TexasCHLforum.com

crazy2medic wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 6:48 am The part I don't grasp is the leadership of the cities and States permitting this stuff, go back and read about past rioting and looting, the State Police or the National Guard was called up given order to stop the violence, yes rioters and looters were shot and killed and that's when the violence ended! These "protesters" have a right to peacefully protest but they are destroying businesses, attacking innocent people on the street and at their homes, seems that's not going to work out well for mayors and governors! So why are they allowing it?

Call me a conspiracy theorist but I think this is a two pronged plot.
1. BLM is not about racial justice. I would send you to their website to read "what we believe" but they have taken a lot of that down. They are about the overthrow of the U.S government as it stands today. I think that BLM, like Al Sharpton before them, is using fear and extortion to destabilize the country. The "woke" mayors might initially be trying to gain political points but we've seen the protestors turn against them too. For me, that is a sure sign that the politics in this are not D and R or even C and L/P. I don't think that they give a rip about President Trump Their target is his supporters. The BLM stuff started way before 2016 and they have managed to exploit a couple deaths in a way that they couldn't exploit the first few deaths like Trayvon Martin that they tried to us. I do believe that there are some people with legitimate concerns but they are and will continue to be over-showed by those with bigger plans.
2. The other part is the second shoe of the mask mandates. "They" (different from BLM) have scared the public out of its mind over Covid. I hear all of the time that people are willing to do just about anything, including attack their neighbors, to make the pandemic go away. Those behind the rioting would like to do the same thing so that people are so scared that they will accept anything to make the rioting stop. This is a larger audience than Trump supporters. There is a large swath of the public, I believe, that is so fed up with politics that they aren't going to get evolved or vote. They just want all the politics stuff to go away so they can go on with their lives. Like the mask attackers, they will apply pressure and maybe even accept Marshall law in order to quell the violence. When people get scared enough, they will grasp at straws.

The reason this might not work and even backfire is that there are more people who are starting to see through all of this. They all might not like our President but they may get to the point where they hate the other side more. We are about the find out how possible that is.

srothstein wrote: ↑Thu Sep 17, 2020 7:27 pm

philip964 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 17, 2020 5:36 pm https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/cop ... -minority/

Protestors in PA demand that if the attacker is a minority, police should not be permitted to defend themselves.

I think the original article was written as a condemnation of the protests by putting their apparent desires in wording. The desire was never stated by protesters and is just a conclusion based on the incidents provoking riots. I would say they also don't like citizen self-defense either.

And that says everything any reasonable person would need to know about the leftist movements.

The protestors might not be in favor of citizen defense but Lancaster County, where the city of Lancaster is located, had 10% concealed handgun licenses when I applied for my non-res permit there. I suspect that the number hasn't dropped since. I plan to renew mine next month and will ask. I might need an armed guard to get to the court house to apply since I cannot carry in that building.

crazy2medic wrote: ↑Sun Sep 13, 2020 4:49 am

E10 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 12, 2020 11:52 pm

philip964 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 12, 2020 10:56 pm https://unitedwildlifeunion.com/2020/08 ... is-racist/

It is cultural appropriation for a European to own a dog.

Two thoughts come to mind:
1. That the stupidest thing I have ever read, and I got through only the first couple paragraphs. I’m sure it got stupider, but I could stand it no longer.
2. Why not let the dogs decide? I know what answer my beagle would give.

that is Stupid on a level rarely seen in an Educated Society!

Here is the scary part. Read the bio. There is no mention of a job. He spends his time providing his propaganda to the schools. IMHO, the leadership in our schools is strong enough to resist being used as a conduit for this trash.

Rafe wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 12:49 pm

Flightmare wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 11:02 am

Rafe wrote: ↑Sun Aug 30, 2020 10:44 pm And Wisconsin Deep Blue Gov. Tony Evers has told President Trump he's not welcome in Wisconsin. Trump is scheduled to visit Kenosha this Tuesday, and Evers wrote him to ask him to stay away. Evidently Evers feels the protests are cathartic, and that they are helping Kenosha "overcome division and move forward." Evers' letter to Trump said, "I am concerned your presence will only hinder our healing."

Yeah. Right. All the Dem-run cities allowing violent assaults and rioting to take place unchecked in their streets are doing a gosh-darned super-swell job of moving forward and healing.

Sounds like it comes straight out of the movie "The Purge".

Oh. Snap. I never thought of that. The Purge's "New Founding Fathers" were purposely represented as extreme-right white nutjobs...Hollywood would never have bought the script, otherwise. But flip the "New Founding Fathers" to be radical leftists and antifa Marxists, and you just painted a pretty chilling analogy of the seemingly incessant riots and violence. Next step: "To protect the cities we all live in while still giving the oppressed, the demeaned, and the overlooked the opportunity to release their just and righteous anger, for 24 hours each year..." Once they've confiscated the guns from lawful citizens, they could even use the supply as a lending library for the poor and downtrodden who can't afford their own firearms but want to exercise their right to Purge.

Er, anybody want to discuss a bunch of us chipping in to buy a couple thousand acres with a defensible perimeter, good underground water supply, and arable land?

You had me at "confiscated guns" I'll put money on the table that says that is not going to happen. They could pick us off one at a time but any mass effort is not going to end well, if they can even get anyone to attempt to carry it out. Given that the same people are the ones who are anti-police, I cannot imagine the wide-spread support for the confiscation concept among the police forces who serve the places where most of the guns actually are.

As far as the arable land, i'm in.

Boxerrider wrote: ↑Sun Aug 30, 2020 7:37 am So Biden's idea is to defund the local police and reorganize a force under federal guidelines and control, with leadership that is farther away and more deeply shrouded in bureaucracy? Exactly how can anyone expect that to make things better?

That hasn't been his history. I don't believe that HE has an idea and, like the rest of his party, he is following first whatever they collectively think will get him elected and afterward whatever they think will keep them in power. They have completely abandoned any idea of actually helping the people that they are supposed to represent. Let's review the overall approach
1. Turn over parts of the population to mob rule. The gangs are the political power and they are at constant war with each other.
2. Stop prosecuting many crimes. Dallas has the $75 limit for property crimes but others are worse - they don't bother with any of them
3. Release prisoners that are already convicted in large numbers.

The police are just a portion of this. It is clear that the intent is to create an environment where people are scared and will cede any amount of power that the Democrats want in order to try to regain a feeling of safety. I think it may backfire on them. Guliani was elected in NYC because of a backlash as was Richard Nixon. We are paying today for the excesses that Nixon put into policing policy.

LTUME1978 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 16, 2020 6:20 pm This belongs to the local and state governments to deal with and they need to do that soon. One of the bright spots of these actions is that it may lead to a lot of folks that used to vote blue voting red out of fear for their safety. If that happens, post election all of this should be brought to an end quickly. If not, we may all get to exercise our Second Amendment rights.

I wish that I believed that it was possible for the red vote to happen. I'm not sure that the voters in some of the "afflicted" areas can connect the dots that well. I've talked to some of these kind of people. I spoke with one mother who at least said that she would rather see her kids shot than to have to pick up a gun and defend them. There is no way to have a rational conversation with people who think that way. I'm convinced that no coming election is going to solve anything and that that we very well may be defending ourselves afterward. The protests that we've seen to date might be mild in comparison to what is coming.

From the Times article

For some Times staffers who opposed publishing the essay, Bennet's resignation was a positive sign, indicating that the paper takes their concerns seriously and is committed to applying more care and _______ to the op-ed process.

So the inmates run the asylum.

powerboatr wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 3:55 pm

this conversation sure makes you wonder, I personally would not "want" to drive over a person/s, BUT if these person/s are putting me or my family or occupants in my vehicle in danger and driving over or through the "offenders" is the only option for my survival then it will be so. then maybe after in a safe place i would call 911 and give some details as what happened as not to be considered a hit and run. Same applies to my personal protection device that uses high speed projectiles . glad we live out in sticks, no way would i go to dallas or austin right now. self preservation is high on my list

As it is on mine. I purposely didn't post the specific locations but I assure you that it is 30 miles from downtown Dallas. I guess that was part of my point. I NEVER would have expected protestors in this residential area. The intersection where this took place is really wide and there is nothing for blocks except 1 story structures. Other that big grocery store, the rest are small store front businesses. The fact that they were bringing the protestors in to this areas says that it can happen anywhere. There is an Interstate about 4 miles away.

03Lightningrocks wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 10:22 am

chasfm11 wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 5:44 am But the video I had seen left no drive-way option. The cars were pinned on all sides and with the protesters in front.

My answer is based on being blocked in by vehicles and unable to drive away. Of coarse one would drive away if not blocked in. The person he brought up, that was dragged from the vehicle, was blocked in by cars and could not drive away.

I'm sorry if I created confusion. I had my own situation which was different than the video that I compared it to. There were far fewer protestors for me than in the video. I didn't see exactly how the protestors in my case were impeding traffic but they were. The cars ahead of me took a while to move after the light changed and I could see the protestors moving back toward the curb. The protestors in the video didn't to that. I agree that there was no-drive away option in the video. And if the protesters in my case had attempted to continue to block the cars in front of me, I wouldn't have had a drive away option either.

The Annoyed Man wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2020 11:32 pm Your car packs more impact energy than any handgun. If someone is trying to smash their way into my car, they’re going to get run over....end of story. You might be able to shoot your way out of a deadly confrontation with one or two people, but you can't shoot your way out of a confrontation with more people than you have bullets in your gun. I have no clue if it’s the right answer from a legal perspective, but I’d rather explain to a judge that I ran over an attacker while trying to evade a mob, than explain why I stopped in the middle of that mob and stared shooting....EVEN IF it seemed like the only option I had left at the time. And by the way, this is a powerful argument for having a dash cam running, to bolster your defense in court, in case you do have to use your front bumper to punt someone into the next county.

I am by no means against using a handgun for self defense, but it may not be the best tool for the job when you have a 2-3 ton vehicle at your disposal, and you’re safely inside of it.

To be clear, my situation was one where, by the time I got to the intersection, no one was blocking my way or even attempting to do so. That had not been the case less than a minute before for the drivers 10 cars ahead of me. If the path forward is my only path out of the situation (middle of 3 lanes headed in my direction and cars behind me) I'll try to take that.

But the video I had seen left no drive-way option. The cars were pinned on all sides and with the protesters in front. Now the energy of the car is useless. And had the protestors continued to stop the cars in front of me, that was my exact situation. I wasn't going to run over anyone because there was no room to move the car in any direction. It is under those circumstances that the next level starts.

I've pondered getting a dash cam. But as others have pointed out in links, the facts may not matter in legal cases. The angle on any video can be critiqued as not fully representative of the situation.

Thanks for all of the links to other situations from other posters.

To underscore my concern about how quickly things escalate, here are some pictures from Austin

I've personally protested at the same spot and never felt the need to tear down the lights or spray paint the building. I'd bet that a large percentage of the pictured protestors don't even know the name of the man who died. This has turned into nothing more than an opportunity to move closer to anarchy.

On balance, I'm not sure how deadly force would play into the situation. I've resumed carrying more spare mags.

I drove through a protest today. I didn't realize what it was until I was through it because I happened to catch a turn lane on a green light. But it was a suddenly sobering thing for me.

This protest was happening at a major intersection (6 lanes crossing 6 lanes) in an outlying Dallas suburb. I had just seen part of what was going on as the protestors, all clad in the same color t-shirt, were out into traffic. When the light changed, their movement back to the side of the road momentarily blocked traffic as no one wanted to run over them.

The protestors were all large framed males and I would guess that they will all under 40, perhaps even under 30. There were not many - maybe 9. I learned later that there had been a larger crowd on the side of one of the roads but that those people hadn't ventured out among the cars. I pulled into a shopping center parking lot just as a local police officer arrived. He exited his vehicle and walked out to talk to them. I waited and watched. They all came back to a large passenger van, loaded and left. Clearly, they were not from the area.

On the surface, this wouldn't seem like a big deal . But just this morning, I watched a video of protestors blocking a six lane road. While the people were stopped and with no place to turn away. some of the protesters broke from the crowd, moved up through the stopped cars and started using pipes or other metal objects to smash the cars, many targeting the driver's side windows. That video was fresh in my mind.

I'll digress to offer a little context. I'm an activist. I've attended many protests of dozens, hundreds and even thousands of people . I've protested with signs at the Austin capital. I'm all for people exercising their right to protest. Yelling and chanting, holding up obnoxious signs, at least for me, is part of protesting. Violence is not. It stops being a protest and starts being something else, depending on what actually takes place.

Like most people on this forum, I suspect, I do not expect to directly confront violence in my lifetime. I carry every day but believe that that because I do and am very aware of not putting myself into places where I might need my firearm, I'm actually "safer" than I was before I got my LTC. With our current situation, I believe that all bets are now off.

This leads me to what is probably a rhetorical question: what do I do if I'm suddenly in a protest that goes to the next level. A part of me says that getting my driver's side window smashed is a small price to pay for staying safe. On the other hand, the protesters in the video were trying to haul people out of their cars. I cannot imagine how things get better after that happens. Yes, I keep my doors locked at all times but once a window is smashed, particularly if I've had to shield my head from the imploding debris, keeping the door locked is not guaranteed.

So should I take my tin foil hat over and sit in the corner or is the question a valid concern?