Texas Firearms Freedom Act

As the name indicates, this is the place for gun-related political discussions. It is not open to other political topics.

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

User avatar

Moby
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 367
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 9:41 pm
Location: Dallas
Contact:

Re: Texas Firearms Freedom Act

#46

Post by Moby » Fri Jan 04, 2013 7:44 am

JALLEN wrote:It appears that Senator Bright isn't very.

Even a person who flunked out of a cheap night law school would know that Federal law prevails over state law to the contrary in all but the most unusual cases, an example of which doesn't now occur to me. There may be one somewhere.

Then why is recreational pot legal in two states?
Still against federal law but if a state just says no and refuses all resources
to the federal agents there are simply not enough agents or money to enforce federal law.
Do not think the Feds always trump state law. Technically they do.
But, right now, I can go buy pot legally in two states with no medical card at all.
All debate asdie...one can go right now and buy pot in two states. A class 1 drug listed right up there with cocain.
Be without fear in the face of your enemies.
Stand brave and upright that the Lord may love thee.
Speak the truth always even if it means your death.
Protect the helpless and do no wrong!

Image

User avatar

57Coastie
Member deactivated at member's request
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 710
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 4:38 pm
Location: College Station, Texas (Website deleted 1/9/2013

Re: Texas Firearms Freedom Act

#47

Post by 57Coastie » Fri Jan 04, 2013 8:43 am

For those of you prepared to read a few Federal laws, taking a break from reading what you want to see, here, I might add a couple to your list.

1. The just-approved NDAA2013 provisions dealing with indefinite detention of citizens, and

2. The so-called "Patriot" Act.

If you do, I hope you do not jump to an erroneous conclusion with respect to the political origin of these shocking laws, enacted by the Congress, signed by the President, or the then-president, and, at least so far, largely approved by the judiciary.

When one cannot rationally articulate his opposition to another's argument, he can be expected to fall back on reductio ad absurdum. I do pray that what might happen, due to ignorance and intemperance, does not happen to those who know not what they do but insist on doing it anyway. My above lengthy post was intended as honest and appropriate advice. Please understand that if unwise decisions are made, and positions announced, by the overwhelming majority of the members of a group, the laws I have mentioned may endanger the group and its members at large, particularly if the group's leaders do not step in -- arguably giving their approval through their silence. I really think that the latter is an imaginary horrible, but who knows for sure? Worse things have happened.

Jim
We're not going to reason people out of positions they haven't reasoned themselves into, to paraphrase Ben Franklin.

User avatar

anygunanywhere
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 7462
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am
Location: La Grange, Texas

Re: Texas Firearms Freedom Act

#48

Post by anygunanywhere » Fri Jan 04, 2013 9:02 am

57Coastie wrote:For those of you prepared to read a few Federal laws, taking a break from reading what you want to see, here, I might add a couple to your list.

1. The just-approved NDAA2013 provisions dealing with indefinite detention of citizens, and

2. The so-called "Patriot" Act.

If you do, I hope you do not jump to an erroneous conclusion with respect to the political origin of these shocking laws, enacted by the Congress, signed by the President, or the then-president, and, at least so far, largely approved by the judiciary.

When one cannot rationally articulate his opposition to another's argument, he can be expected to fall back on reductio ad absurdum. I do pray that what might happen, due to ignorance and intemperance, does not happen to those who know not what they do but insist on doing it anyway. My above lengthy post was intended as honest and appropriate advice. Please understand that if unwise decisions are made, and positions announced, by the overwhelming majority of the members of a group, the laws I have mentioned may endanger the group and its members at large, particularly if the group's leaders do not step in -- arguably giving their approval through their silence. I really think that the latter is an imaginary horrible, but who knows for sure? Worse things have happened.

Jim
Those pieces of legislation violate the constitution and are part of the eroding freedom issue.

Your post does not surprise me in the least as it fits with all of your other posts on this board.

I am already on the infected pustule's lists. My actions on issues that have nothing to do at all with firearms or the second amendment are the reason I am on these lists.

I really don't care if my words put me on another list.

When we are afraid that our words guaranteed by the 1st Amendment will place us in danger of incarceration because they now place us in the category of domestic terrorist simply because the government (tyrants) have redefined terrorist then the time for diplomacy is long past.

Stay silent if you wish. Your decision. Your decision, in my opinion, shows that you agree with their position.

Anygunanywhere
"The Second Amendment is absolute...If we refuse infringement to our Right to Keep and Bear Arms, as protected by the Second Amendment, we will never be burdened by tyranny, dictatorship, or subjugation - other than to bury those who attempt it. B.E.Wood

Locked

Return to “Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues”