The full court press for gun control in Texas has unintended consequences; and people there are safer, as a direct result!

in #informationwar4 months ago

Texans sometimes make me proud, and this is one of those times! With understand and wisdom, they have resisted the pressure to take rights away from honest Texans, and told gun control liberals to kiss off. In response to demands that they pass sweeping restrictions in new laws, they instead removed and reduced existing restrictions in a wide area of laws. In so doing, they held the line and represented their voters well!

So; Don't mess with Texas!

Image from Pixabay:
https://pixabay.com/photos/shooting-ar-woman-ar-15-gun-rifle-777802/
shooting pixabay.jpg
Fun at the Range.

Article on Texas's response to attempts at gun control over recent mass shootings:
https://thinkamericana.com/texas-to-relax-gun-laws-following-el-paso-shooting/

Texas lawmakers respond to the full court press to force gun control on the innocent Citizens in Texas, by relaxing gun laws across the board. They understand, that you limit the crazy people that want to kill, by ensuring that more good Citizens are armed, more often!

Well this is great news! Following the recent mass shooting at the Walmart in El Paso, Texas is planning to loosen up their gun control laws!

It should say something when the state with some of the most relaxed gun laws in the United States is relaxing their laws even more when it comes to buildings of worship, apartments, foster homes, and schools. Better late than never!

Texas lawmakers realize that if someone evil wants to do harm, they will do it no matter what laws are in place. The only solution is to make sure good people have means to defend themselves.

This is the wise way to respond to emergencies, by allowing people their Constitutional right to defend themselves! As they say when seconds count, the Police are only minutes away...and this proves that Texas Representatives understand this fact! They serve their constituents well

In a rare moment of honesty from CNN, quoted in this article we see:

“There is no indication that the shooting in Dayton, Ohio, would have been prevented by proposed universal background checks or legislation to bolster the federal background check system. The alleged El Paso, Texas, shooter purchased his firearm legally and there is no evidence that he had a criminal history that a background check would’ve caught.”

Which begs the question; if it would Not help limit the crazy shooters, why do the liberals run home to momma (gun control) every time there is a shooting? It is the same as saying my neighbor has too many kids, so we should make a law that everyone else be steralized....

Article on the full court press for gun control in Texas:
https://txgunrights.org/latest-news/will-governor-abbott-cave-on-gun-control/

In this post the author is concerned that the knee jerk reactions will be to punish honest sane gun owners for the actions of a few crazy ones. It is a legitimate concern that liberal politicians push for more gun control the day after every shooting occurs.

Yet the gun control crowd and their allies in the media are pouncing on the opportunity to further rip our country apart.

Even though the crime scenes are still being processed, anti-gun vultures are swooping in for political gain.

Failed U.S. Senate candidate and now Presidential hopeful Beto O’Rourke is calling for universal gun registration, outright gun bans, and due process-shredding “Red Flag” laws.

Not surprisingly, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris are echoing his demands.

Instead of placing the blame on violent criminals and terrorists who slaughtered their fellow citizens, they want to blame you and me.

Here is the actual lawmaker's response:
https://therivardreport.com/9-new-gun-laws-to-loosen-the-rules-in-texas/

The lawmakers loosen gun laws across the board in Texas, to make Citizens in Texas safer. This is the proper response to the flagrant misuse of firearms! Arming the good people of Texas will provide defensive firearms to more locations, allowing immediate response to the crazy shooter situations. This is great news for Texas, and needs to be adopted everywhere else, until this shooting blight is brought under control!

During the 86th session of the Texas Legislature, lawmakers passed nine new rules governing firearms in a state that already has some of the most lenient gun laws in the United States. Each of the new laws goes into effect on Sept. 1.

These include:

Under SB 535, firearms can be carried legally at any church, synagogue, or other established place of worship.

HB 302 prohibits landlords from restricting possession of firearms by residents or their guests. Likewise, SB 741 prohibits a property owners association from restricting the possession, transportation, or storage of a firearm or ammunition. The law also prohibits restrictions on the lawful discharge of a firearm.

HB 1143 allows licensed gun owners to store their handguns, firearms, and ammunition in private vehicles on school campuses as long as it is out of plain view.

HB 1177 gives people the right to carry a handgun without a license during declared state and local disasters. It also allows disaster shelters to admit evacuees with firearms.

By arming more sheepdogs, we actually can keep the wolves under control! History has proven this to be true. The problem is not, and never has been, the guns; it is contained in the heart of those willing to do violence to others. When there is no longer a moral absolute (thou shalt not murder) then with enough work; you can justify anything, including Murder!

Remain Vigilant and don't be a victim!

Sort:  

Imagine for a moment that someone developed an app (StopDead) that can stop any targeted internal-combustion engine cold within 50 meters (and cause thousands of dollars in damage).

Now imagine the stated purpose of this app (StopDead) is to protect you (and others) from getting hit by an oncoming motorist (or an out-of-control government agent).

The app (StopDead) costs about $200 to install.

It also costs about $5 per use.

Do you believe such an app (StopDead) should be legal or illegal?

Do you believe more people should have the app (StopDead) or fewer people should have it?

Do you perhaps believe that people should be over a certain age, or be screened somehow (perhaps psychologically) before being allowed to install such an app?

Easier to ban all assault cars, and to make us all walk. Only police and military need cars anyway....

They have the ability to scramble the ECM and stop your car right now. But they would never abuse their power....

They also have microwave emitters intended to be used for crowd control (hearding tool), effectively inserting us into a mobile mivrowave oven. In passing, that would be a good app to have; at least until these signals fry the phone.

But the government is our benign protector...so why be concerned about democide?

>:(

So I take it you believe the hypothetical StopDead app would be a good thing for everyone to have?

I never said that. The ability to restrict other's movements is NOT freedom. I could build one with some radar gear I have, but it is anathema to my core beliefs. All you need do is exceed the buss protection voltage of the ECM with short wave length EM signals, by pumping high enough power. Pulse signals are the most likely to cause maximum damage.

If Police use them, I believe they should have to pay for the damage they cause.

Conversely, no one has the right to do harm to others with their property, in this case their car.

I do NOT approve of the microwave crowd control either, I just get the information in the trade magazines.

I want people left alone to do as THEY choose. It is Not my place to order them to do what I want them to do! BUT, I require the same from others!

>:(

I never said that. The ability to restrict other's movements is NOT freedom.

Isn't the ability to shoot someone dead, "the ability to restrict other's movements"?

If Police use them, I believe they should have to pay for the damage they cause.

I agree 100%. I've heard of many cases where police searched automobiles or homes and basically ripped them to shreds without finding any contraband, and the owner is expected to pay for any damages.

Conversely, no one has the right to do harm to others with their property, in this case their car.

In your wild-west-fantasy, how do you expect people to keep others from doing "harm to others with their property"?

Isn't the concept of "guns for everyone" (mutually assured destruction) precisely the same as giving everyone equal access to the hypothetical StopDead app?

Wouldn't "mutually assured destruction" also keep people from just killing other people's cars for fun or for spite?

Isn't the ability to shoot someone dead, "the ability to restrict other's movements"?

This is entirely dependent on how the firearm is used. I have carried one (or more) for several decades, and I have not restricted anyone. Most firearms in good people's hands are defensive in nature too. ANY TOOL can be used improperly, but more firearms Historically reduces crime numbers.

In your wild-west-fantasy, how do you expect people to keep others from doing "harm to others with their property"?

This is not something I like, and I wish it was not needed! If used properly, for self defense, no one outside of those initiating harm, will suffer. A hundred firearms in my neighborhood would cause me no problems.

Conversely, ONE Offensive firearm could cause irreparable harm, in the absence of defensive firearms.

My firearm is a precision device, because I Practice, but your stop dead app would damage all cars in it's path. One bullet from my hunting rifle would permanently stop a car if I needed to do so. Besides the equipment required is significant, and can never be contained in a cell phone.

Isn't the concept of "guns for everyone" (mutually assured destruction) precisely the same as giving everyone equal access to the hypothetical StopDead app?

Guns for everyone is guaranteed in our founding documents, to avoid the real threat, democide

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democide THIS killed more people in the last century than all the wars did, so this is the real threat!

There is a real possibility that were this car killing ability become popular, there is a very good chance that the attacker would destroy his own car at the same time. I could modify my car to resist a specific Frequency, both on the transmit and receive ends. The rifle would be more positive , LOL!

Your video is interesting, I am currently preparing a home in the country I already bought, to be off grid and self contained. I will make my own power, vehicle fuel, and food....

:)>

The StopDead app is hypothetical, but with more and more vehicles now being connected to the internets, it's not inconceivable.

The StopDead app would be able to target specific vehicles.

It would cost about $200 and charge an additional $5 per use.

The StopDead app would give you "the ability to restrict other's movements".

EXACTLY THE SAME AS A GUN DOES, BUT IT WOULD BE SAFER BECAUSE IT COULD ONLY BE USED TO KILL CARS AND TRUCKS.

I'm asking if you believe the "mutually assured destruction" principle would also apply to the StopDead app (to mitigate potential abuse)?

OR, do you believe the StopDead app should be made illegal or restricted to only people who meet certain licensing requirements?

Saying you could modify your car to protect you from the StopDead app is exactly the same as telling people to just buy bullet-proof clothing if they are worried about random wackos shooting up their neighborhood.

I am an Electrical Engineer, so my view of a car stopper is different than yours. My intent, if I decided to do it would be to permanently destroy the internal computer in the car I wanted to disable using microwaves. This is what the Police are doing, per the trade magazines.

This type of device can destroy both cars, unless the transmitting car has internal protection against the microwave signal. I would include that protection in my car, before using the transmitter.

Any app that can be bought, can be blocked by more money on the other end.

You would also have a hard time with both of my cars. One is a 1990 Range Rover, and I cut the antenna loose in my "Connected" car. I don't care for people spying on my movements, using my own hardware.

EXACTLY THE SAME AS A GUN DOES, BUT IT WOULD BE SAFER BECAUSE IT COULD ONLY BE USED TO KILL CARS AND TRUCKS.

No, turning off an ignition is NOT the same and can be blocked on almost all cars. A rifle bullet will work 100% of the time, and can be used to gather food, and protect the home. Do that with an app....

I actually have several bullet RESISTANT vests (there is no such thing as a bullet Proof vests) which I wear when I do security at church, when I also carry firearms at their request.

Firearms are not dangerous by themselves, they are simply a tool that can be used improperly. You are mixing the offensive, and a defensive use of the same device. Two completely different things....

:)>

Democide
Democide is a term proposed by R. J. Rummel since at least 1994 who defined it as "the intentional killing of an unarmed or disarmed person by government agents acting in their authoritative capacity and pursuant to government policy or high command". According to him, this definition covers a wide range of deaths, including forced labor and concentration camp victims; killings by "unofficial" private groups; extrajudicial summary killings; and mass deaths due to the governmental acts of criminal omission and neglect, such as in deliberate famines, as well as killings by de facto governments, i.e. civil war killings. This definition covers any murder of any number of persons by any government.Rummel created the term as an extended concept to include forms of government murder not covered by the term genocide.

Hello there my friend, it's good to be back here and be talking. How's janton ? Any news about him?

He's on here every day, so you will run into him soon. I'm still trying to get him on weku too.

Are you back posting? I've been worried about you. I know how rough school can be!

:)>

The logic here seems to be,

If you have a school full of kids and there are a couple of kids with baseball bats that are hitting other kids over the head, just give them all baseball bats.

Or better yet, give them all guns.

A better analogy would be if you have that situation, you take away all the protective gear from the other kids.

That is what is missed, the firearms being removed, are Defensive firearms. The Offensive firearms will forever be unaffected by regulations.

I have carried for decades, and have never needed to pull my firearm. If I am to believe them, the pistol would have snuck out and attacked someone by now....

I also carry three, by their request, at Church. I don't like it that in our time it is needed, but I do carry there too.

:'(

I'm always hearing people complain that the world is full of idiots.

Do you really think the world would be a safer place if every idiot had a gun?

Do you think barfights and roadrage would be less of a problem if every idiot had a gun?

Now if you want to talk about defense, should we all just buy bullet-proof jackets?

https://bulletblocker.com/bullet-proof-clothing.html

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure you are an intelligent and responsible musketeer, but I certainly don't like the idea of every idiot out there carrying a gun.

The idiots you worry about already have guns.

I would rather be somewhere with a hundred decent people armed, than in the same location, unarmed, with one of those idiots.

I have taught a number of people, how to use a firearm properly. I also practice regularly, to avoid mistakes.

Bulletproof clothing is actually bullet Resistant, and it is heavy and uncomfortable. It also only avoids penetration, you still must absorb the force. This usually results in a broken rib, and possible internal bleeding.

Sadly we can only restrict the law abiding citizen's access to firearms.

After all making drugs illegal has done away with them, so I'm sure these gun laws will be just as effective....

Murder is in the heart, not the firearm; and wisdom is not gained by not carrying a firearm. Nor are idiots limited to those who carry firearms.

My entire family carries, and my Son is an armed security officer at a local university. We collectively have never pulled a weapon, but I have taught them proper use since they were kids.

I have instructed, and armed two of three sisters. I have a pistol for the third one she will not get, until she is fully trained.

Now for the bottom line, the government does not have the authority to restrict firearms. Our Founding Fathers knew that the largest threat to free citizens, was their own government. I posted on this recently. They wrote about it 200 plus years ago, it was true then too....

:)>

Ok, that seems to make sense, if you believe that all the dangerous people already have guns.

Do you believe any measures (non-federal) should be implemented to mitigate potential harm?

Perhaps mandatory firearms education in schools?

Now that you mention it, we do seem eager to throw a gun into the hands of every able-bodied 18 year old we can find when it suits our "national interests"...

Perhaps mandatory firearms education in schools?

While it wasn't mandatory, there was a time when many schools had gun clubs. It wasn't uncommon to see a rifle in some of the back windows of the trucks at high school, and we didn't have the terror of school shootings that have grown in frequency in recent years.

True, that was common, and safe. This is a heart problem, not a firearm problem.

:'(

Since any competent machinist can make a basic firearm in a few hours, yes they can get what they want. I can build one that looks factory in a day. Banning would make the price so high that some machinists would be tempted.

Laws are currently in place for misuse. You shoot, they arrest today already. The biggest problems we have are related to not enforcing what is on the books currently.

When those who are not allowed to have a firearm are found with a firearm, it should be prison. If they use one in a robbery, they should not get out. I carry insurance (USCCA) for legal fees if I ever need to use mine.

I had training in school, and I am fine with that. we teach swimming to avoid a life threatening situation (drowning) in school....

True, but when they come back, one of the targeted groups to disarm is the veterans; who have very good training, SMH!

:)>

Congratulations @smithlabs! You received a personal award!

Happy Birthday! - You are on the Steem blockchain for 2 years!

You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking

You can upvote this notification to help all Steem users. Learn how here!

26 months, but thanks.

:)>

Congratulations @smithlabs! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

You published a post every day of the week

You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

To support your work, I also upvoted your post!

You can upvote this notification to help all Steem users. Learn how here!

As long as people stay politically active and everything. This is a tricky subject. If judges were perfect, this would be a walk in the park. But some judges can be morally insane.

They work for the father of lies, and sadly make him proud.

You are right, we can no longer let politics slide, we Must watch everything they want to do.

>:(

Texas rocks in some ways!

Much as I hate to say it, they did GOOD here, LOL! Perfect response to the gun grabbers, but you guys need to replace the politician who wanted to support the gun grabber's agenda!

:).

Then we'd only have one party.

Sadly, we only have one party here today already.

:)>

where? and what party?

The USA, when the liberals and RINOs get together; they are monolithic and Insane.

:)>

Especially the Insane part, LOL!

:)>