Spreadfire Arms
Member
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 1,312
DK Suddeth wrote:
incorrect actually. if you have a Class A or B misdemeanor, or a conviction of Disorderly Conduct, you are not eligible for a CHL in Texas. not all gang members are convicted felons. eliminating UCW law would allow those with these Class A and B misdemeanors, or disorderly conduct convictions, to open carry a handgun, since a CHL would not be needed.
and for those gang members who are felons, they can't possess guns, but if they repeal UCW, then they can carry switchblades and clubs too.
Deavis wrote:
its not me personally. but politicians do not want to be known for allowing gang bangers to lawfully carry guns. all it takes is one gang banger to be lawfully carrying, then committing an armed offense, to make all sponsoring politicians of the bill look bad.
being able to arrest a gang banger for being armed is a good thing if you ask most LE officers. most LE officers will prefer that the laws NOT be changed to allow gang bangers to be legally armed. most LE officers don't care if the guy is required to carry in plain view or not. they only care that the guy has a legal right to carry a firearm around and that they may exercise extremely poor judgment and use it on someone to commit a violent crime. to just allow gang members to walk around armed until they commit an offense with the gun is political suicide.
the anti gunners will say the Republicans are backing a law that "will allow all gang members to be legally armed." how does that sit with the constituents, especially when we are looking at an election in 2 years?
like i said, i am not for or against open carry. i would not write a letter encouraging it, nor would i write a letter to a politician opposing it. to tell you the truth im ambivolent about the issue. if it passes then cool. if it doesn't pass then cool as well.
what im saying is that most Republicans, who are facing an election in 2 years, will probably not touch this bill with a 10-foot pole. Bush's popularity rating is low, the Republicans are still dealing with the Ronnie Earle / Tom DeLay issue, not to mention 5 generals recommending the removal of Donald Rumsfeld, etc.
you can see the headlines stating that the Republicans want to allow legally armed gang bangers on the street. i bet you the Democrats will say that, since there is already a way for law abiding citizens to be armed already (CHL), so who else do the Republicans want to arm now?
all im saying is that i don't see any Republican politician sponsoring a repeal of UCW.
If a 'gang banger' is not a felon (or otherwise meets the requirements for owning a firearm) he would be legal to carry the gun with a concealed license anyway. Most 'gang bangers' are either ex-felons or of otherwise disqualifying factors so carrying a gun either way would be illegal.
incorrect actually. if you have a Class A or B misdemeanor, or a conviction of Disorderly Conduct, you are not eligible for a CHL in Texas. not all gang members are convicted felons. eliminating UCW law would allow those with these Class A and B misdemeanors, or disorderly conduct convictions, to open carry a handgun, since a CHL would not be needed.
and for those gang members who are felons, they can't possess guns, but if they repeal UCW, then they can carry switchblades and clubs too.
Deavis wrote:
If they aren't breaking the law and if they aren't a felon, then why would you want to arrest them in the first place? I realize being able to arrest someone for carrying a gun illegally is useful but how does that change if they are open carrying? If you have already rolled them for something, then you check them out, and if it is illegal they go away for a long time. It would be no different than finding an illegal concealed gun on them except that you would know they have it first. Does that make sense?
its not me personally. but politicians do not want to be known for allowing gang bangers to lawfully carry guns. all it takes is one gang banger to be lawfully carrying, then committing an armed offense, to make all sponsoring politicians of the bill look bad.
being able to arrest a gang banger for being armed is a good thing if you ask most LE officers. most LE officers will prefer that the laws NOT be changed to allow gang bangers to be legally armed. most LE officers don't care if the guy is required to carry in plain view or not. they only care that the guy has a legal right to carry a firearm around and that they may exercise extremely poor judgment and use it on someone to commit a violent crime. to just allow gang members to walk around armed until they commit an offense with the gun is political suicide.
the anti gunners will say the Republicans are backing a law that "will allow all gang members to be legally armed." how does that sit with the constituents, especially when we are looking at an election in 2 years?
like i said, i am not for or against open carry. i would not write a letter encouraging it, nor would i write a letter to a politician opposing it. to tell you the truth im ambivolent about the issue. if it passes then cool. if it doesn't pass then cool as well.
what im saying is that most Republicans, who are facing an election in 2 years, will probably not touch this bill with a 10-foot pole. Bush's popularity rating is low, the Republicans are still dealing with the Ronnie Earle / Tom DeLay issue, not to mention 5 generals recommending the removal of Donald Rumsfeld, etc.
you can see the headlines stating that the Republicans want to allow legally armed gang bangers on the street. i bet you the Democrats will say that, since there is already a way for law abiding citizens to be armed already (CHL), so who else do the Republicans want to arm now?
all im saying is that i don't see any Republican politician sponsoring a repeal of UCW.