Texas Open Carry - Page 17
You are Unregistered, please register to use all of the features of FirearmsTalk.com!    
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism >

Texas Open Carry


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-07-2013, 12:49 AM   #161
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
DeltaF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Deep South USA
Posts: 3,206
Liked 2451 Times on 1342 Posts
Likes Given: 336

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterMcCool
There is no law against being a jackass. If law enforcement receives a complaint of someone innocently bearing a firearm, why is an officer dispatched?
... Because until the investigation is conducted the officer does not know that this person is "innocently carrying a firearm."

Quote:
"Should police investigate every time the circus comes to town because Orangello fears they might bring a bear?"
This is the only thing in your list that you would probably not get an officer dispatched to. Dispatch would probably alert the officers working the circus extra duty detail to be on the lookout for orangello because he is mentally stable and afraid of bears though. :-P

Quote:
"Can I request an officer to harass a man walking his Doberman in my presence? There is no right to scary dogs."
We get called out on a daily basis to investigate "a man walking his dog." Yes. This happens. It sucks. The person is almost always cooperative and says "yeah i'm so-and-so, I live right up the road from here at this address, here's my license." Then we take the license down in about 10 seconds and wave at them while they keep walking. Then we write about a 4 sentence BS report.

Quote:
How about a Muslim wearing a backpack or a teen in a hoodie
Yes. We get called out for this too. We have to investigate it. It sucks. It's usually innocent, but occasionally results in a solved burglary or vehicle theft. It has also resulted in me getting into a foot pursuit with 3 armed individuals who had just stolen literally thousands of dollars worth of cell phones from people at a university Halloween party. Also one freaky, long and drawn out "fake bomb" and "bomb threat" call stemmed from this type of dispatch.

Edit: just recently someone was fired from an agency in this area for deleting these types of calls out of the system late in the shift so he wouldn't have to investigate or write reports on them. It's tempting to try to just fly through these type calls and try to find the quickest exit to all of them, but that's what gets people killed.
__________________
"...it is ...ALIVE!!!"

Last edited by DeltaF; 09-07-2013 at 12:59 AM.
DeltaF is offline  
MisterMcCool Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 12:57 AM   #162
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
DeltaF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Deep South USA
Posts: 3,206
Liked 2451 Times on 1342 Posts
Likes Given: 336

Default

Removed. Oops :-)
__________________
"...it is ...ALIVE!!!"
DeltaF is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 02:27 AM   #163
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 188
Liked 70 Times on 44 Posts
Likes Given: 49

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkguy View Post
so screaming "F YOU" constantly through your mom's funeral is ok with you as an expression of the first amendment? do you support this?

exercising the right of an amendment JUST to cause a stink is plain stupid and childish and can disturb the peace in general....and i have no problem with charges being brought against those who make gun owners look like fools or simply seek to start trouble.

gun owners have enough to contend with....without fools thinking they represent our cause.
Like I said whether I agree or not that would be your right. We are either 100% supportive of everyones Constitutional right or we are 100% against it there is no middle ground when it comes to the Constitution.
MTHunter is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 02:32 AM   #164
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 188
Liked 70 Times on 44 Posts
Likes Given: 49

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaF View Post
So you would support me dressing up in an Elmo costume and running in circles around police officers while singing "THIS GIRL IS ON FIRE!" At the top of my lungs. All done in support of the first amendment? Or would you think it was a pointless moronic "protest" that would never accomplish anything and only serve to stir up trouble? (And make people laugh)
Yes I would support you in doing so because it is your Right. Granted I would probably think you were either incredibly stupid or insane but I would not try and stop you because I am not in the habit of interfering in others people Constitutional rights.
MTHunter is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 10:56 PM   #165
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hawkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: austin,tx
Posts: 4,626
Liked 3248 Times on 1941 Posts
Likes Given: 2347

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MTHunter View Post
Like I said whether I agree or not that would be your right. We are either 100% supportive of everyones Constitutional right or we are 100% against it there is no middle ground when it comes to the Constitution.
federalists and anti-federalists....do you think the founders who framed the constitution were LIKE MINDED????

the constitution WAS WRITTEN BY OPPOSITE MINDED PEOPLE WHO COMPROMISED!!!! and now supporters of the constitution claim there can be no middle ground or compromise?

the constitution was ALSO WRITTEN TO BE AMENDED!!! (PROPERLY)

many parts of the bill of rights and constitution are vague enough to merit DEBATE. just like any other piece of literature or law. and it has been debated since the founding of our country.....since the beginning folks!

a few facts many constitution supporters want to overlook these days...

the constitution would have never been written if the founders were a bunch of narrow minded people who refused to compromise on anything....they were quite the opposite actually....and their COMPROMISE was responsible for one of the most well thought out and revolutionary forms of government to that day....formed by groups of people who were on polar opposite ends....

but today...no talk...no compromise...no listening....political gridlock...team against team....how would the founders have viewed this attitude i wonder?

i'm afraid they would think we are both morons and cowards honestly. a group of close minded people who have lost both our ability to reason as well as our ability to fight.

"no middle ground"....i think the founders would GREATLY disagree myself...

Last edited by hawkguy; 09-07-2013 at 11:02 PM.
hawkguy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 11:21 PM   #166
McCool@email.com
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
MisterMcCool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Bumfugg, Egypt
Posts: 10,229
Liked 9180 Times on 4962 Posts
Likes Given: 19351

Default

There is no compromise on the bill of rights.
__________________
No offense and none taken (̿▀̿ ̿Ĺ̯̿̿▀̿ ̿)̄

Last edited by MisterMcCool; 09-08-2013 at 12:38 AM.
MisterMcCool is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 11:26 PM   #167
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hawkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: austin,tx
Posts: 4,626
Liked 3248 Times on 1941 Posts
Likes Given: 2347

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterMcCool View Post
There is no compromises on the bill of rights.
the bill of rights WAS a compromise.....it's very existence is the result of a compromise! disagree?

and we have been compromising on it since the beginning....its all there.... in our history....

and that is kinda the purpose for the judiciary branch, is it not?
hawkguy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 11:34 PM   #168
McCool@email.com
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
MisterMcCool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Bumfugg, Egypt
Posts: 10,229
Liked 9180 Times on 4962 Posts
Likes Given: 19351

Default

The only purpose of the Supreme Court is to determine the Constitutionality of laws. Therefore, anything predetermined by the Constitution IS law.
__________________
No offense and none taken (̿▀̿ ̿Ĺ̯̿̿▀̿ ̿)̄
MisterMcCool is offline  
rjd3282 Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 11:37 PM   #169
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hawkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: austin,tx
Posts: 4,626
Liked 3248 Times on 1941 Posts
Likes Given: 2347

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterMcCool View Post
The only purpose of the Supreme Court is to determine the Constitutionality of laws. Therefore, anything predetermined by the Constitution IS law.
their INTERPRETATION of the constitutionality of laws......disagree????

and their interpretation has been known to be VERY different, depending on their view...disagree?
hawkguy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 11:39 PM   #170
McCool@email.com
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
MisterMcCool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Bumfugg, Egypt
Posts: 10,229
Liked 9180 Times on 4962 Posts
Likes Given: 19351

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkguy

their INTERPRETATION of the constitutionality of laws......disagree????
Okay, I agree. But there is little discretion in the bill of rights.
__________________
No offense and none taken (̿▀̿ ̿Ĺ̯̿̿▀̿ ̿)̄
MisterMcCool is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
A open carry and concealed carry holster review jeffkaiser1989 Firearm Accessories & Gear 0 07-23-2013 02:49 PM
Texas proposed Open Carry Bill... BPNovum Legal and Activism 3 01-28-2013 07:39 PM
Texas is one step closer to open carry! truevil1313 Concealed Carrying & Personal Protection 59 07-21-2011 05:45 AM
To Open Carry Supporters in Texas user4 Politics, Religion and Controversy 3 02-05-2009 01:26 PM
Thousands sign petition to make Texas an open-carry state sculker The Club House 5 06-29-2008 06:03 PM



Newest Threads