TexasCHLforum.com

We are falling behind ladies and gentlemen. We should be ashamed not only of being fifth, but of coming behind Kommifornia (3rd).

http://bearingarms.com/number-of-backgr ... -to-shine/

naaa, Keep in mind that LTC/CHL exempts the holder from the background check, we most likely have more gun sales.

Texans, buy more guns!!!!!!!!

Chas.

"working on it boss"

(bingeing NCIS tonight while I do some hand sewing)

G.A. Heath wrote:naaa, Keep in mind that LTC/CHL exempts the holder from the background check, we most likely have more gun sales.

Likewise, intrastate private transfers are not regulated by the state of Texas.

In addition to the exemption from the NICS check with a CHL/LTC, also keep in mind that even though CA and TX are #1 and #2 in populations, CA has about 12 million more people than we do.

Here are some reports from the NRA-ILA web site that may shine some light on the surge of buying in the other states.

http://www.bgdailynews.com/news/propose ... 93111.html

https://www.nraila.org/articles/2016030 ... -committee

https://www.nraila.org/articles/2016030 ... ortunities


I read something else about Indiana proposing handgun legislation (pro gun) but I can't find it. I think that since our surge in sales occurred last year, and no major legislative proposals are in the works, along with the fact that LTC holders aren't subject to background checks, the numbers are slightly misleading. JMHO

C-dub wrote:In addition to the exemption from the NICS check with a CHL/LTC, also keep in mind that even though CA and TX are #1 and #2 in populations, CA has about 12 million more people than we do.

I hate it when they just throw out the raw numbers like that without an actual analysis. Course sometimes that doesn't matter. In a discussion I was having with someone she threw out "Texas has ##### incidents of []". With a little research I showed her that our incident rate per 100,000 was much lower than her state's. The response? "That doesn't matter, the total number is more!"

Sigh

What they are not accounting for is that Texas leads the pack with private party gun sales/trades, I'm sure.

For California private party gun sales:

"When neither party to a transaction is a licensed firearms dealer, firearms transfers in California must be completed through a licensed California dealer."

http://smartgunlaws.org/category/state- ... s-of-guns/

But still, yeah, gotta buy more. Can't have commie state be ahead.

Kentucky runs a NCIS check on EVERY CHL holder, EVERY month.

This tends to skew the numbers a bit!

G.A. Heath wrote:naaa, Keep in mind that LTC/CHL exempts the holder from the background check, we most likely have more gun sales.

Besides that, no one in commiefornia has guns whereas most Texans already own at least one

Maybe everybody is trying to catch up to Texas. I dont know one person who doesn't own no less then 5 guns. My neighbor has 4 different cc pistols. 3 house pistols 2 truck guns and an assortment of rifles.

After a thorough and exhaustive analysis ( lasting all of 2 minutes ), I've come to the conclusion that the primary forces driving the Californians buying so many guns(thus surpassing Texas ) is because panic buying has set in over there due to the asinine anti-gun bills under consideration in the California legislature. They are running scared, with good reason. Whereas we, in Texas ( ) have never had those kinds of restraints to our liberties.

I've never been to California, and I have no desire to go there.

steveincowtown wrote:Kentucky runs a NCIS check on EVERY CHL holder, EVERY month.

Why? What a waste of public funds.

Just because I'm not paranoid does not mean the government is not out to get you.

OneGun wrote:

steveincowtown wrote:Kentucky runs a NCIS check on EVERY CHL holder, EVERY month.

Why? What a waste of public funds.

Just because I'm not paranoid does not mean the government is not out to get you.

IMHO the whole system is a waste of public funds. The latest info I can find is that the NCIS processed appx. 20,000,000 checks in 2012. Of those about 88,000 were denied. That is a mighty big and expensive system to strain out the less than .44% that are rejects. Of those .44% that are rejected, there is no data on how many of those were accepted upon appeal.