I must have missed it.

I never said that there are not people out there who want all guns banned. There are a handful of them, just as there are a handful of people who want no gun control at all.

I happen to agree, somewhat, with those articles asking for repeal of the 2nd Amendment. Why? As written, the interpretation of it is so open to controversy that we have seen countless lawsuits brought through the court system asking for the various state and federal court's interpretation of the amendment. But to make it clear, I am not at all promoting the banning of handguns.

In Texas, I'd like to give you specific examples of what I believe are over-zealous politicians pushing guns on the majority of the population with absolutely no concern for the majority.

Every 2 years the state legislature meets to enact new laws. And every 2 years someone in the legislature brings up a law for passage that would allow students over 21 the right to carry concealed handguns in college dormitories and classrooms.The president of the University of Texas system does not want it. The president of UT-Austin does not want it. The overwhelming majority of faculty and students at UT-Austin do not want it. The campus police do not want it. The city of Austin police do not want it. In spite of all this opposition against such a bill by those who would be most affected by the law, my bet is that eventually such a bill will be passed. Why not simply let each college decide for themselves whether or not to allow concealed handguns in dorms and classrooms? The simple explanation is that the right to self defense is just that, a right. You can't have different institutions deciding whether to allow a "right". Why not allow trained, vetted people the right to self defense with concealed carry?

Second example -- elections in Texas for Governor and Lt. Governor are in the near future. I'm reading that several candidates from guess which party, are proposing open carry of handguns. Give me a break! I'd be willing to bet that if the voting population is asked, less than a handful would support such a law. I have no problem with concealed handguns by those with a CHL, but open carry I am totally against. What is wrong with open carry? Better check up on some laws in this country. Missouri has had open carry since their post Civil War Constitution was signed in 1875. Olathe, KS has open carry. Many other states have open carry depending on the weapon.

Your last statement, "You know if only life is saved by defensive use...it's worth it. Right?" is as ridiculous as my stating "You know if only one life is lost to someone who kills using a handgun, it's worth it to ban all handguns." Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Despite the one missing word, you got the message but missed the facetiousness.

Despite the one missing word, you got the message but missed the facetiousness. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

The simple explanation is that the right to self defense is just that, a right. You can't have different institutions deciding whether to allow a "right". Why not allow trained, vetted people the right to self defense with concealed carry?

Do your homework. The opposition to such a law is well stated.

There is no universal right to self defense. Establishments are permitted to ban handguns from their buildings. My place of work does so. My credit union does so. I do not allow handguns in my home. Even the proposed law allowing concealed weapons in dorms/classrooms in colleges in Texas would not apply to private institutions. So even Texas legislators realize that different institutions can have different rights pertaining to concealed handguns. So you are wrong.

What is wrong with open carry? Better check up on some laws in this country. Missouri has had open carry since their post Civil War Constitution was signed in 1875. Olathe, KS has open carry. Many other states have open carry depending on the weapon.

Open carry of rifles is allowed in Texas. Occasionally you will see some relatives of the Duck Dynasty crew demonstrating that right in Texas. The average person does NOT want to see people openly carrying weapons. I have been in Missouri a few times and, despite what you say is the law, I have never seen any private citizen openly carrying a handgun. I'm sure that a few people do so, but the average person in Mo. probably doesn't even know they have the right to do so, and even less actually carry.

What you dimatards need to understand it does not matter if you have a gun or not if someone wants to kill you they can.

We had another shooting and I waited for the inevitable shout for gun control from the lefties here. It didn't happen. I wonder why. Gunman was a minority? Someone at the DNC was off for the weekend and did not send out the talking points? He didn't use an "assault" weapon? I think the liberal racists here didn't like the POV that a Hispanic (black or otherwise) killed two non-minority people. It does not compute with their view of the world where racist white people are slaughtering minorities (except in Chicago).

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

3 dead? Child's play. Shit, Admiral, you don't even care about 20 six year old first graders being slaughtered in their class room and you criticize others with this weak bullshit?

Fuck off dunce.

The simple explanation is that the right to self defense is just that, a right. You can't have different institutions deciding whether to allow a "right". Why not allow trained, vetted people the right to self defense with concealed carry?

Do your homework. The opposition to such a law is well stated.

There is no universal right to self defense. Establishments are permitted to ban handguns from their buildings. My place of work does so. My credit union does so. I do not allow handguns in my home. Even the proposed law allowing concealed weapons in dorms/classrooms in colleges in Texas would not apply to private institutions. So even Texas legislators realize that different institutions can have different rights pertaining to concealed handguns. So you are wrong.

What is wrong with open carry? Better check up on some laws in this country. Missouri has had open carry since their post Civil War Constitution was signed in 1875. Olathe, KS has open carry. Many other states have open carry depending on the weapon.

Open carry of rifles is allowed in Texas. Occasionally you will see some relatives of the Duck Dynasty crew demonstrating that right in Texas. The average person does NOT want to see people openly carrying weapons. I have been in Missouri a few times and, despite what you say is the law, I have never seen any private citizen openly carrying a handgun. I'm sure that a few people do so, but the average person in Mo. probably doesn't even know they have the right to do so, and even less actually carry. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

If you believe this then we cannot have a conversation.

If you believe this then we cannot have a conversation. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Don't argue with me. State and Federal court decisions have made it perfectly clear that a person does not at all times have a universal right to self defense.

allow trained, vetted people the right to self defense with concealed carry?


speaking.

What you dimatards need to understand it does not matter if you have a gun or not if someone wants to kill you they can. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

outlaw guns and the archery business booms ... outlaw archery equipment and the knife makers flourish, outlaw knives and the baseball bat companies swing for the fence with sales, the trickle down continues until you get to rocks , we don't make rocks anymore, but confiscating them all ??

humans are a violent breed, where there's a will, there's a way ... fists/feet? cut off everyone's limbs when they are born !

I'm sure the liberals would be in a quandary if a gay black guy went and killed 60 gays at a liberal political gathering in San Fransisco. The news can't report it, it plays into the racist narrative and the anti gay narrative, but the numbers are so large they want to get the anti-gun narrative out there, so how do they spin it?

I'm sure the liberals would be in a quandary if a gay black guy went and killed 60 gays at a liberal political gathering in San Fransisco. The news can't report it, it plays into the racist narrative and the anti gay narrative, but the numbers are so large they want to get the anti-gun narrative out there, so how do they spin it? Originally Posted by Jewish Lawyer

Nothing wrong with Hitler having a few gas chambers to defend himself

humans are a violent breed, where there's a will, there's a way ... fists/feet? cut off everyone's limbs when they are born ! Originally Posted by CJ7

its why they geld horses..or make steers out of bulls

you first

Don't argue with me. State and Federal court decisions have made it perfectly clear that a person does not at all times have a universal right to self defense. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Show us. I will not spend my time looking for a negative. If you truly believe this then show us those decisions.

its why they geld horses..or make steers out of bulls

you first Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

obnoxious much?

Nothing wrong with Hitler having a few gas chambers to defend himself Originally Posted by WTF

I know you think that way, exploiter of illegals

P.S. Go fuck yourself, faggotty anti-Semite and welcher

Show us. I will not spend my time looking for a negative. If you truly believe this then show us those decisions. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Courts have ruled that establishments can ban guns from their buildings. Here are a few other cases in which courts have restricted gun ownership or guns from being carried in certain places. This research took all of 5 minutes and only consists of recent rulings. I am sure I can find MANY other court decisions that have limited what you call the universal right to self defense.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/15/supreme-court-maryland-gun-law_n_4100510.html

The Supreme Court won't review a decision upholding a Maryland gun law that requires residents to demonstrate a "good and substantial reason" to get a permit to carry a handgun outside their own home or business.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/07/supreme-court-guns-church_n_2424597.html

The Supreme Court won't overturn a Georgia law banning firearms in churches and other places of worship.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/01/nyregion/federal-judge-upholds-majority-of-new-york-gun-law.html?_r=0

A federal judge ruled on Tuesday that New York’s strict new gun laws, including an expanded ban on assault weapons, were constitutional, but struck down a provision forbidding gun owners to load more than seven rounds into a magazine.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/08/nra-handgun-control-atf-supreme-court

Last week, the National Rifle Association filed a petition with the Supreme Court (PDF) asking it to strike down a ban on the sale of handguns to people who are at least 18 and younger than 21.

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled last year that the restriction was "consistent with a longstanding tradition of targeting select groups' ability to access and to use arms for the sake of public safety." It also acknowledged that Congress found people below the age of 21 to be "relatively immature and that denying them easy access to handguns would deter violent crime"