TexasCHLforum.com

tallmike wrote:

DoubleActionCHL wrote:

Rex B wrote:Further, if she did indeed leave a loaded firearm unattended in an area secured from same because of mentally unstable people having access, then she is not the sort of CHLer we need to support.

I agree with this in principle, but I believe we have to look at the bigger picture. Anti-gunners will use ever opportunity to take away our rights. The nurse may have done something stupid, but stupid isn't necessarily illegal. I believe it's in our best interest as a whole to be sure she doesn't become a negative statistic.

I will not support someone that I believe was wrong just to be "sure she doesnt become a negative statistic" thats just silly and supporting every fool with a CHL detracts from our argument.

We need to be reasonable and selective in our support and only then can we expect the opposition to be reasonable and selective too.

I dont care if the other side will or wont be reasonable and selective, I will do what I think is right not what my opponent is doing.

You can support her in the sense that (hypothetically) she did nothing illegal. Our rights as CHL holders are in question here. Anything she might have done that wasn't necessarily smart isn't relevant if it wasn't illegal. You can call her stupid all day long, but we need to separate the irresponsible from the illegal. She probably does deserve to be fired, sanctioned, or otherwise chastised by her employer for her actions. This is a completely separate issue from the legal questions.

Our lack of support for the legal issues because we believe she behaved irresponsibly (even though her actions were within the confines of the law) may result in a loss, and a legal precedent that could have far-reaching implications.

Rex B wrote:Further, if she did indeed leave a loaded firearm unattended in an area secured from same because of mentally unstable people having access, then she is not the sort of CHLer we need to support.

I agree with this in principle, but I believe we have to look at the bigger picture. Anti-gunners will use ever opportunity to take away our rights. The nurse may have done something stupid, but stupid isn't necessarily illegal. I believe it's in our best interest as a whole to be sure she doesn't become a negative statistic.

Russell wrote:

Liberty wrote: It is now in the DA's hands he is charged with either letting her go, or pressing forward and trying to prove that she did indeed receive proper notice. Unless she recieved notice in a prior discipline action I doubt she ever received proper written notification.

I doubt she received proper written notification as well, however it would not surprise me if she did. Hospitals have hordes of lawyers, one may just have put the correct notification in her employee handbook.

It's certainly possible, but I doubt it.

Furthermore, the law isn't vague. It requires that the language be 'identical' to that included in PC 30.06; not close, not similar, not meaning the same thing. The hospital need only produce this language and prove she was notified, otherwise they have no case. I'll be interested to see what the Chief comes up with. I also find it interesting that he's going after a CHL holder so aggressively. Does anyone know anything about the police chief? Does he have a record of being anti-CHL or anti-gun for the private citizen?