same should be with carrying. And YES it IS because alcohol or other intoxicants change mood and temperament when consumed in excess. With your argument, it should also be allowable for someone on an LSD trip, a person who is mentally unstable with paranoid Sophronia, known homicidal maniacs, etc. to have a loaded handgun in their possession. Sorry, I just don't buy it. And it is not Bradyesq thinking, just using some common sense because of those that don't or won't. You have the right to be a 2A absolutionist if you want, but I feel there are reasonable restrictions that have to be made. If all people did what was right all the time, then there would not need to be laws at all, and we all know where that would lead us. Just see my sig line on the bottom.

And, I will post no further as I have stated my view and opinion as they stand.

chabouk wrote:
Keith B wrote:Intoxication impairs judgment. Intoxication impacts different people in different ways. Ever seen the guy that gets mean or is '10 foot tall and bullet proof' after a couple of drinks? I have. These people would be very quick in grabbing their gun and potentially using it where they might not when they are not under the influence.
Testosterone impacts different people in different ways. Ever seen the guy that gets mean or is '10 foot tall and bullet proof' when he gets all puffed up over a perceived insult? I have.

Your argument boils down to: Because some people might be inclined to act badly while drinking, all people should be banned from carrying while drinking. It's exactly the same argument used by the anti-gunners regarding carry in general.

That is not what I am saying. Having A drink is not what you were stating. Your statement was that it shouldn't matter if you were slobbering drunk (totally blotto in your words) while carrying as long as you were not driving. I disagree as normal judgment is impaired totally when you are intoxicated. Are you still a mellow drunk? Maybe, but would your decision to draw and shoot, and shoot safely be affected in that condition? I guarantee it would be. (Again, we're talking intoxicated, not the I had one drink scenario.)

chabouk wrote:A gun in your holster is the same as a car in your driveway: until you actually operate it, it doesn't matter how intoxicated you are. And once you do operate it (by driving or firing), you should be responsible for you actions that harm or threaten others. Driving your 4,000 pound weapon while impaired endangers others. Being a passenger in that 4,000 pound weapon while totally blotto and carrying a concealed handgun doesn't endanger anyone.

I totally disagree. Intoxication impairs judgment. Intoxication impacts different people in different ways. Ever seen the guy that gets mean or is '10 foot tall and bullet proof' after a couple of drinks? I have. These people would be very quick in grabbing their gun and potentially using it where they might not when they are not under the influence.

TexasCHLforum.com

Search found 5 matches

Re: How would you improve the Texas CHL program?

Re: How would you improve the Texas CHL program?

Re: How would you improve the Texas CHL program?

Re: How would you improve the Texas CHL program?

Re: How would you improve the Texas CHL program?