TexasCHLforum.com

Provide us an example of one place on the internet you can have respectful considerate discussions with anti-gun people? They aren't capable of it.

You have a good point. We all like to be on extreme sides anymore.

Look - I am who I say I am. I have a slingshot, a straw and some restaurant napkins. I like shooting as a hobby and believe that my chances of defending myself and family are better with weapons in the house.

Maybe I am the 'loaded liberal' but I can assure all of you I hate the Clinton's as much as anyone here. Even have and read the Hitchen's book 'No one left to lie to'.

I think we are better off understanding each other so I am sticking around.

montgomery wrote:

TheFriscoKid wrote:

1911 Raptor wrote:i Think we have an anti in our midst.

Would a photo of my guns clear the air ? A recent target ?

No sir. You made it quite clear that this is not your fight. If you are not willing to stand and fight, then you are part of the problem. And that IS the problem.

I have a life, loved ones, people that I love and love me. A lot to live for and a lot of life lived. The only thing I'd kill or die for would be to protect my wife and son.

Guns are a part of my life, they are not my life.

Here's the thing - the changes coming are going to happen regardless of what we debate and divide upon.

I've spent $3000 on G&A since Valentine's day in anticipation of those changes.

One thing I find astonishing within this thread is those that bury their heads in the sand and label others as trolls or liberal gun grabbers instead of staying focused on the topic or confronting ideas, opinions and facts they don't agree with.

Many of these same people are the brave 'fight to their death cold dead hands' advocates that become cowards at the mere whisper of an idea that confronts their current perceptions.

This forum would benefit - we would benefit - from having more liberals and democrats and anti-gun people come in and have respectful considerate discussions not with the expectation that either side will change the others mind but from the benefit of understanding the other side and then being able to create strategies and compromises that allow us to keep our guns and allow the majority of Americans to feel safe again.

I believe a good guy with a gun is the only thing stops a bad guy with a gun. But that doesn't address the root cause. What we need to do is try to prevent the number of bad guys with guns before they even have a chance to kill 10 or 20 or 50.

Chaparral wrote:

TheFriscoKid wrote:

Is everyone here a 'cold dead hands' advocate ?

“Single issue voter” might be a kinder term.

Hilarious. When will CHL have 'likes' ? Instead of

1911 Raptor wrote:i Think we have an anti in our midst.

Would a photo of my guns clear the air ? A recent target ?

Again and again people keep taking the discussion to the extreme and inflaming passions when this is just a simple clear case of the far majority of people fed up with school shootings, mall shootings, concert shootings, spurned lover shootings, post office shootings, business shootings and they want people that are mentally dangerous to not have access to guns.

No one wants to take yer guns, yer AK and AR, yer Glicks, yer Glocks - not even my awesome FiveSeven.

They want (90% of Republicans and 79% of NRA members) to prevent the mentally ill from purchasing guns.

You will have to pry my guns out of my cold, dead hands, you gun grabbing liberal pretending to be one of us.

Your entire post qualifies you as incomprehensibly deranged but when you can come to the conclusion that I'm a 'gun grabbing liberal' ----well, that only exemplifies the depth of your inability to exhibit any critical thinking at all.

You think gun grabbers come into a forum like this trying to get a better understanding of the armor-piercing laws in Texas first and then decide to go subversive ?

Good luck wrapping your brain around that kind of logic.

Dangerously mentally ill. A threat to themselves or others.

Not depressed, not just the blues, not even anti-social or emo or religious extremist of any flavor... but dangerously mentally ill. A threat to themselves or others.

It is human nature to be lazy and scared. That is what tyrants have counted on all throughout history.

It's not being 'lazy or scared' - it's being strategic.

No one here, no group of people here are capable of winning against the govt. During the revolution it only took a few rifles and a few good men. What is your 5,000 acre hillbilly compound going to do against an army equipped with tanks, blackhawks and warthogs?

It's common sense to live to fight another day. It's also common sense in every day life and in nature.

Although the argument has gotten sidetracked - the main idea is give up worthless concessions like "the mentally ill should have easier access to guns" before much more restrictive regulations are forced upon us.

Way too many people here are seeing this as an us - them thing. Lib vs Con. Fox News vs NY Times, etc.

We have an easy out - give up the nut cases and gun rights will be left alone.

Another article trying to make it clear.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/201 ... tings.html

Hopefully the smart guys at the NRA will see the writing on the wall.

Nothing here that I see that threatens gun owners like me.

A majority of Americans blame Congress and President Donald Trump for not doing more to prevent mass shootings, a new Washington Post/ABC News poll finds.

The survey -- conducted in the wake of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, that left 17 people dead -- also finds that significantly more Americans believe mass shootings in the United States are due more to mental health issues than inadequate gun laws.

Sixty-two percent of respondents said Trump is not doing enough to prevent mass shootings and 77% say Congress is doing an inadequate job on the issue.

Among those polled, 57% said mass shootings in the United States were more of a reflection of problems identifying and treating people with mental health problems, while 28% blamed "inadequate gun laws." Nine percent blamed both equally. Across party lines, 77% of individuals polled said the Parkland shooting could have been prevented by more effective health screening treatment.

Police documents described the confessed shooter, Nikolas Cruz, as suffering from mental illness.

Some 58% of those polled said stricter gun control laws would have prevented the Florida shooting. Among party lines, 86% of Democrats and 57% of independents said stricter gun control would have prevented it, but only 29% of Republicans said the same thing.

There was no rise in support for a ban on assault weapons compared to two years ago. In addition, 42% of respondents said the Florida shooting could have been prevented if school teachers were allowed to carry guns.

The Washington Post/ABC News poll was conducted from February 15-18 among a random sample of 808 adults reached vial cellphone or landline with a margin of error of plus or minus four percentage points. Among those surveyed, 31% identified as Democrat, 24% as Republican and 40% as independent.

Everyone will be lying about their guns and perjury is tough to prove. I have guns today. I don't have any tomorrow. So no worries about that.

I've lived 55 years - haven't "needed" a gun yet.

US is typically ranked out of the top 10 and as far back as mid 30s in personal freedom.

Cato has US at 17th.

https://www.cato.org/human-freedom-index

Lastly - you - me - we - are the majority ! What do you think it means that 90% of Republicans think the mentally ill shouldn't have weapons?

This is my singular argument. We need to get behind this before a whole bunch of junk is going to be forced upon us.

montgomery wrote:The question you have to ask yourself is are you willing to fight and die to keep your firearms?

No. Neither fight nor die. I am also not willing to kill the parents, spouses, brothers, and children of others to keep my guns which would also be a reality or possibility should 'confiscation' occur.

Most everyone here is pro LEO - 'cold dead hands' means those are the same guys that will be coming to do their jobs when and if the order is ever given. I'm sure they won't enjoy it either even if it goes peacefully and well. But if the tide shifts and the laws change, then that is the will of the people and in a democracy that's the way the ball bounces.

I wouldn't be the first to turn mine in. I'd be willing to wait, I'd be willing to hide and bury my guns and ammo until the day I absolutely need them or until things change. I'd be willing to lie to authorities.

To a lot of people this may make me a 'bad' patriot. But like most people I am concerned about protecting my wife and child first and foremost and I can't do that very well if I am going to engage the govt. in a shootout. I am certain I will lose that fight 100% of the time.

Gun rights are important but they come second to my family, my life and my ability to protect and provide. Protect doesn't always mean 'stand yer ground n fight' it often means avoid the fight and get the hell out of Dodge.

I've had the fortune of spending many years outside of America and can think of 100s of places where we could live safely and have natural deaths.

With all of that written, I don't think it will ever come to that. What might happen is stronger checks, stronger 'check ups', higher requirements for storage, safety and training and absolute restrictions and better systems and safeguards on the mentally ill (dangerous).

I am not liberal in this regards and discussing 'mental health' - this is what a high majority of NRA Conservatives (79%) and Republicans (90%) believe are needed.

jason812 wrote:

TheFriscoKid wrote:
Is everyone here a 'cold dead hands' advocate ?

Yes

Jason, no wife or children ? No other passions or hobbies ? Travel? Anything ?

Really - honestly willing to have a shoot out where the certain result is your death? Regardless of how many you'd take with you ?

TreyHouston wrote:HERE IS THE REAL DEAL!!!!

If you want to stop high schoolers feom dying. Raise the driving age to 25! In 2013, CARS KILLED 2,524 teens. Thats 2.5 Florida shooting PER WEEK! 55% even admit to not wearing seatbelts all the time, geez thats high!

2,524 teens die a year

https://www.edgarsnyder.com/car-acciden ... .html#2013

Same stats with texting and driving - more killed each year since 9/11 than on 9/11. Where's that war?

But to take to an extreme - cigarettes, alcohol, fast food, junk food, sugar, white flour, and my Dr. says bacon but the hell if anyone is going to take bacon from my cold dead hands.