Smith County Sheriff's reaction to Gov. Perry's comments

[Doug.38PR]

I just watched a news report from Shreveport on Smith County (Tyler, Tx) Sheriff's reaction to Gov. Rick Perry's comments.


Said he had "mixed feelings" but only showed his reasons why carrying anywhere would be a bad idea citing the lunatic who started the gunfight in front of hte courthouse "if he had brought a gun into the courthouse during a divorce more lives would have been lost"

Then the news interviewed 3 other citizens who all said it was a bad idea "boos, women and guns don't mix" "this isn't the old west anymore, we don't need to carry guns"

I didn't hear anybody interviewed who was for it or hear the other side of the sheriff's feelings.


Looked to me to be a biased report.

[kauboy]

Can you give us a hint as to who published this report?

[frankie_the_yankee]

I just watched a news report from Shreveport on Smith County (Tyler, Tx) Sheriff's reaction to Gov. Rick Perry's comments.

Said he had "mixed feelings" but only showed his reasons why carrying anywhere would be a bad idea citing the lunatic who started the gunfight in front of the courthouse "if he had brought a gun into the courthouse during a divorce more lives would have been lost."

Then the news interviewed 3 other citizens who all said it was a bad idea "boos, women and guns don't mix" "this isn't the old west anymore, we don't need to carry guns"

I didn't hear anybody interviewed who was for it or hear the other side of the sheriff's feelings.

Looked to me to be a biased report.

All strawman arguments and red herrings.

1) I'm quite sure Perry did not mean to include courthouses or "sterile areas" in his "anywhere" statement. These special places, with screening and armed security in place, are in a completely different catagory.

2) If anything kept the dirtball that shot up Tyler from going into the courthouse itself it was the presence of armed deputies - NOT some stupid gun-free zone policy. Also, not only did the Tyler shooter NOT have a CHL, but a heroic nearby CHLer actually engaged him and, at the cost of his own life, saved several others from being murdered.

In my mind, that sheriff had a lot of nerve being skeptical of expanded locations for citizen carry. On THAT day, Tyler would have done better to have MORE CHLers out and about - not less.

3) Booze, guns, etc. don't mix. True enough. But why aren't CHLers getting drunk and blowing people away NOW? Does anybody think it's because they are not allowed to carry in 51% locations? Who is to stop them if they wanted to carry, drink, and shoot people anyway?

Why would anyone think that some drunken hothead would: a) even qualify for or get a CHL to begin with, and b) refrain from going out drinking while carrying because he sees a 51% sign someplace?

The people who get CHL's are the most law abiding group of people in TX. Perry's proposal wouldn't expand CHL eligibility. The same people who have them now, who are NOT committing crimes, are the people who will have them after Perry's proposal is adopted.

[RPBrown]

Women and guns don't mix? Tell that to my family or some of the women here.

[dihappy]

I just watched a news report from Shreveport on Smith County (Tyler, Tx) Sheriff's reaction to Gov. Rick Perry's comments.

Said he had "mixed feelings" but only showed his reasons why carrying anywhere would be a bad idea citing the lunatic who started the gunfight in front of the courthouse "if he had brought a gun into the courthouse during a divorce more lives would have been lost."

Then the news interviewed 3 other citizens who all said it was a bad idea "boos, women and guns don't mix" "this isn't the old west anymore, we don't need to carry guns"

I didn't hear anybody interviewed who was for it or hear the other side of the sheriff's feelings.

Looked to me to be a biased report.

All strawman arguments and red herrings.

1) I'm quite sure Perry did not mean to include courthouses or "sterile areas" in his "anywhere" statement. These special places, with screening and armed security in place, are in a completely different catagory.

2) If anything kept the dirtball that shot up Tyler from going into the courthouse itself it was the presence of armed deputies - NOT some stupid gun-free zone policy. Also, not only did the Tyler shooter NOT have a CHL, but a heroic nearby CHLer actually engaged him and, at the cost of his own life, saved several others from being murdered.

In my mind, that sheriff had a lot of nerve being skeptical of expanded locations for citizen carry. On THAT day, Tyler would have done better to have MORE CHLers out and about - not less.

3) Booze, guns, etc. don't mix. True enough. But why aren't CHLers getting drunk and blowing people away NOW? Does anybody think it's because they are not allowed to carry in 51% locations? Who is to stop them if they wanted to carry, drink, and shoot people anyway?

Why would anyone think that some drunken hothead would: a) even qualify for or get a CHL to begin with, and b) refrain from going out drinking while carrying because he sees a 51% sign someplace?

The people who get CHL's are the most law abiding group of people in TX. Perry's proposal wouldn't expand CHL eligibility. The same people who have them now, who are NOT committing crimes, are the people who will have them after Perry's proposal is adopted.

Thats great Frankie!

[longtooth]

Women and guns don't mix? Tell that to my family or some of the women here.

Below is the ecidence of how guns & women mix around our household. One of the move & shoot drills I put the ladies through on regular occassions is 3 silouetts spaced about 15 ft apart at 10 yds. They move parallell to the targets, ingage each w/ 2 shots as they move, take cover at the end, do a tack reload, go back down the line the other way. That is 4 possibles on each target. I assure you they are all ventalated.

Mom's renewal target. 246 of 250 & she is 76.

[KBCraig]

I just watched a news report from Shreveport on Smith County (Tyler, Tx) Sheriff's reaction to Gov. Rick Perry's comments.

You can watch the video here:
KTBS article.

Yep, definitely some one-sided reporting.

[gregthehand]

Hmm didn't this guy who went on the shooting rampage use an AK-47, and not a concealed pistol? Surely had he walked into the courthouse with that to a divorce proceeding someone would have noticed. Also wasn't the man who interveened and got killed a CHL holder, and is credited with saving the young boy who would have been shot next had he not stepped up? Sounds like a bunch of crap these people are spewing to me.

[frankie_the_yankee]

Hmm didn't this guy who went on the shooting rampage use an AK-47, and not a concealed pistol? Surely had he walked into the courthouse with that to a divorce proceeding someone would have noticed. Also wasn't the man who interveened and got killed a CHL holder, and is credited with saving the young boy who would have been shot next had he not stepped up? Sounds like a bunch of crap these people are spewing to me.

You are correct.

This gives me an idea. I think the sheriff of that county could use a little "consciousness raising", not to mention the local news media.

What would it take to commission a bronze plaque of some sort and get it placed in the town square as a historical marker? I'm thinking of something to honor the heroic citizen who used his lawfully carried handgun to save others, even though it cost him his own life.

I don't know how to go about doing this, but I would certainly contribute to the cause if someone wanted to start a collection.

How could such a thing be organized?

[jimdark]

Hmm didn't this guy who went on the shooting rampage use an AK-47, and not a concealed pistol? Surely had he walked into the courthouse with that to a divorce proceeding someone would have noticed. Also wasn't the man who interveened and got killed a CHL holder, and is credited with saving the young boy who would have been shot next had he not stepped up? Sounds like a bunch of crap these people are spewing to me.

If memory serves, he was carrying not only an AK-47, but was wearing a Kevlar vest AND flak jacket. Thus the reason Mark Wilson was able only to knock him down, not kill him.

It would stand to reason that if you walk into court wearing both forms of protection, looking like the Pillsbury Dough Boy, carrying a rifle, that eyebrows would be raised.

Shoot, I know if I saw something like that, at the very least I would inconspicuously get my handgun off of safe....

Jim Dark

[Doug.38PR]

Frankie-the-Yankee
I think Gov. Perry did include courthouses (and airports and hospitals and schools) in his comments

you also said,

In my mind, that sheriff had a lot of nerve being skeptical of expanded locations for citizen carry. On THAT day, Tyler would have done better to have MORE CHLers out and about - not less.

To be fair, I believe that sheriff did credit that CHLer who first engaged the AK-47 shooter as saving the child's life that he was going to kill along with his mother. Also the sheriff started out saying "I have mixed feelings about it." We didn't get to hear his other feelings, only the reasons why it was supposedly a bad idea.

If their is a concern that someone involved in a court case might get upset and use a gun, the judge could insist that all participants involved in the case (witnesses, defendants, etc.) check their firearms with the deputy at the door and may pick them up once court has adjourned. No need to ban everyone from carrying in the courthouse.

[Venus Pax]

Then the news interviewed 3 other citizens who all said it was a bad idea "boos, women and guns don't mix" "this isn't the old west anymore, we don't need to carry guns"

I must say that I'm a bit curious as to how my gender and hobby were put on the same moral level with drunkenness.

[frankie_the_yankee]

I must say that I'm a bit curious as to how my gender and hobby were put on the same moral level with drunkenness.

I suspect that the reference is to the historical fact that some guys get drunk and fight over the attentions of women. Sometimes it might be to scare some other guy off. Sometimes it might be just to get the attention of the woman in question. (SOME women, like it or not, DO react that way.)

Not saying that this is right or wrong (well, maybe it IS wrong), but that sort of thing has been going on for a long time and short of changing human nature I do not see it ending any time soon.

All that said, the original statement, "boos (sic) guns and women don't mix" is pretty stupid and misinformed in the current context. That's because if CHLers were inclined to get drunk and shoot it out over women, they would be doing it right now.

There ARE people who might get drunk and shoot it out over women, but those people do NOT have CHL's and can't get them. Because anyone like that almost always has a history of drunken brawling and/or other run-ins with the law that disqualify them from getting a permit.

[frankie_the_yankee]

Frankie-the-Yankee
I think Gov. Perry did include courthouses (and airports and hospitals and schools) in his comments

Maybe. But I don't think he really MEANT it with respect to "true" secured areas. In context, this would be courthouses, the secure portion of an airport, and possibly a few other places - but NOT schools, college campuses, and hospitals - none of which are secured areas.

If I were setting the policy, I would make an exception for secured areas.

you also said,

In my mind, that sheriff had a lot of nerve being skeptical of expanded locations for citizen carry. On THAT day, Tyler would have done better to have MORE CHLers out and about - not less.

To be fair, I believe that sheriff did credit that CHLer who first engaged the AK-47 shooter as saving the child's life that he was going to kill along with his mother. Also the sheriff started out saying "I have mixed feelings about it." We didn't get to hear his other feelings, only the reasons why it was supposedly a bad idea.

I know he credited him at the time. As to the recent report, I didn't see the whole thing so I don't know for sure. The part I did see did not include any reference to the role that the CHL hero played in that incident.

[KBCraig]

Then the news interviewed 3 other citizens who all said it was a bad idea "boos, women and guns don't mix" "this isn't the old west anymore, we don't need to carry guns"

I must say that I'm a bit curious as to how my gender and hobby were put on the same moral level with drunkenness.

I think the person who said that worked in a bar, and was saying the mix of women, booze, money, guns, and men was volatile.