The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://texaschlforum.com/
For instance, they have a "protest against illegal guns." Uh... WHAT? Who are they protesting AT? Are the picketing the homes of criminals or something? I somehow think not.
If I'm not mistaken, wasn't Jim Brady getting paid (his job) to do what he was doing when an illegal gun used by a convicted felon was used to shoot him? Again, if I'm not mistaken, what happened was against existing and apparently unenforced laws when it happened?seamusTX wrote:Why not just take them at their word?
The people who run those organizations want to ban guns. Their talk about "sensible gun control" is simply political cover for ideas that they know would be shot down in the cold light of day. They refuse to acknowledge that banning guns will not reduce crime or have any other positive consequence.
They are also making a good living at it.
They are very much like book banners. Book banners think that by suppressing a book they can extinguish an idea. That has never worked, and in a free market, calling for a ban on a book often makes it a best seller.
- Jim
Particularly since the Bradys usually exempt the type of guns that Hinckley used from their efforts to ban. Hinckley used a .22 cal revolver.seamusTX wrote: Someone in his situation today could still legally purchase a firearm, so the Bradys haven't made much progress.
- Jim
, I was thinking the assault came from "Squeaky" Fromm. Thanks for the wake up.To which I say, Bingo! The way to raise the price and profit on anything is to ban it. Works with books, drugs, worked like a wizard on alcohol - the WCTU and Congress established Organized Crime gangs as major financial players in the American economy with that one....and in a free market, calling for a ban on a book often makes it a best seller.
What I find interesting is the part about canceling school trips to NY and WashDC. I don't think you can CCW in either of those locations so the rule change wouldn't apply anyway. Of course, this message is written for consumption by the anti-RKBA faithful who propably don't know that anyway. Sheeple
MORE GUNS IN NATIONAL PARKS PUT VISITORS AT RISK
Dear Scott,
The Bush Administration has given the gun lobby a special last-minute gift — a very expensive one, … one that puts public safety at risk.
The Brady Center is taking action to stop it. We need your help.
The Brady Center has filed a suit asking a federal court to strike down the Administration’s last-minute rule change to allow concealed, loaded guns in national parks and wildlife refuges.
Please give a tax-deductible gift now to help us stop this unnecessary and dangerous ruling. It will allow guns in rural and urban national park areas around the country ...
... from Wyoming’s Yellowstone and California’s Yosemite to Philadelphia’s Independence National Historical Park, home of the Liberty Bell.
The Brady Center filed the suit on behalf of our Brady Campaign members, including school teachers in the New York and Washington, D.C. areas who are canceling or curtailing school trips to Ellis Island and the Statue of Liberty and the National Mall in Washington, D.C. now that the Bush Administration will allow guns in these national parks.
Click here to give today to support our efforts to keep our parks and wildlife refuges safe, to stop the gun lobby and the Bush Administration from enacting this last-minute ruling.
Sincerely,
Sarah Brady, Chair
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... wD95D7ILG0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence sued the Bush administration Tuesday in hopes of stopping a new policy that would allow people to carry concealed, loaded guns in most national parks and wildlife refuges.
The lawsuit said members of the Brady Campaign will no longer visit national parks and refuges "out of fear for their personal safety from those who will now be permitted to carry loaded and concealed weapons in such areas."
Absinthe and Viox come to mind. Wel you asked.BobCat wrote: And if I sound cynical, please point out a counterexample - a case in which something was banned and went away, as opposed to generating burgeoning profits.
It appears that the entire west (left) coast of the United States is not receptive to Texas CHL holders.Venus Pax wrote:Which parks would still be off-limits to CHLs?
(I know anything in CA, but can't think of others.)
British beef. Leaded gasoline. Segregated water fountains.Liberty wrote:Absinthe and Viox come to mind. Wel you asked.BobCat wrote: And if I sound cynical, please point out a counterexample - a case in which something was banned and went away, as opposed to generating burgeoning profits.