How Democrats could get their way on gun control

Howdy: I'm an attorney licensed to practise law in the State of Texas.

As stated: PERMITLESS. PERMITLESS != Constitutional Carry.
In this permitless carry state, passing in to an area with a proper 30.07 or 30.06 while armed in violation is a crime. Carry anyways, and end up having to use it? You're in for a bad time as what you did was illegal as you were not then in lawful possession of your firearm.

In a constitutional carry state like Indiana, you can walk right past that sign and AT MOST you can be asked to leave by the owner IF they spot you carrying. Shoot someone otherwise lawfully? You're good.

See the difference?

And Texas, as stated, loves authority just different sorts. For instance: No background checks for ammo, instead we have a LT Gov who keeps getting elected even though he prevents legalization of marijuana (even simple decriminalization or medical ) bills that have passed the Republican controlled house and announced they have the votes in the Senate from being calendared for a vote.
He's done that twice now. That's 4 years running. And bragged about it both times and in this recent election.
We do other silly **** like that.
We're not the most free state in the union, even if you restrict your definition to only refer to gun laws.

 

I carry concealed everywhere except for hospitals, schools and other areas where its forbidden. I've made sure it was ok... I asked cops.

Marijuana has nothing to do with guns. It seems your preoccupation with dope says you don't really want to talk about guns. Smokin' da dope and guns are apples and space shuttles... totally different. I'm all for restricting illegal drug use even if you aren't. I bet if you look hard you'll find a dope discussion somewhere. but its not here.

 

Other areas forbidden would be areas posting a proper 30.07 or 30.06.
In Texas if you carry in those places and have to shoot someone who is straight up murdering everyone in the room? You've committed more than one crime and you're going to prison.
In Indiana or any other constitutional carry state, you can carry in those places and have to do the same? You've committed no crime.
See how that works?

As stated: Texas rides the authority dick in a different way than California, but still rides it pretty hard.
As stated: Even if you want to restrict the definition of being free to gun law only, we don't rate the top spot.
As stated: You wanted to have a we've got the most freedom discussion. That opens the door to discuss more than a narrow issue. Don't want to talk about it? Don't make wild, sweeping claims which are unsupported in fact and law.

 

"rides the authority dick"????? Ok.... your foul mouth, childishness, and ego preclude you from having any value here. I will block you now. Have a nice day.

 

I'd phrased it more delicately, but you wanted to pretend to be obtuse.
Can't take a little locker room talk when you fight the hook with no understanding of the legal position or the facts?
I, for one, hope your day is not nice.

 

On this we agree. The Pacific United States of America proposes a new very blue nation with Washington, Oregon, California and Hawaii seceding from the union and forming their own. You can keep your court, your Congress, and your constitution. We can make our own. I like it.

 

What makes you think it would be "very blue"?

 

Have you not been paying attention this last year. He says lots of things that are not correct. He has a hard time correctly telling a story about his life. Why are you still thinking everything he says is correct.

 

Mostly the populations of Seattle, LA, San Francisco, Portland, San Diego, Sacramento, etc.

 

So do the counties with red majorities declare themselves to be part of the USA, given that the power to dissassociate politically seems acceptable? Would they just be considered rebel or enemy territory by the capitals of the Left Coast? I wonder how this new Blue country would guarantee freedom of passage through those lands?

 

They'd secede as states, and apparently the majority would rule. Try using a map that inflates or deflates the size of the counties in proportion to their population and see if you don't get what I'm talking about.

 

To essentially be a tyrant.

That sounds more like a coup.

 

The capital of the country you shouldn't be allowed to have state representatives as it's not a state and shouldn't be considered one. The reason why it's not a state shouldn't be considered one is because no state government should have authority over federal government.

 

I understand that the states would secede, but that doesn't mean that the eastern halves would go willingly. Why couldn't they just secede from the western parts, or appeal to the US to remain part of the US?

 

I don't know why you don't understand this Democrats don't care about abortion. They care about having a political football.

That's why in the 50 years they had between the court case decision and the overruling of it they didn't do squat to make sure it was supported by anything more than a court case that could be overruled.

Why would you ever support these manipulative creatons?

 

I suppose there is really no rule saying they couldn't but historically its not really how it works.

 

ITs the same reason they refuse to pass the SAFE banking act or change the controlled substances act to remove marijuana from scheduling.
They want the carrot attached to a stick that they can lead you around and get you to pull the cart for them with. They don't want to actually give you the carrot, they want to promise you the carrot so you'll do things.

 

It's a pretty small sample size. We still have the question of how does the West Coast enclaves actually secure the eastern parts.

 

O they would never secede in the first place: That western nation gets its water from the colorado river. You think arizona is going to give them water if it isn't required to by the feds?

 

The eastern Washingtonians would just have to dynamite the pass from Seattle.

 

Couldn't have said it better myself

 

Michael Moore is predicting that Democrats will win big in the midterms. If so then they could be in a very good position to get rid of the filibuster and pass new gun safety legislation.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/oct/23/michael-moore-democratic-party-win-midterm-interview

 

New gun safety laws? Nah... all we have to do is make sure the current ones are enforced. If the Repubs win... the Dems will make absolutely certain that the filibuster remains in place.

 

And SCOTUS will Bruen the heck out of them.

 

The left does not have the power to do any of those things.

But thanks for the reminder that progressives hate our Constitution and would abolish our freedom if they had the chance to do so.