TexasCHLforum.com

HGWC wrote:It appears that Mr Cotton objects the opinions I've expressed in my first few posts here, and he's made it clear that this board isn't a suitable "bully pulpit" for this point of view. I appreciate being able to express my opinion at least for the day. I'll be on my way now. Thanks for the discussion.

I agree with some of your opinions and I disagree with others and that's fine. I disagree with the way you choose to express those opinions and that is not fine. We have very good educational discussions in which varying opinions are expressed, but it's done in such a way that those differing opinions are not belittled, as you have done. Purely as an example, Kevin and I agree on some issues and strongly disagree on some issues, yet I have the utmost respect for him and the way he presents his arguments. You will never find him minimizing the efforts of others. Coming to the board and figuratively thumbing your nose at any opinion that differs from yours is not a way become one of the family.

Chas.

HGWC wrote:So, the point I'd like to make is that I'd like to see Texas laws changed such that the states' recognition that I will keep and bear arms for self defense is only a recognition that I'm a citizen. I don't believe in the concept of tailoring laws to only allow the "good guys" to keep and bear arms. I don't believe in tailoring the laws to keep the "wrong people" from keeping and bearing arms. I believe the recent Heller ruling requires the state to completely re-think it's firearm regulations starting with the basis that "all" people have a right to keep and bear arms. Short of that, what dire interest does the state have to infringe upon that right or to strip that right from all the "wrong people?"

I was responding to this is the part of your post that appears to be arguing that Heller would protect a convicted felon's right to possess firearms. Heller clearly does not.

As I noted, I agree that the "money" provisions (Texas school loans, Texas taxes/fees, and child support) for CHL eligibility should be repealed. If you do a search, you'll find that most TexasCHLforum members agree with this position.

Chas.

The Supreme Court's decision in Heller expressly stated that it cannot be cited as authority to strike down laws that prevent felons from possessing firearms. I agree that the "money" provisions in the CHL eligibility requirements are both unnecessary and violative of the Texas Constitution. Those provisions should be deleted.

Chas.

[i]Heller[/i] wrote:2. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited.
It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any
manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed
weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment
or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast
doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by
felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms
in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or
laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of
arms.