TexasCHLforum.com

nightmare69 wrote:

flintknapper wrote:

(d) "Criminal street gang" means three or more persons having a common identifying sign or symbol or an identifiable leadership who continuously or regularly associate in the commission of criminal activities. - See more at: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/txstatutes/ ... yshfZ.dpuf

^^^^^^^^^^^
Could be pretty tough to prove.

Issue we have is there is no defenition of a sole "gang member" nor is it a crime to be one.

Yes Sir, pretty much my point.

I am not against pro-active law enforcement...to the extent it can reasonably prevent crime and does not infringe upon rights.

We would all love to see less crime and/or the potential for it. But in some cases...we are simply forced to be reactive. At that point, I believe harsh penalties and less plea bargaining might be the more useful tool.

Keep doing what you can.

(d) "Criminal street gang" means three or more persons having a common identifying sign or symbol or an identifiable leadership who continuously or regularly associate in the commission of criminal activities. - See more at: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/txstatutes/ ... yshfZ.dpuf

^^^^^^^^^^^
Could be pretty tough to prove.

Well I think we both know there is a propensity for mis-use there. IF they can pass a background check and are for the most part lawful then we don't get to pick and choose who can carry. IMO, that is as it should be.

MPA requires no instruction, background check or licensing, so quite a different deal. Frankly, I was a bit surprised it passed with some of the restrictions it has.

I guess I fall on the side of favoring harsh penalties/sentences for violators, more than onerous restrictions limiting who can carry/own weapons.