Search found 3 matches

by MeMelYup
Tue Feb 10, 2015 2:16 pm
Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
Topic: General 2015 Legislative Session Discussion
Replies: 146
Views: 53807

Re: General 2015 Legislative Session Discussion

locke_n_load wrote:
Charles L. Cotton wrote:
joe817 wrote:It would be really interesting to watch the committee meeting when they present SB17. I hope it's broadcast.
Unless there is a system failure, it will be broadcast. I suggest unloading your handgun before watching; monitors are easy to replace, but you'll miss the rest of the hearing.

Chas.
Why is there a consensus that this hearing will be infuriating to watch? Seems that 346/17 removes concealed from the CHL law and creates a 30.07 specifically for OC, which seems like a reasonable bill for licensed OC.
There are those who will condemn it because it is not "constitutional carry." Then you have groups like MDA that will condemn it because they are scared when they see a gun without a badge. Call 911 and swat them.
by MeMelYup
Sat Jan 31, 2015 7:00 pm
Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
Topic: General 2015 Legislative Session Discussion
Replies: 146
Views: 53807

Re: General 2015 Legislative Session Discussion

Ruark wrote:Kory Watkins is a "professional protestor." He's involved in several movements under the guise of "fighting for our rights." He sees himself as some kind of caped superhero. Here's an example of the kind of crap that comes from him:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/12/gun- ... -way-home/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Can you believe this guy... he thinks it should NOT be illegal to drive drunk.

He doesn't carry a valid driver's license - his reasoning? "I don’t ask for permission to drive a car I paid for on a road I paid for."

As far as CJ.... he's always talking about how he shouldn't have to pay for something (i.e. a CHL) that's he's allowed to do in the Constitution. What he doesn't say is that he has some kind of criminal conviction on his record, the result being that he isn't ELIGIBLE for a CHL anyway!!!

Sometimes I wish there were a way some responsible groups like TFC, TSRA, etc. could publicly discredit these people - yank the covers off, so to speak.
According to the last paragraph he doesn't have a sense of humor.
by MeMelYup
Wed Nov 12, 2014 12:17 am
Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
Topic: General 2015 Legislative Session Discussion
Replies: 146
Views: 53807

Re: 2015 Bill Status Report

DUST FOOT wrote:I really hope the TSRA gets behind one of these open carry bills and for the reasons of making it easier for law makers to get on board, taking the wind out of the OC show boaters sails, and common sense I would like to see any open carry bill have these amendments.
1: no openly carried firearm larger than .45 cal unless on your own property, hunting, or any other shooting activity. There is just no need to walk around with a S&W 500 hand cannon strapped to your leg for self defense.
2: no more than one openly carried handgun at a time on your person. We don't need people walking around like Hoot Gibson with 2 six shooters on their hips.
3:can carry no more than one extra clip or speed loader on your person while open carrying in the general public. we don't need people walking around with bullet belts across their chest just trying to show off or looking like the Lone Ranger

I would even be OK with having to openly display your state issued handgun license if you open carry a handgun ( on a lanyard around your neck, clipped on your pocket, or someway like that ) so that any person or LEO can see that you have passed a state and federal background check, been finger printed, and have met all other state requirements.

I know that I will get hammered on pretty hard about this, but I am not against anybody's freedoms it is just that open carry is my biggest wish from law makers in 2015 and I feel that these amendments could make it an easier pill to swallow for the ones that are still on the fence about open carry. We can always tweek the law later let's just get open carry passed first. This is the first time I have ever posted my opinion on this forum so please go easy but let the hammering begin. :smash: :smash:

Robert M.
What is your reasoning behind 1, 2 and 3.
Why no firearm over 45? If a person wants to carry a 454 or a 50 it's their choice.
Why a stipulation in the law that you can only open carry one firearm at a time, someone may want to carry an additional one on the ankle or shoulder holster in addition to one on the hip.
I carry a spare 15 round magazine with my firearm which is a Glock 27, 9+1. I know many people that their magazine pouches are for 2 magazines so why limit to one magazine.

Return to “General 2015 Legislative Session Discussion”