Texas DA's Ignoring the Law [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Texas DA's Ignoring the Law


jetboatdriver
02-26-2007, 17:17
The TSRA (Texas State Rifle Assoociation) has just published a paper entitled "Above the Law" about the illegal actions of many TX District and County Attorneys relating to the new "car carry" law.

Even if you have a CHL, you will want to read the report.

Go here to read it

http://tsra.com/docs/AboveTheLaw.pdf

You need to make sure all of your friends that have weapons in their cars know about this.

You need to join TSRA as well.

Glenn E. Meyer
02-27-2007, 09:52
Thanks for the heads up.

Also, the ACLU - imagine that. Must have some constant posters here rolling in agony!

S.O.Interceptor
02-27-2007, 10:02
Originally posted by jetboatdriver


You need to make sure all of your friends that have weapons in their cars know about this.



What you need to do is make sure you and your friends have a CHL. I'm not saying I agree with what they're doing, and I personally haven't made an arrest for UCW under the new law except for criminals who were carrying, but if you can have a CHL, then you won't have to worry about it.

You can be a member of the TSRA, NRA, and anyone else you want to join, but if you don't have a CHL, there is a chance you'll have to defend yourself in court. It isn't worth it.

By the way, I think the TSRA is smoking crack. Don't they realize that half the people who read this are going to question it simply because they had the ACLU help with it? I've never known the ACLU to have the best interest of gun owners at heart. The only reason I could see them getting involved at all is because some ****head they know got arrested and they want to get ****head off. I can't think of a time when I agreed with anything the ACLU has ever done, but if that time ever comes, the ACLUs involvement would probably be enough to make me change my stance.

Rex G
03-04-2007, 14:22
I remember when the ACLU helped a KKK leader with a legal problem. A true idealist will do such a thing, but who knows the ACLU's true motivation, then or now. I do seem to recall another incident where the ACLU became involved in a legal battle, on the side of gun owners, but can't remember the issue or any details. I am reasonably sure the ACLU is concerned about the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments in these cases, NOT the Second Amendment.

FP2000H
03-04-2007, 14:56
I'll admit I don't have a CHL, but when I travel to south Texas, I take my pistol with me. Sometimes, when I drive out to see my friends in Hutto, I take it. When I travel south into Westlake or my friends' in San Marcos or San Antonio, I take it. Not having a CHL (even with one, I don't know that I'd carry), it's not practical for me to take it to a restaurant or the movies or anyplace where it'd just be left in the car and be vulnerable to theft. Part of me views the process of acquiring a CHL as acceptance of a state licensed privilege substituted for what is really an inherent right. Anything to keep the money machine going. :upeyes: Still, I suppose there are people who will find loopholes, on both sides. Wait until the privilege to carry is revoked altogether.

cwood
03-04-2007, 21:46
Originally posted by FP2000H
I'll admit I don't have a CHL, Not having a CHL (even with one, I don't know that I'd carry), it's not practical for me to take it to a restaurant or the movies or anyplace where it'd just be left in the car and be vulnerable to theft.

Am I incorrect in understanding you to say that a CHL is not practical because you couldn't take it into a restaurant or a movie? sorry, but that is how it reads to me.

If I am understanding your intent correctly then I am at a loss to understand WHY you feel you cannot take it into a restaurant or movie. The only thing to prevent you from doing so is your own choice or the presence of proper 30.06 notification.

It is my experience that proper 30.06 notification is very rare indeed, even here in the Peoples Republic of Austin.

If I have misinterpreted your comments, please advise me of what I missed.

FP2000H
03-05-2007, 06:56
Originally posted by cwood
Am I incorrect in understanding you to say that a CHL is not practical because you couldn't take it into a restaurant or a movie? sorry, but that is how it reads to me.

If I am understanding your intent correctly then I am at a loss to understand WHY you feel you cannot take it into a restaurant or movie. The only thing to prevent you from doing so is your own choice or the presence of proper 30.06 notification.

It is my experience that proper 30.06 notification is very rare indeed, even here in the Peoples Republic of Austin.

If I have misinterpreted your comments, please advise me of what I missed.

Sorry for the confusion. What I meant is that, as of right now, since I don't have a CHL, it's not practical for me to take it anywhere where I can't be in control of the weapon at all times. Sure I could ride with it to the movies or a restaurant if I wanted (as per the example), but then I'd just have to leave it in the car because I don't have a license to carry. That's why I only take it on long journeys where the destination is a private residence. If I had a CHL, I don't know that I'd carry on me anyway, but at least then I'd have the option of strapping the weapon to me.

BTW, you know Texas is badass when the TXACLU is pro-gun.