Community for Kel-Tec Shooters banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,206 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Texas seems to be a step closer to Constitutional Carry.
House Bill 1927 cleared the State House last week and will be presented to the State Senate. Our Governor has already stated that if a Bill gets to his desk, he would sign it.

For those who would want to follow its progress:

 
  • Like
Reactions: fflincher

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Texas seems to be a step closer to Constitutional Carry.
House Bill 1927 cleared the State House last week and will be presented to the State Senate. Our Governor has already stated that if a Bill gets to his desk, he would sign it.

For those who would want to follow its progress:

Not sure this is a great plan. Letting trained and licensed law abiding citizens carry for personal defense is a good thing. Indiscriminately handing out weapons to unttrained, unskilled, and potentially mentally unbalanced people leads to the FedEx disaster and the like. Probably not a popular view around here, but I think we need to do a much better job of keeping firearms away from violent felons, domestic violence perpetrators, and emotionally unstable folks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Not sure this is a great plan. Letting trained and licensed law abiding citizens carry for personal defense is a good thing. Indiscriminately handing out weapons to unttrained, unskilled, and potentially mentally unbalanced people leads to the FedEx disaster and the like. Probably not a popular view around here, but I think we need to do a much better job of keeping firearms away from violent felons, domestic violence perpetrators, and emotionally unstable folks.
First, it is a constitutional right. Second, Texas has a Motorist Protection Act which allows every legal gun owner to carry a loaded handgun concealed in their car (as far as I know there has been no massive bloodshed). Third, The license to carry teaches the legality but does NOT teach safe gun handling with a minimal range course for skill, not safety. Fourth, the criminals among us do not take safety courses.
The solution to crazy will never be found. Had the FedEx workers been armed they might have been able to stop the crazy. FedEx bans phones and arms so one can't even call for help, a dumb policy if you ask me.
Finally, states that have passed laws allowing constitutional carry have not seen the bloodshed you fear. Will it pass in Texas, I don't know. Should people train and learn how to use a firearm, of course. I think most law abiding citizens would train in the basic use of a firearm before carrying. Again though, you can't stop crazy and they exist gun laws or not. The FedEx killer had already had FBI intervention and still went on a killing spree.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,918 Posts
The FedEX shooter already had a shot gun taken by the police. They did not take the time and effort to file the paperwork for the RED FLAG law. 🥴 🥴 🥴
Steve
 
  • Like
Reactions: fflincher

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,388 Posts
Would the solution to yelling “Fire!” In a crowded theater be to put gags on everyone until they have taken a course in public responsibility? ... the same should be true of the fundamental rights addressed in the 2nd Amendment.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,839 Posts
Not sure this is a great plan. Letting trained and licensed law abiding citizens carry for personal defense is a good thing. Indiscriminately handing out weapons to unttrained, unskilled, and potentially mentally unbalanced people leads to the FedEx disaster and the like
Mulemuffins.

First off, claiming "indiscriminately handing out weapons to unttrained, unskilled, and potentially mentally unbalanced people" is so great a mischaracterization that it boggles the mind. No one is "handing out weapons" at all with this bill. All it does is say that if you can legally buy and own a gun, then you can legally carry it in public.

And the whole idea of required training is ripe for abuse. Who gets to decide what is and is not "enough" training? I'm sure it's fine when I get to decide, but what about if Maxim Waters gets to make the rules about how much is enough?

And frankly, to be blunt, the whole idea of "required training" somehow making everything better and people generally more effective is not supported by the evidence. Pick your favorite study tracking Defensive Gun Uses (DGU); Mauser, Kleck, Hart, CDC, any of the annual National Crime Victim Survey's and look at the percentage of time that the gun is actually discharged in a DGU. It's somewhere around 1 out of 10 times. So 90% of the time in a DGU, the trigger is not pulled. Let me ask you a question. How much "training" is required to not shoot and still be effective? None, that's how much. Heck, the gun could be freaking unloaded and still rack up the DGU.

And even "training" doesn't guarantee skill. I've been training and teaching fighting for more than 30 years. I've seen people who were "trained" that couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag. I've seen people who had been good who let their skills degrade. I've seen people with natural talent. And if you want to get into firearms specifically (yes, I'm certified there too), if the claim is that "training" makes a big difference, I'd point you to the numerous instances of "trained military" and "trained police" who are unskilled and/or incompetent, despite (somehow) passing their training and marksmanship requirements on the range.

And how exactly would a training and licensing requirement to legally carry the guns they already have access to somehow keep "potentially mentally unbalanced people" from carrying them? It doesn't.

Probably not a popular view around here, but I think we need to do a much better job of keeping firearms away from violent felons, domestic violence perpetrators, and emotionally unstable folks.
It's an unpopular view because it does not achieve any of the things you want it to. It does not keep firearms away from violent felons, domestic violence perpetrators, and emotionally unstable folks. They've never had any problem getting guns. The research shows that these people get guns illegally already, either from straw purchases (which are already illegal), by stealing them from someone else (theft is already illegal), or on the black market (which is illegal). Heck, it's already extra-illegal for a felon (violent or otherwise) to even touch a gun (or any component part of ammunition such as a spent brass casing). Requiring a "carry license" for legal, law abiding, citizens doesn't keep any of these things from happening.

In fact, all it is yet another infringement that gets people used to the idea of yet infringement by claiming to achieve goals which it doesn't actually achieve.

OTOH, it does give the government a handy list of people who own guns. I'm sure no government has ever abused that sort of information, right?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
532 Posts
I think that we (the USA) should adopt the Swiss model that requires every 18 year old to take Basic Training and Advanced training for 4 to 6 months. But that is a matter for another discussion, I guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Alnath, as with anything, read the directions first.
Every new gun is sold with warning and instructions that stuff the box full.
Everyone who buys one has to fill out the 4473.
I disapprove of "red flag" laws because they do not demand demonstrably true information of a definable, uniform nature.

You'll never overcome ignorance, stupidity, crazy or criminal.

Let me have my gun for defense against thugs, criminals, the insane, drugged up and drunk.

And plinking. Let's not lose sight of plinking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Mulemuffins.

First off, claiming "indiscriminately handing out weapons to unttrained, unskilled, and potentially mentally unbalanced people" is so great a mischaracterization that it boggles the mind. No one is "handing out weapons" at all with this bill. All it does is say that if you can legally buy and own a gun, then you can legally carry it in public.

And the whole idea of required training is ripe for abuse. Who gets to decide what is and is not "enough" training? I'm sure it's fine when I get to decide, but what about if Maxim Waters gets to make the rules about how much is enough?

And frankly, to be blunt, the whole idea of "required training" somehow making everything better and people generally more effective is not supported by the evidence. Pick your favorite study tracking Defensive Gun Uses (DGU); Mauser, Kleck, Hart, CDC, any of the annual National Crime Victim Survey's and look at the percentage of time that the gun is actually discharged in a DGU. It's somewhere around 1 out of 10 times. So 90% of the time in a DGU, the trigger is not pulled. Let me ask you a question. How much "training" is required to not shoot and still be effective? None, that's how much. Heck, the gun could be freaking unloaded and still rack up the DGU.

And even "training" doesn't guarantee skill. I've been training and teaching fighting for more than 30 years. I've seen people who were "trained" that couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag. I've seen people who had been good who let their skills degrade. I've seen people with natural talent. And if you want to get into firearms specifically (yes, I'm certified there too), if the claim is that "training" makes a big difference, I'd point you to the numerous instances of "trained military" and "trained police" who are unskilled and/or incompetent, despite (somehow) passing their training and marksmanship requirements on the range.

And how exactly would a training and licensing requirement to legally carry the guns they already have access to somehow keep "potentially mentally unbalanced people" from carrying them? It doesn't.

It's an unpopular view because it does not achieve any of the things you want it to. It does not keep firearms away from violent felons, domestic violence perpetrators, and emotionally unstable folks. They've never had any problem getting guns. The research shows that these people get guns illegally already, either from straw purchases (which are already illegal), by stealing them from someone else (theft is already illegal), or on the black market (which is illegal). Heck, it's already extra-illegal for a felon (violent or otherwise) to even touch a gun (or any component part of ammunition such as a spent brass casing). Requiring a "carry license" for legal, law abiding, citizens doesn't keep any of these things from happening.

In fact, all it is yet another infringement that gets people used to the idea of yet infringement by claiming to achieve goals which it doesn't actually achieve.

OTOH, it does give the government a handy list of people who own guns. I'm sure no government has ever abused that sort of information, right?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
You are clearly correct. Nothing can be done to stop the parade of idiots and criminals from killing indiscriminately. Shooting joggers in suburban neighborhoods. Shooting up music performances. Shooting up schools, night clubs, WalMarts. It can't be helped.We should give up. No regulations of any type. No permits either. (Let's get away from those socialist drivers licenses too!) Our society will only be safe when we have a completely armed citizenry. Then we can be safe. Like Mogadishu. Every man his own John Wayne. What could go wrong?

Canada and New Zealand have gun homicide rates about 1/50th of ours. They also are nations based on a culture of self-reliance. What is the difference? Is there something genetically predisposing Americans to this slaughter? Or could the easy availability of firepower play a role? We have more of that here than anyone else. It could make a reasonable person wonder if rational regulation might help. The NRA's 'Good guy with a gun' certainly does not seem have solved the problem yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
When I was a kid you could order guns through the mail or in the local hardware store. Yet I don't recall any mass shootings unless you count a couple of incidents in the 70s involving mental cases sniping at people with a hunting rifle. I've been on the fence for a long time on getting a carry license solely from not wanting to be higher up on the send to the "Re-education camp" list. As to training I'd like to see gun safety as mandatory in high schools. The Training you get to be able to carry is focused on what the law says. Not whether you can fire a gun and not shoot your eye out (kid)!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
861 Posts
I believe that those two countries would allow you to become a citizen. You would probably feel much safer as a citizen of one or the other of them.
You are clearly correct. Nothing can be done to stop the parade of idiots and criminals from killing indiscriminately. Shooting joggers in suburban neighborhoods. Shooting up music performances. Shooting up schools, night clubs, WalMarts. It can't be helped.We should give up. No regulations of any type. No permits either. (Let's get away from those socialist drivers licenses too!) Our society will only be safe when we have a completely armed citizenry. Then we can be safe. Like Mogadishu. Every man his own John Wayne. What could go wrong?

Canada and New Zealand have gun homicide rates about 1/50th of ours. They also are nations based on a culture of self-reliance. What is the difference? Is there something genetically predisposing Americans to this slaughter? Or could the easy availability of firepower play a role? We have more of that here than anyone else. It could make a reasonable person wonder if rational regulation might help. The NRA's 'Good guy with a gun' certainly does not seem have solved the problem yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
532 Posts
I wouldn't use Canada and New Zealand for comparison. Both have draconian gun laws as are being proposed here and have for a few years. But at the same time, no potential enemy countries would dare send an invasion force here because so many homes are armed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
You are clearly correct. Nothing can be done to stop the parade of idiots and criminals from killing indiscriminately. Shooting joggers in suburban neighborhoods. Shooting up music performances. Shooting up schools, night clubs, WalMarts. It can't be helped.We should give up. No regulations of any type. No permits either. (Let's get away from those socialist drivers licenses too!) Our society will only be safe when we have a completely armed citizenry. Then we can be safe. Like Mogadishu. Every man his own John Wayne. What could go wrong?

Canada and New Zealand have gun homicide rates about 1/50th of ours. They also are nations based on a culture of self-reliance. What is the difference? Is there something genetically predisposing Americans to this slaughter? Or could the easy availability of firepower play a role? We have more of that here than anyone else. It could make a reasonable person wonder if rational regulation might help. The NRA's 'Good guy with a gun' certainly does not seem have solved the problem yet.
Your first post sounds like a liberal gun grabber wrote it for you. Your second shows that you let the media tell you how to think and can't use logical deduction. The way to stop shootings is shoot back. With the exception of shooting into a venue from a hotel across the street every shooting you mention occurred in a gun free zone, either government enforced or property owner enforced. Until liberals cried about locking up criminals during COVID crime and the mythically named gun violence have been down. Allowing criminals to kill their witnesses has been a great boon to the illegal use of guns.

Colorado and Indiana have red flag laws and have had two high profile shootings by people known to law enforcement agencies. Neither red flag law protected the citizens, nor did FedEx's gun free cell phone free zone. In Colorado a radicalized immigrant drove 30 miles to an area where he would encounter less resistance. In Colorado 1 in 10 have a carry permit but the liberal leaning parts have a lower concentration of permits. Pick a state and you can tell by their crime stats when the changed to shall issue permits.

BTW, Canada has gun laws more strict than any US State or Federal Law but has crime on par with Massachusetts.

I'm sure you're "a gun owner" and believe in "common sense gun safety measures" so you have self limited to 10 round magazines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
When I was a kid you could order guns through the mail or in the local hardware store. Yet I don't recall any mass shootings unless you count a couple of incidents in the 70s involving mental cases sniping at people with a hunting rifle. I've been on the fence for a long time on getting a carry license solely from not wanting to be higher up on the send to the "Re-education camp" list. As to training I'd like to see gun safety as mandatory in high schools. The Training you get to be able to carry is focused on what the law says. Not whether you can fire a gun and not shoot your eye out (kid)!
I would agree that teaching about gun safety in high school would be smart. Doing better with teaching civics wouldn’t hurt either. Nobody is born knowing that stuff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Your first post sounds like a liberal gun grabber wrote it for you. Your second shows that you let the media tell you how to think and can't use logical deduction. The way to stop shootings is shoot back. With the exception of shooting into a venue from a hotel across the street every shooting you mention occurred in a gun free zone, either government enforced or property owner enforced. Until liberals cried about locking up criminals during COVID crime and the mythically named gun violence have been down. Allowing criminals to kill their witnesses has been a great boon to the illegal use of guns.

Colorado and Indiana have red flag laws and have had two high profile shootings by people known to law enforcement agencies. Neither red flag law protected the citizens, nor did FedEx's gun free cell phone free zone. In Colorado a radicalized immigrant drove 30 miles to an area where he would encounter less resistance. In Colorado 1 in 10 have a carry permit but the liberal leaning parts have a lower concentration of permits. Pick a state and you can tell by their crime stats when the changed to shall issue permits.

BTW, Canada has gun laws more strict than any US State or Federal Law but has crime on par with Massachusetts.

I'm sure you're "a gun owner" and believe in "common sense gun safety measures" so you have self limited to 10 round magazines.
Your litany of law enforcement failures is distressing but irrelevant. Shoddy law enforcement is cured by working harder on the enforcement problem, not by throwing out laws. The cure is having better trained, better paid cops. Motivated prosecutors. Engaged judges. Not throwing up your hands and saying we just have to live with it. A significant majority of US citizens on the left and right favor better gun laws. Not confiscating guns or criminalizing ownership, but forcing responsibility. A kid gets your gun and shoots somebody, YOU go to jail. Drop your gun from your pocket and put a round through somebody’s wall, YOU get nailed for a fine and cost of repair. (An idiot in the Va legislature did that a few years back.) We have to recognize the problem and work on it, not just cuss the lefties and hope things will get better.

FWIW, My Sub2000 has >10 round mags, but the rest don’t.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
Your litany of law enforcement failures is distressing but irrelevant. Shoddy law enforcement is cured by working harder on the enforcement problem, not by throwing out laws. The cure is having better trained, better paid cops. Motivated prosecutors. Engaged judges. Not throwing up your hands and saying we just have to live with it. A significant majority of US citizens on the left and right favor better gun laws. Not confiscating guns or criminalizing ownership, but forcing responsibility. A kid gets your gun and shoots somebody, YOU go to jail. Drop your gun from your pocket and put a round through somebody’s wall, YOU get nailed for a fine and cost of repair. (An idiot in the Va legislature did that a few years back.) We have to recognize the problem and work on it, not just cuss the lefties and hope things will get better.

FWIW, My Sub2000 has >10 round mags, but the rest don’t.
We do not need one more gun law. Relevance is that laws are not enforced and adding more laws isn't a fix.

There must be a lot of shoddy law enforcement when 80% of firearms offenders have prior felonies. I never said throw out a law, but I would expect them to be enforced. Except gun free zones. Gun free zones kill.

I see you respond to polls. Have you seen the polls where people are read existing laws and ask why we can't pass a law like that? Most Americans don't know gun laws, some gun owners don't bother to learn the laws they should know. This lack of knowledge is how the President tells Americans that PLCAA makes the firearms industry exempt from any law suit.

Back to prosecutors, I read an article from Philadelphia last week and wish I saved it. The ADA said that incarceration isn't the answer. He might get 5 shootings a year in an middle class neighborhood but 120 in a lower class neighborhood and those shooters need a second chance not a felony record. Philly has also gone from 63% conviction rate to a 43% conviction rate. The progressive DA ran on a soft on criminals approach but blames police for his losses in court.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
I think that we (the USA) should adopt the Swiss model that requires every 18 year old to take Basic Training and Advanced training for 4 to 6 months. But that is a matter for another discussion, I guess.
I like the idea to a point. Even though I have good basic firearm skills, I would love some Advanced training. Issue is, it's so damn expensive. At least for me.

On the whole, widespread basic training would, imho, have a high chance of removing the fear & ignorance that general anti-gun person has.

Requiring it for owning, not so much, but offering it, sign me up! Lol
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top