TexasCHLforum.com

I would like to know what forum members think about this especially in regards to false accusations made by angry spouses:

http://www.avoiceformen.com/misandry/ch ... -kentucky/

Er...don't have angry spouses?

"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."
-some dead guy.

Temporary CHLs until something permanent due to threats? I like the idea, a lot. Where's the RKBA crowd when you need 'em to say "well if we had our way, you wouldn't need a permit in the first place."

EDIT: In the interest of full disclosure CPD believes that any man who abandons a wife and kids or abuses same should be tarred and feathered all the way from Paris, Texas to Paris, France. Others may disagree, but they would be wrong.

What do I think? I think it's an interesting first post on a Texas forum.


Welcome to the forum.

What is this angry wife concept of which you speak?



Anygunanywhere

One of the questions is why domestic violence is treated in a special way? Why not all assault, robbery, attempted murder victims are given the choice to get an expedited carry permit if such bill is crafted? Do they also get a discount (meaning other CHL holders foot the bill) or they have to pay like everyone else?

The reason I brought this to the Texas forum because if the issue popped into the mind of a politician in Kentucky it may pop into the mind of a Texas representative also.

Also the reason I brought up the "angry spouse" concept that false accusations can me made by a domestic partner lot easier than by a stranger starting from domestic violence all the way through spousal rape. So if the accusation turns out to be false or the court finds the accused not guilty do they revoke the permit or the (false) accuser can keep it?

andrea80 wrote:One of the questions is why domestic violence is treated in a special way? Why not all assault, robbery, attempted murder victims are given the choice to get an expedited carry permit if such bill is crafted? Do they also get a discount (meaning other CHL holders foot the bill) or they have to pay like everyone else?

The reason I brought this to the Texas forum because if the issue popped into the mind of a politician in Kentucky it may pop into the mind of a Texas representative also.

Also the reason I brought up the "angry spouse" concept that false accusations can me made by a domestic partner lot easier than by a stranger starting from domestic violence all the way through spousal rape. So if the accusation turns out to be false or the court finds the accused not guilty do they revoke the permit or the (false) accuser can keep it?

Well lets look at the issue of false accuser. In that instance the accuser gets a temporary CHL correct? Strangely, I'm not seeing the harm here.

Why the difference in treatment. Historically domestic violence claims have legs and bad things happen. But I'm ok with a temporary for the items you listed as well. I should note, theoretically in Texas a CHL can be processed quite quickly and I would be just fine to make that even faster or a temporary one if evidence of a permanent one is being pursued is there.

Personal rant mode on:
*The fingerprint requirement is irrelevant and a burden for no benefit.
*I was able to get a background check for non CHL purposes to a higher standard in 24 hours, years ago. This nonsense about it going through DPS is a make work thing.
*The test. I'm ok with the new class and testing structure. I'm actually for much more training, but the standards can be done in a day here.

A couple of points.

First, the article was written by a typical anti-gun nutjob. The points made are so ridiculous that they clearly identify the spots on this particular twisted leopard (e.g. saying issuing a handgun license to someone is state-sponsored murder of an unconvicted person accused of DV. Really? Ludicrous).

Second, Kentucky is next door to Ohio, which already has a process in place for an Emergency CHL. In many Ohio counties, a person applying for an emergency license can have CHL in hand in less than 24 hours. This is for all emergencies, not just DV. Looks like the idea is spilling across the border.

andrea80 wrote:One of the questions is why domestic violence is treated in a special way? Why not all assault, robbery, attempted murder victims are given the choice to get an expedited carry permit if such bill is crafted? Do they also get a discount (meaning other CHL holders foot the bill) or they have to pay like everyone else?

Because SELDOM does a suspect in a robbery later hunt down and murder his previous victim. In domestic violence they often do.

jbarn wrote:Because SELDOM does a suspect in a robbery later hunt down and murder his previous victim. In domestic violence they often do.

It would be interesting to see some statistics about it. It would mean that a rape victim would not be able to take advantage of the same program where the rapist may avoid up to life in prison by silencing the victim. This just does not seem right to me.

My personal opinion is that if someone can legally own a gun he/she should be able to carry it anywhere he/she wants.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:Well lets look at the issue of false accuser. In that instance the accuser gets a temporary CHL correct? Strangely, I'm not seeing the harm here.
.

I agree with you, I see no harm giving CHL to anyone who is eligible in any timeframe. I personally don't understand why this needs to be limited to DV victims when DV cases are often more complicated.

I am quoting from another opinion from another commenter:

- The DV community continually shows a severe disability in acknowledging the existence of mutual domestic violence. This bill allows whoever first takes the initiative to petition a court to become the potential shooter, when the party to be "protected against" may well be just as much at risk if not more so.

... and an example:

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas ... 038626.php

The Moons' testimony ran parallel throughout the trial, with both agreeing the fight that landed them in the spotlight started when she threw a candle holder at his back and kneed him in the groin. Acknowledging he probably caused many of her bruises and scratches - including thumbprints consistent with choking - Moon said he never meant to hurt his wife, only to calm her down.[/

And not long ago:

Texas mother responsible for killing three young sons and her husband in what authorities are calling a murder-suicide

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/m ... -1.1466168

Well thats less an issue of "why are DV victims getting special treatment?" and more "everyone should have this and pronto Mr. or Mrs. Legislator!"