Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 1/16/2021 3:26:46 PM EST
Link Posted: 1/16/2021 4:06:37 PM EST
That's cool and all, but it will be as effective at protecting 2nd Amendment rights as the 2nd Amendment itself.

Constitutional Carry is probably a better basket to put most of our eggs into.

Calls, emails, set up meetings and go to committees hearings on the bill, etc.
Link Posted: 1/16/2021 4:17:19 PM EST
Well with Abbot giving lip service to ‘red flag laws’ and Patrick to ‘universal back ground checks’, I would not have a lot of hope for them to stand up to feds.
Link Posted: 1/16/2021 4:23:28 PM EST
I'll be happy if nothing happens regarding firearm laws this session.  With Xiden coming in and the next session in 2023 it'd give the legislature time to counter DC's bullshit (and us get some less RINOs in Austin).
Link Posted: 1/17/2021 9:28:51 AM EST
Any "Good news" these days is "Good news" and we need ALL the Good news AND PEOPLE CONTACTING THEIR REPRESENTATIVES TO MAKE IT HAPPEN AS POSSIBLE!!!

Don't sit back and assume this is already DONE or a 100% slam dunk.  THIS is just starting and WE NEED TO KEEP FRIENDLY & CIVIL PRESSURE on our Reps to get what we want.

WHO REPRESENTS ME - CONTACT LINK
Link Posted: 1/17/2021 2:35:53 PM EST
Another attempt to pander to gun owners. State laws like this have ZERO effect on your freedoms.

"Firearm Freedom Laws" do not eliminate federal firearms laws due to the Supremacy Clause.
Local and state LE don't enforce federal law anyway.


Every politician that introduces this type of legislation is trying to show how much he/she supports the Second Amendment, but in fact is substituting bullshit for real legislation.

87R45 LHC-F

By: TothH.B. No. 112



A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT
relating to the enforcement of certain federal laws regulating
firearms, firearm accessories, and firearm ammunition within the
State of Texas; creating a criminal offense. This brilliant Texas legislator hasn't read the Supremacy Clause.
       BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
       SECTION 1.  The Legislature of the State of Texas finds that:
             (1)  The Tenth Amendment to the United States
Constitution reserves to the states and the people all powers not
granted to the federal government elsewhere in the constitution, as
those powers were understood at the time Texas was admitted to
statehood in 1845.  The guaranty of those powers is a matter of
contract between the state and people of Texas and the United States
dating from the time Texas became a state.
             (2)  The Ninth Amendment to the United States
Constitution guarantees to the people rights not enumerated in the
constitution, as those rights were understood at the time Texas
became a state.  The guaranty of those rights is a matter of
contract between the state and people of Texas and the United States
dating from the time Texas became a state.
             (3)  The Second Amendment to the United States
Constitution guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear
arms, as that right was understood at the time Texas became a state.  
The guaranty of that right is a matter of contract between the state
and people of Texas and the United States dating from the time Texas
became a state.
             (4)  Section 23, Article I, Texas Constitution, secures
to Texas citizens the right to keep and bear arms.  That
constitutional protection is unchanged from the date the
constitution was adopted in 1876.
       SECTION 2.  Title 8, Penal Code, is amended by adding Chapter
40 to read as follows:
CHAPTER 40.  THE TEXAS FIREARM PROTECTION ACT
       Sec. 40.01.  SHORT TITLE.  This chapter may be cited as the
Texas Firearm Protection Act.
       Sec. 40.02.  DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:
             (1)  "Firearm" has the meaning assigned by Section
46.01.
             (2)  "Firearm accessory" means an item that is used in
conjunction with or mounted on a firearm but is not essential to the
basic function of the firearm. The term includes a detachable
firearm magazine.
       Sec. 40.03.  STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT POLICY REGARDING
ENFORCEMENT OF FEDERAL FIREARM LAWS.  
(a)  This section applies to:
             (1)  the State of Texas, including an agency,
department, commission, bureau, board, office, council, court, or
other entity that is in any branch of state government and that is
created by the constitution or a statute of this state, including a
university system or a system of higher education;
             (2)  the governing body of a municipality, county, or
special district or authority;
             (3)  an officer, employee, or other body that is part of
a municipality, county, or special district or authority, including
a sheriff, municipal police department, municipal attorney, or
county attorney; and
             (4)  a district attorney or criminal district attorney.
Well, state and local governments don't enforce federal law. Never have.
       (b)  An entity described by Subsection (a) may not adopt a
rule, order, ordinance, or policy under which the entity enforces,
or by consistent action allows the enforcement of, a federal
statute, order, rule, or regulation enacted on or after January 1,
2021, that purports to regulate a firearm, a firearm accessory, or
firearm ammunition if the statute, order, rule, or regulation
imposes a prohibition, restriction, or other regulation, such as a
capacity or size limitation, a registration requirement, or a
background check, that does not exist under the laws of this state.
That's nice, but already illegal under current Texas law.
       
(c)  No entity described by Subsection (a) and no person
employed by or otherwise under the direction or control of the
entity may enforce or attempt to enforce any federal statute,
order, rule, or regulation described by Subsection (b).
They don't do it now.
       (d)  An entity described by Subsection (a) may not receive
state grant funds if the entity adopts a rule, order, ordinance, or
policy under which the entity enforces any federal law described by
Subsection (b) or, by consistent actions, allows the enforcement of
any federal law described by Subsection (b).  State grant funds for
the entity shall be denied for the fiscal year following the year in
which a final judicial determination in an action brought under
this section is made that the entity has violated Subsection (b).
"or....allows the enforcement of any federal law described..."? Yeah, state and local LE stopping ATF/FBI/DEA from doing their job? I want video!
       (e)  Any citizen residing in the jurisdiction of an entity
described by Subsection (a) may file a complaint with the attorney
general if the citizen offers evidence to support an allegation
that the entity has adopted a rule, order, ordinance, or policy
under which the entity enforces a federal law described by
Subsection (b) or that the entity, by consistent actions, allows
the enforcement of a law described by Subsection (b).  The citizen
must include with the complaint any evidence the citizen has in
support of the complaint.
       (f)  If the attorney general determines that a complaint
filed under Subsection (e) against an entity described by
Subsection (a) is valid, to compel the entity's compliance with
this section the attorney general may file a petition for a writ of
mandamus or apply for other appropriate equitable relief in a
district court in Travis County or in a county in which the
principal office of the entity is located.  The attorney general may
recover reasonable expenses incurred in obtaining relief under this
subsection, including court costs, reasonable attorney's fees,
investigative costs, witness fees, and deposition costs.
       (g)  An appeal of a suit brought under Subsection (f) is
governed by the procedures for accelerated appeals in civil cases
under the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.  The appellate court
shall render its final order or judgment with the least possible
delay.
       (h)  A person commits an offense if, in the person's official
capacity as an officer of an entity described by Subsection (a), or
as a person employed by or otherwise under the direction or control
of the entity, or under color of law, the person knowingly enforces
or attempts to enforce any federal statute, order, rule, or
regulation described by Subsection (b).  An offense under this
subsection is a Class A misdemeanor.
       SECTION 3.  This Act takes effect immediately if it receives
a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, as
provided by Section 39, Article III, Texas Constitution.  If this
Act does not receive the vote necessary for immediate effect, this
Act takes effect September 1, 2021.
View Quote


How about not introducing bills that offer zero benefit. Bills like this confuse the public and for those unaware of the Supremacy Clause cause a lifetime of grief.....just ask Shane Cox and Jeremy Kettler how the Kansas Second Amendment Protection Act worked out for them.

Not one bit of this bill ends any federal firearms law or how its enforced. But yay!!!!! another freedom law is good! No, it isn't. We need LESS laws, not more.

How about a bill removing all Texas state laws regarding firearm possession and use except for criminal acts?
How about a law letting teachers carry firearms on school property?
How about constitutional carry?


Link Posted: 1/17/2021 5:29:16 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DogtownTom:
Another attempt to pander to gun owners. State laws like this have ZERO effect on your freedoms.

"Firearm Freedom Laws" do not eliminate federal firearms laws due to the Supremacy Clause.
Local and state LE don't enforce federal law anyway.


Every politician that introduces this type of legislation is trying to show how much he/she supports the Second Amendment, but in fact is substituting bullshit for real legislation.


How about not introducing bills that offer zero benefit. Bills like this confuse the public and for those unaware of the Supremacy Clause cause a lifetime of grief.....just ask Shane Cox and Jeremy Kettler how the Kansas Second Amendment Protection Act worked out for them.

Not one bit of this bill ends any federal firearms law or how its enforced. But yay!!!!! another freedom law is good! No, it isn't. We need LESS laws, not more.

How about a bill removing all Texas state laws regarding firearm possession and use except for criminal acts?
How about a law letting teachers carry firearms on school property?
How about constitutional carry?


View Quote



With Respect Dogtown Tom, perhaps we need to adopt the winning tactics of the Left in some things.

Is Marijuana STILL illegal on the Federal Level? Last time I checked it still was.

YET, it is "Legal" / "Decriminalized" in a significant number of States, who have essentially given the Bird to the "Supremacy Clause" & the Feds.

So, if Xiden & Ho Chi Harris decide to go after our guns, we treat it the same way other states do Pot.  

We have a Governor, we have the Legislature, we have many local Sheriffs who would support such.

Am I wrong to think such a thing as "Texas gives the Finger  to Gun Laws - Says it will NOT Comply" is possible?

Link Posted: 1/17/2021 7:41:21 PM EST
Link Posted: 1/17/2021 7:45:02 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bigger_Hammer:



With Respect Dogtown Tom, perhaps we need to adopt the winning tactics of the Left in some things.

Is Marijuana STILL illegal on the Federal Level? Last time I checked it still was.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bigger_Hammer:



With Respect Dogtown Tom, perhaps we need to adopt the winning tactics of the Left in some things.

Is Marijuana STILL illegal on the Federal Level? Last time I checked it still was.

Yep, and get caught bringing in a truckload into any state where marijuana has been legalized by the state and you'll still be subject to federal penalties.
Just because a state doesn't prohibit ____ doesn't mean it's legal under federal law.

YET, it is "Legal" / "Decriminalized" in a significant number of States, who have essentially given the Bird to the "Supremacy Clause" & the Feds.

Don't confuse states decriminalizing or legalizing the possession or use of marijuana at the state level with the scope and purpose of the Supremacy Clause. Federal DEA could at any time raid every marijuana dispensary/store/dealer in those states and seize the pot, their cash and arrest everyone involved in that business selling it. They'll throw conspiracy charges on everyone connected. But only if the US Attorneys Office would accept such charges. They likely won't because in those states it would be difficult to get a conviction.


So, if Xiden & Ho Chi Harris decide to go after our guns, we treat it the same way other states do Pot.  

Good luck with that. US Attorneys Offices love slam dunk gun cases. Ask this guy if HB 112 would have saved him.


We have a Governor, we have the Legislature, we have many local Sheriffs who would support such.

Every single Texan could support it, but it doesn't change federal law.
Think for a minute why that's a good thing......think about why a Governor, Legislature and many local Sheriffs are exactly the people we don't want adding more gun laws. California is the best example of a "Governor, Legislature and many local Sheriffs" who think state law should override the Second Amendment.




Am I wrong to think such a thing as "Texas gives the Finger  to Gun Laws - Says it will NOT Comply" is possible?

Texas can pass all the laws it wants, but none can override or eliminate federal law....thats the point of the Supremacy Clause. Do you really believe it's giving the finger when it doesn't change a damned thing?
As I noted in red above, HB112 doesn't change a damned thing. Texas state and local LE doesn't enforce federal law as it is and as its always been. HB112 is pablum for the misinformed, ill informed and those easily placated by legislators who pretend to be advocates of the Second Amendment.

Less laws= more freedom. We need legislators who will remove existing state laws that violate the Second Amendment. HB112 doesn't do that.


Link Posted: 1/17/2021 8:07:05 PM EST
This bill is not only a joke, but a huge waste of pro-gun people’s efforts. If you want to do something worth a shit, get behind getting Constitutional Carry passed. Then push to get rid of more gun free zones. Both would do a lot more than this bill does.
Link Posted: 1/18/2021 3:15:20 AM EST
That's cute and all...or just fucking pass constitutional carry
Link Posted: 1/18/2021 11:56:59 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DonofKalifornia:
This bill is not only a joke, but a huge waste of pro-gun people’s efforts. If you want to do something worth a shit, get behind getting Constitutional Carry passed. Then push to get rid of more gun free zones. Both would do a lot more than this bill does.
View Quote


I emailed my representatives with this exactly. This is a wastes of time and effort. Constitutional carry should be the highest priority.
Link Posted: 1/18/2021 12:50:28 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DonofKalifornia:
This bill is not only a joke, but a huge waste of pro-gun people’s efforts. If you want to do something worth a shit, get behind getting Constitutional Carry passed. Then push to get rid of more gun free zones. Both would do a lot more than this bill does.
View Quote


Tell me more about Constitutional Carry so this would do away with the CHL?
Link Posted: 1/18/2021 1:07:03 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/18/2021 1:08:42 PM EST by DonofKalifornia]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Commando223:


Tell me more about Constitutional Carry so this would do away with the CHL?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Commando223:
Originally Posted By DonofKalifornia:
This bill is not only a joke, but a huge waste of pro-gun people’s efforts. If you want to do something worth a shit, get behind getting Constitutional Carry passed. Then push to get rid of more gun free zones. Both would do a lot more than this bill does.


Tell me more about Constitutional Carry so this would do away with the CHL?


Yes, if you can own a gun you can carry a gun. There would still be LTC’s so if you travel and to bypass NICS.

Constitutional Carry is does not allow felons to carry a gun as per what Boner was telling everyone.

Also remind representatives that passage of Constitutional Carry is a plank in the Texas Republican Party.
Link Posted: 1/18/2021 1:08:25 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Commando223:


Tell me more about Constitutional Carry so this would do away with the CHL?
View Quote


I would assume you would still have the LTC. That way you could carry in other states. I would also think the 30.06 abd 30.07 would also remain. You should be able to carry concealed without a permit as long as you are an adult and not a prohibited person.
Link Posted: 1/19/2021 11:39:04 AM EST
Another valuable reason to still have an LTC, even with Constitutional Carry, is for school zones.  Again with the supremacy of fed laws, but there are only a handful of exemptions that allow you to carry guns near schools, and eliminating state laws prohibiting concealed carry ain't one of the exemptions.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 2:01:39 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/20/2021 2:02:16 AM EST by joshdb50]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bigger_Hammer:



With Respect Dogtown Tom, perhaps we need to adopt the winning tactics of the Left in some things.

Is Marijuana STILL illegal on the Federal Level? Last time I checked it still was.

YET, it is "Legal" / "Decriminalized" in a significant number of States, who have essentially given the Bird to the "Supremacy Clause" & the Feds.

So, if Xiden & Ho Chi Harris decide to go after our guns, we treat it the same way other states do Pot.  

We have a Governor, we have the Legislature, we have many local Sheriffs who would support such.

Am I wrong to think such a thing as "Texas gives the Finger  to Gun Laws - Says it will NOT Comply" is possible?

View Quote


The sheriffs aren't going to engage in a firefight for your fucking suppressor, bro.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 8:08:22 AM EST
The feds will change the constitution by packing the supreame court. They can do whatever they want to do. Constitutional carry is a positive way to go. But the feds will do whatever they want. They do not have to abide by laws. The latest election is a good example.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 12:02:11 PM EST
What good will constitutional carry be if the guns you want to carry are banned by the federal government?

As far as the supremacy clause goes, there is a long history in the US of states nullifying federal laws. Marijuana laws are a prime example of this in modern history. You have pot shops setup in many states that are not hiding themselves. Pot farms in a state are growing it. The same can be done for guns.

It’s time our local and state governments start practicing the doctrine of the lesser magistrate.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 12:04:17 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By joshdb50:
The sheriffs aren't going to engage in a firefight for your fucking suppressor, bro.
View Quote

All they have to do is choose not to enforce unconstitutional laws. It’s already happening with rona lockdowns and mask mandates.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 12:18:10 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ar15eric:
What good will constitutional carry be if the guns you want to carry are banned by the federal government?

As far as the supremacy clause goes, there is a long history in the US of states nullifying federal laws. Marijuana laws are a prime example of this in modern history. You have pot shops setup in many states that are not hiding themselves. Pot farms in a state are growing it. The same can be done for guns.

It’s time our local and state governments start practicing the doctrine of the lesser magistrate.
View Quote


Sorry but you are really wrong. The FED will crack down on gun owners using FED officers/troops. Why not treated like marijuana? Well the DUMBocrats and even Republicans don’t hate people who use marijuana. The DUMBocrats hate gun owners and will make them pay for supporting the conservative Republicans and President Trump.

Passing this bill does nothing except waste time from passing better bills.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 12:38:01 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DonofKalifornia:


Sorry but you are really wrong. The FED will crack down on gun owners using FED officers/troops. Why not treated like marijuana? Well the DUMBocrats and even Republicans don’t hate people who use marijuana. The DUMBocrats hate gun owners and will make them pay for supporting the conservative Republicans and President Trump.

Passing this bill does nothing except waste time from passing better bills.
View Quote

Let’s walk through that same logic then.

Texas passes Constitutional carry. Federal government passes sweeping gun laws that all but eliminate my right to posses a firearm. Now tell me, what good are these other gun related bills?

Constitutional carry is a much bigger waste of time if you’re not allowed to even have firearms.

We are at a point in this country were the only effective tool we will have against tyranny is your local/state government refusing to enforce tyrannical laws.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 1:01:31 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ar15eric:
What good will constitutional carry be if the guns you want to carry are banned by the federal government?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ar15eric:
What good will constitutional carry be if the guns you want to carry are banned by the federal government?

Zero.
But any sort of gun ban surviving this Supreme Court is a liberals pipe dream.



As far as the supremacy clause goes, there is a long history in the US of states nullifying federal laws.

Don't misunderstand the difference with nullifying the law and selective enforcement.
There are plenty of pot busts in those states that have decriminalized the possession of marijuana.




Marijuana laws are a prime example of this in modern history. You have pot shops setup in many states that are not hiding themselves. Pot farms in a state are growing it. The same can be done for guns.

Sure. Good luck with that.

It’s time our local and state governments start practicing the doctrine of the lesser magistrate.

Our state and local government don't enforce federal law, never have.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 1:12:18 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/20/2021 1:12:37 PM EST by ar15eric]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DogtownTom:
Zero.
But any sort of gun ban surviving this Supreme Court is a liberals pipe dream.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DogtownTom:
Zero.
But any sort of gun ban surviving this Supreme Court is a liberals pipe dream.


Good luck with that. Especially after what we saw in December.

Originally Posted By DogtownTom:
Don't misunderstand the difference with nullifying the law and selective enforcement.
There are plenty of pot busts in those states that have decriminalized the possession of marijuana.

But yet not enough to shut down the industry. It’s thriving in many states.

Originally Posted By DogtownTom:
Our state and local government don't enforce federal law, never have.

No, but they quite frequently partner with feds. Many times the feds don’t know what’s going on until the local government tells them something is happening.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 1:16:20 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ar15eric:

Let’s walk through that same logic then.

Texas passes Constitutional carry. Federal government passes sweeping gun laws that all but eliminate my right to posses a firearm. Now tell me, what good are these other gun related bills?  
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ar15eric:

Let’s walk through that same logic then.

Texas passes Constitutional carry. Federal government passes sweeping gun laws that all but eliminate my right to posses a firearm. Now tell me, what good are these other gun related bills?  

First, "Federal government" doesn't pass laws.........Congress does and the President signs into law.  WE THE PEOPLE elect Congress and the President. Every two years we can show our displeasure with their performance. If they pass laws that enough of us don't like.....we have a maens to replace them.

Second, for fucks sake. Heller. Read it. The USSC has already ruled on the right to possess a firearm. I'm actually salivating at the though of the next gun rights lawsuit to reach this Supreme Court. If you are a liberal gun grabber.....you don't want that.


Constitutional carry is a much bigger waste of time if you’re not allowed to even have firearms.
"IF".....if the Queen had balls, she'd be King. FFS "If" doesn't mean jack squat. Fear of IF isn't a reason to stop trying to get Constitutional Carry......in fact its the best reason to keep pushing it.

We are at a point in this country were the only effective tool we will have against tyranny is your local/state government refusing to enforce tyrannical laws.

Horseshit.
Your state and local government enforce state and local laws, not federal laws no matter how tyrannical they might be. Been like that for years.
Of course nothing stops a state from mirroring federal law.....like Texas used to do with NFA firearms.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 1:39:18 PM EST
I think maybe I have the 'rona or something.  How can I be agreeing with Tom in two different threads at the same time?

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DogtownTom:

I'm actually salivating at the though of the next gun rights lawsuit to reach this Supreme Court.
View Quote


Same.

I'm actually quite pleased that some of the "conservative" Justices (and Chief Justice) are turning out to be more libertarian than conservative.  

But, yeah, I totally want to see some big 2A cases hit this SCOTUS.  

And, in order to provoke disagreement with Tom, and to spread the truth, I think that the Firearms Policy Coalition is our best bet to see big SCOTUS decisions.  If you're still donating to the impotent and corrupt NRA, you should seek help.  They aren't doing shit to help right now.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 2:25:03 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DogtownTom:
First, "Federal government" doesn't pass laws.........Congress does and the President signs into law.  WE THE PEOPLE elect Congress and the President. Every two years we can show our displeasure with their performance. If they pass laws that enough of us don't like.....we have a maens to replace them.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DogtownTom:
First, "Federal government" doesn't pass laws.........Congress does and the President signs into law.  WE THE PEOPLE elect Congress and the President. Every two years we can show our displeasure with their performance. If they pass laws that enough of us don't like.....we have a maens to replace them.

Correct, if we do something about it that is not a repeat of the last 40 years. If we elect a bunch of cowardly republicans in the mid terms, don’t expect anything.

Originally Posted By DogtownTom:
Second, for fucks sake. Heller. Read it. The USSC has already ruled on the right to possess a firearm. I'm actually salivating at the though of the next gun rights lawsuit to reach this Supreme Court. If you are a liberal gun grabber.....you don't want that.

FFS, SCOTUS has been denying cert for any 2A case since heller. They’ve had many 2A cases in the last few years and they punt them all. I don’t know how any sane person could have any faith in that institution after what we have seen from it in the last several years. Plus there is a very high likelihood that it will be packed this year.

Sorry to say, this is no longer the country you and I grew up in. We can’t use the same playbook we have been using, because that is how we lost  

Originally Posted By DogtownTom:
"IF".....if the Queen had balls, she'd be King. FFS "If" doesn't mean jack squat. Fear of IF isn't a reason to stop trying to get Constitutional Carry......in fact its the best reason to keep pushing it.

I never said to stop. I am saying to do both. FPA is a much higher priority though.

Originally Posted By DogtownTom:
Of course nothing stops a state from mirroring federal law.....like Texas used to do with NFA firearms.

Which is why we need to have it removed from Texas law. Much of exceptions to our laws around prohibited weapons are contingent on items being in the NFA registry. Texas should have no laws dependent on federal laws because those laws will change very quickly.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 2:27:30 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:
I'm actually quite pleased that some of the "conservative" Justices (and Chief Justice) are turning out to be more libertarian than conservative.  

But, yeah, I totally want to see some big 2A cases hit this SCOTUS.  
View Quote

Is this meant to be sarcasm? They will just dodge it like they have been dodging all the other 2A cases for years.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 2:48:56 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:
I think maybe I have the 'rona or something.  How can I be agreeing with Tom in two different threads at the same time?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:
I think maybe I have the 'rona or something.  How can I be agreeing with Tom in two different threads at the same time?







And, in order to provoke disagreement with Tom, and to spread the truth, I think that the Firearms Policy Coalition is our best bet to see big SCOTUS decisions.  

I don't know why you think I would disagree. FPC and the Second Amendment Foundation do the great legal work.
Where we disagree is the impact on legislative lobbying. I think the NRA is vastly more effective than GOA and NAGR.



If you're still donating to the impotent and corrupt NRA, you should seek help.  They aren't doing shit to help right now.

As is GOA and NAGR.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 2:56:50 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DogtownTom:
As is GOA and NAGR.
View Quote

Is GOA useless? I’ve haven’t heard this before, maybe just because they are not as high profile as the useless NRA.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 3:04:30 PM EST
I don’t see that this act will do anything. Will the state and local LEOs stop the the feds from enforcing federal gun control in the state? Obviously no. So how is this going to protect anyone living here?
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 3:30:44 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ar15eric:

Is GOA useless? I’ve haven’t heard this before, maybe just because they are not as high profile as the useless NRA.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ar15eric:
Originally Posted By DogtownTom:
As is GOA and NAGR.

Is GOA useless? I’ve haven’t heard this before, maybe just because they are not as high profile as the useless NRA.



The GOA is doing a lot more grassroots organizing than either the NRA or TSRA has ever done. The GOA and NAGR should never be used together in the same sentence. GOA under Erich Pratt has done quite a bit. More importantly the GOA is getting state representatives organized in each state. This is especially important since the NRA has done a terrible job on a state level. NAGR is simply a way for Dudley Brown to make himself a living without working. NAGR tried very hard to stop the recall on anti-gun legislators in Colorado, and then when a grass roots group removed 3 of the 4 NAGR tried taking credit for it. The 4th legislator was pretty wounded after and did not have much money to run again.

I finally got fed up with the NRA having been a life member since 1967, and worked as an NRA lobbyist in California (and no I did not get paid, nor asked for my expense be reimbursed). In California most of the work in gun rights including most if not all the lawsuits is by the California Rifle and Pistol Assc. Here in Texas the TSRA does nothing but stonewall getting our gun rights restored.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 3:50:00 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ar15eric:

Is GOA useless? I’ve haven’t heard this before, maybe just because they are not as high profile as the useless NRA.
View Quote


No, the GOA is not useless.

It's not a question you can ask your Congress critter in writing, but if you go to Washington (or their local office when in recess) and actually talk to them, you'll see that the NRA hasn't been nearly as relevant the past few years, and the GOA is starting to take over as the most powerful federal 2A lobbying organization.  Has GOA actually surpassed NRA's strength yet?  Probably not, but if the momentum continues GOA will surpass the NRA this year or next in terms of influence.  Of course, if the NRA is able to shake off the external attacks and the internal corruption and regain its focus, that could all change.  I totally think that it's possible for the NRA to regain its former status and power, but the Board of Directors don't seem very interested in doing what needs to be done for that to happen.  

At the state level, GOA is blowing the NRA away.  Seems to be doing better than the TSRA the past few months, too, but we'll see how that shakes out now that Texas is in session.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 3:52:40 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DogtownTom:

I don't know why you think I would disagree. FPC and the Second Amendment Foundation do the great legal work.

View Quote


Yeah, I'm definitely hallucinating or something...   I need to see a doctor.


On a serious note, I've never heard anyone but you mention the NAGR.  Are they new?  I want to believe you when you talk them down, but you're so wrong on the GOA.  

Anyone else know about the NAGR?
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 4:55:35 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:
I've never heard anyone but you mention the NAGR.  Are they new?...
View Quote

You have to be kidding.
NAGR please.

Other in the NAGR "umbrella" include Texas Gun Rights.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 5:14:18 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/20/2021 5:15:57 PM EST by RenegadeX]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ar15eric:
Is GOA useless?
View Quote


Can anyone name a single bill they got passed, either in Texas or Nationally? Any bills they stopped?

Any one every get certified by GOA?

Anyone ever been to their range? Museum? Get gun insurance?

Any Democrat ever say, if it wasnt for GOA, we would have more Gun Control?

GOA and others are just places for people who hate NRA to send their money and feel good about themselves. They accomplish nothing.

NRA and SAF are the only two organizations that have any successes.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 7:17:37 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DogtownTom:

You have to be kidding.
NAGR please.

Other in the NAGR "umbrella" include Texas Gun Rights.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DogtownTom:

You have to be kidding.
NAGR please.

Other in the NAGR "umbrella" include Texas Gun Rights.

Wow.   Well, I'm glad I haven't heard of them!

Originally Posted By RenegadeX:


Can anyone name a single bill they got passed, either in Texas or Nationally? Any bills they stopped?

Any one every get certified by GOA?

Anyone ever been to their range? Museum? Get gun insurance?

Any Democrat ever say, if it wasnt for GOA, we would have more Gun Control?



Well, now we all know who hasn't gone to Washington to talk to legislators.  Lobbying doesn't work like that.  All the 2A orgs are working on bills.  Unless they wrote them and the sponsor specifically names an organization, they can all claim to have gotten a bill passed.  In fact, legislators sometimes name groups other than the ones that do the most work (I've seen this, not in the 2A realm, but in other areas).  Same with stopping them.

And I've definitely personally spoken to Democrat and Republicans who have said that the GOA is more influential on Capitol Hill than the NRA on gun legislation.  Not with $$, but with voters.  I don't think that's true yet, but it's absolutely been said in the halls of Congress.

And GOA doesn't (yet?) offer any of the other things that the NRA did/does.  Stick to comparing their lobbying efforts for a real comparison.  

However, on that note, I did see a Facebook ad for a group that was going to try to offer training/education like the NRA.  That was the one thing I was afraid of if the NRA further imploded:  lack of training/education certification infrastructure.  No other groups were standing up to offer what the NRA does.


GOA and others are just places for people who hate NRA to send their money and feel good about themselves. They accomplish nothing.

NRA and SAF are the only two organizations that have any successes.


I guess you didn't click on the link above that shows the cases that FPC has pending with SCOTUS?

Instead of trying to tear down these groups that are really doing things (unlike, evidently, NAGR), we should be encouraging people to join and support ALL of them.  The fact that the NRA became so huge and there was no room for any other organizations was a BAD thing.  That's exactly what allowed the corruption that is destroying them right now.  A little friendly competition to keep them honest would have gone a long way towards having healthy non-profit activism!
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 7:25:13 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/20/2021 7:25:59 PM EST by RenegadeX]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:
Well, now we all know who hasn't gone to Washington to talk to legislators.  Lobbying doesn't work like that.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:
Well, now we all know who hasn't gone to Washington to talk to legislators.  Lobbying doesn't work like that.


That is how successful lobbying works. Like FOPA, PLCAA, etc.

Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:
And I've definitely personally spoken to Democrat and Republicans who have said that the GOA is more influential on Capitol Hill than the NRA on gun legislation.


What pro-gun legislation have they influenced? Trick question, since we have not had a significant win in 15 years or so.

Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:
I guess you didn't click on the link above that shows the cases that FPC has pending with SCOTUS?


You are confusing effort with results.

Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:
Instead of trying to tear down these groups that are really doing things (unlike, evidently, NAGR), we should be encouraging people to join and support ALL of them. !


Not trying to tear them down, trying to get all the wood behind one arrow that works. Joining all is fine.
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 8:02:12 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RenegadeX:


That is how successful lobbying works. Like FOPA, PLCAA, etc.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RenegadeX:


That is how successful lobbying works. Like FOPA, PLCAA, etc.

No, I don't think you've ever walked the halls of Congress nor do you know how successful lobbying works.  Campaign contributions are not lobbying.  Dollars are always wanted, but they don't walk and talk and build relationships that make things happen at just the right time.  They also don't guarantee votes, which is what Congress critters really value.  Dollars are just a way to try to get votes.

You are confusing effort with results.


How do you figure?

Can you point to any successful litigation from any other organization in the last two years (I know FPC has worked with SAF on a few cases, but other than those)?
Link Posted: 1/20/2021 8:08:18 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:

No, I don't think you've ever walked the halls of Congress nor do you know how successful lobbying works.  Campaign contributions are not lobbying.  Dollars are always wanted, but they don't walk and talk and build relationships that make things happen at just the right time.  They also don't guarantee votes, which is what Congress critters really value.  Dollars are just a way to try to get votes.
View Quote

Are you a registered lobbyist?
I ask because lobbying sure as hell involves campaign contributions.






Link Posted: 1/20/2021 8:14:18 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:
No, I don't think you've ever walked the halls of Congress nor do you know how successful lobbying works.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:
No, I don't think you've ever walked the halls of Congress nor do you know how successful lobbying works.


Not sure what your fascination is with walking around Congress.

Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:
Campaign contributions are not lobbying.  Dollars are always wanted, but they don't walk and talk and build relationships that make things happen at just the right time.  They also don't guarantee votes, which is what Congress critters really value.  Dollars are just a way to try to get votes.


Never said anything about campaign contributions.

Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:

Can you point to any successful litigation from any other organization in the last two years (I know FPC has worked with SAF on a few cases, but other than those)?


2 years? I have not seen anything significant in over a decade.

Keep sending money to orgs that get nothing done, and dont forget Wayne, he needs some new suits.


Link Posted: 1/20/2021 10:56:38 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DogtownTom:

Are you a registered lobbyist?
I ask because lobbying sure as hell involves campaign contributions.

View Quote


No, I pay a registered lobbyist.  And work closely with him.  And we don't make campaign contributions and we've had some success (and many, many failures!).  Lobbying can certainly involve campaign contributions, but quid pro quo is, of course, illegal.  I'm sure different industries have to lobby in different ways, but in my industry (which I don't want to discuss) it's all about relationships.
Link Posted: 1/21/2021 2:34:23 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/21/2021 2:53:48 AM EST by joshdb50]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ar15eric:
What good will constitutional carry be if the guns you want to carry are banned by the federal government?

As far as the supremacy clause goes, there is a long history in the US of states nullifying federal laws. Marijuana laws are a prime example of this in modern history. You have pot shops setup in many states that are not hiding themselves. Pot farms in a state are growing it. The same can be done for guns.

It’s time our local and state governments start practicing the doctrine of the lesser magistrate.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ar15eric:
What good will constitutional carry be if the guns you want to carry are banned by the federal government?

As far as the supremacy clause goes, there is a long history in the US of states nullifying federal laws. Marijuana laws are a prime example of this in modern history. You have pot shops setup in many states that are not hiding themselves. Pot farms in a state are growing it. The same can be done for guns.

It’s time our local and state governments start practicing the doctrine of the lesser magistrate.



This post is immensely confusing. Here's why.

See the text you posted in red, which states local laws don't matter because feds will do what they want later.

Then in the blue text you encourage people to go to bat for a state law that will ultimately be subject to what the feds want to do.

Currently, state level constitutional carry is a benefit. The fed has not outlawed shit. It's not a bridge we're currently crossing.


Originally Posted By ar15eric:

All they have to do is choose not to enforce unconstitutional laws. It’s already happening with rona lockdowns and mask mandates.


Yeah, don't worry it will be feds doing the enforcing...just like what happens in states with permissive laws regarding the devil's lettuce.
Link Posted: 1/21/2021 10:06:48 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:


No, I pay a registered lobbyist.  And work closely with him.  And we don't make campaign contributions and we've had some success (and many, many failures!).
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:


No, I pay a registered lobbyist.  And work closely with him.  And we don't make campaign contributions and we've had some success (and many, many failures!).

Wait......you pay a registered lobbyist for gun rights or in some other industry?
If some other industry IDGAF. It has no relation to lobbying for a Constitutional right.





 Lobbying can certainly involve campaign contributions,

Yet you wrote above:  "Campaign contributions are not lobbying" Which is it?





but quid pro quo is, of course, illegal.  

Of course, and there is no clear line between a campaign contribution and a bribe.
Campaign contributions to elect or reelect a candidate with your beliefs and views is legal.
Payments to a campaign or to a politician to influence a vote or official act are not.
Yeah, that clear.




You love GOA........how much $$$$$ have they spent in the last twenty years to help elect candidates who support the Second Amendment? I'll take Federal or State.
Strongly worded emails don't count.




I'm sure different industries have to lobby in different ways, but in my industry (which I don't want to discuss) it's all about relationships.

So you have no more experience in lobbying for gun rights in the halls of Congress than RenegadeX.....whose experience and knowledge you belittle?
Good grief.
Link Posted: 1/21/2021 4:35:33 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/21/2021 4:36:44 PM EST by RenegadeX]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DogtownTom:

So you have no more experience in lobbying for gun rights in the halls of Congress than RenegadeX.....whose experience and knowledge you belittle?
Good grief.
View Quote


He tried to move the goal posts from what has GOA accomplished, to who walks the halls of congress the most....

The sad fact is, in most of our lifetimes, there have only been 2 major legislative successes at the Fed level. FOPA and PLCAA. and NRA delivered both. And even FOPA had 2 losses within it. At the Judicial level, 2 successes of the same kind, Heller & McDonald. delivered by SAF. That is it.
Link Posted: 1/21/2021 6:18:51 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RenegadeX:


Can anyone name a single bill they got passed, either in Texas or Nationally? Any bills they stopped?

Any one every get certified by GOA?

Anyone ever been to their range? Museum? Get gun insurance?

Any Democrat ever say, if it wasnt for GOA, we would have more Gun Control?

GOA and others are just places for people who hate NRA to send their money and feel good about themselves. They accomplish nothing.

NRA and SAF are the only two organizations that have any successes.
View Quote


Quoted for wrongness. I can tell you that I have personally block walked with GOA state leadership for pro gun candidates. I have responded to calls for written comments on issues. I have personally been put in contact with campaigns for pro gun candidates that need volunteers. GOA is solid especially in Texas. They work their asses off and could use your help. And they don't beg like the NRA. They want activism first, money a distant second. PM me if you want more info. Happy to put you in touch with them.
Link Posted: 1/21/2021 6:22:11 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/21/2021 6:24:59 PM EST by RenegadeX]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By bollox:
Quoted for wrongness. I can tell you that I have personally block walked with GOA state leadership for pro gun candidates. I have responded to calls for written comments on issues. I have personally been put in contact with campaigns for pro gun candidates that need volunteers.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By bollox:
Quoted for wrongness. I can tell you that I have personally block walked with GOA state leadership for pro gun candidates. I have responded to calls for written comments on issues. I have personally been put in contact with campaigns for pro gun candidates that need volunteers.


You did not answer a single question, again confusing effort with results:

Can anyone name a single bill they got passed, either in Texas or Nationally? Any bills they stopped?

Any Democrat ever say, if it wasnt for GOA, we would have more Gun Control?

Originally Posted By bollox:
GOA is solid especially in Texas.


ROFL

They have ZERO wins in Texas.
Link Posted: 1/21/2021 7:06:43 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RenegadeX:


He tried to move the goal posts from what has GOA accomplished, to who walks the halls of congress the most....

The sad fact is, in most of our lifetimes, there have only been 2 major legislative successes at the Fed level. FOPA and PLCAA. and NRA delivered both. And even FOPA had 2 losses within it. At the Judicial level, 2 successes of the same kind, Heller & McDonald. delivered by SAF. That is it.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RenegadeX:
Originally Posted By DogtownTom:

So you have no more experience in lobbying for gun rights in the halls of Congress than RenegadeX.....whose experience and knowledge you belittle?
Good grief.


He tried to move the goal posts from what has GOA accomplished, to who walks the halls of congress the most....

The sad fact is, in most of our lifetimes, there have only been 2 major legislative successes at the Fed level. FOPA and PLCAA. and NRA delivered both. And even FOPA had 2 losses within it. At the Judicial level, 2 successes of the same kind, Heller & McDonald. delivered by SAF. That is it.


Having been a NRA Life member over 50 years, and Benefactor since ‘95. I also was one of the founders of the NRA Members Councils in California. I even worked part time as a lobbyist in California. We would talk weekly with WLP and the ILA. About 10 years ago the NRA quit doing anything in California, the lawsuits that have given a chance of over turning many laws has been the CRPA after Chuck Michel took it over.

I was pretty unhappy with the NRA trying to kneecap the SAF on both Heller and McDonald, yet take credit when the USSC ruled in our favor.

In the last few years I became completely disillusioned  with the NRA, when WLP changed how the BOD is nominated so the members can no longer nominate BOD’s. WLP also had the NRA liability insurance no longer cover Board members in the duties of their jobs. Why do you think so many board members left in a year’s time. Many NRA members have requested an audit of the NRA books, here again WLP refused to even entertain an audit.

After years the NRA as a lobbying organization is completely lost.
Link Posted: 1/22/2021 9:00:08 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RenegadeX:


He tried to move the goal posts from what has GOA accomplished, to who walks the halls of congress the most....

The sad fact is, in most of our lifetimes, there have only been 2 major legislative successes at the Fed level. FOPA and PLCAA. and NRA delivered both. And even FOPA had 2 losses within it. At the Judicial level, 2 successes of the same kind, Heller & McDonald. delivered by SAF. That is it.
View Quote


Your inability to read about FPC's success notwithstanding, I think you're the one who has moved the goalposts.  

I totally understand your point about accomplishments vs efforts, but accomplishments take time.  I'm saying that GOA has become close to being as, if not more, effective than the NRA at lobbying.  What has the NRA lobbied for in the past year or two?  Banning bumpstocks, that's what.  In that regard, you're correct.  The NRA has successfully lobbied for gun control at the national level.  Yay for the NRA.

Let's hope the NRA doesn't have any more of those types of accomplishments.

Link Posted: 1/22/2021 9:35:36 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:
 I'm saying that GOA has become close to being as, if not more, effective than the NRA at lobbying.  
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:
 I'm saying that GOA has become close to being as, if not more, effective than the NRA at lobbying.  

Then provide any semblance of proof.





What has the NRA lobbied for in the past year or two?  Banning bumpstocks, that's what.

NRA didn't lobby Congress, because it wasn't Congress that banned bumpstocks........it was Trump who directed ATF to rewrite the definition of machine gun to include bumpstocks. And it wasn't "in the last year or two but fall of 2017 when Trump directed ATF to change the definition.

As far as the NRA......."NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre and NRA political strategist Chris Cox issued a statement saying, “The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semiautomatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations.”
That's not lobbying for a ban dude. "additional regulations" isn't equal to "ban" Now it doesn't fit the GOA narrative because GOA is GOA.


 In that regard, you're correct.  The NRA has successfully lobbied for gun control at the national level.  Yay for the NRA.

Let's hope the NRA doesn't have any more of those types of accomplishments.

When GOA fanboys don't know what they are talking about, it doesn't make the GOA look like a better organization now does it?

Don't misunderstand, I don't like WLP, never have. I could give a rats ass how much his suits cost. What matters is whether the NRA is effective at what they do.
And GOA is just as corrupt as the NRA.
Link Posted: 1/22/2021 9:36:16 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DaTrueDave:

Your inability to read about FPC's success notwithstanding, I think you're the one who has moved the goalposts.  

View Quote

There you go again.

ar15eric asked “is GOA useless?”

Still avoiding the question and trying to move goalposts from GOA to FPC.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top