TexasCHLforum.com

stroo wrote:I have no problem with gun free zones under certain conditions one being that the party responsible for the zone ensure that it is gun free.

The penalty should be an eye for an eye.

If someone is a theft victim in a gun free zone, the politicians who made the policy should reimburse them.

If someone is injured in a gun free zone, the politicians who made the policy should be injured in kind.

If someone is raped or murdered in a gun free zone...

chabouk wrote:Nobody made Hasan do what he did. He acted alone. If we accept that he was somehow controlled, then we have to accept that Right-to-Life forced Eric Rudolph to bomb abortion clinics. I rejected that: both criminals acted as individuals.

Nobody made the 9/11 not terrorists do what they did either.

The Annoyed Man wrote:argued in the past that Muslims should rise up against the invasion of Iraq/Afghanistan.

The Annoyed Man wrote:He said his family is absolutely shocked that he did these things.

Why are they shocked? He did what he said he was going to do. Rise up against the US military being in Iraq/Afghanistan.

The FBI says it wasn't terrorism. I want to know how was this different than 9/11 in motivation? Both mass murders were Muslims massacring Americans because the Muslims don't like US foreign policy.

ExMarlboroMan wrote:CHL should be an option for military personal , on base or not. They should have the right to defend themselves and not have to wait for a leo to do the job.

What about spouses and civilians who work on base? Exercising your rights guaranteed in the bill of rights should be allowed for everyone. The death and injury toll shows the results of gun control.