stingeragent wrote:One point at a time. All the links you posted in the top of thread were from 2014. That in no way shows they had anything to do with the 2015 session.
So the fact that Texas legislators now have panic buttons to protect them from pro-gun activists had nothing to do with the 2015 session and had no impact on the legislators' thinking about gun rights?
As to folks on this forum not supporting OC and you wanting 1 specific example? There are at least 10 on page 1 of this forum. Heres one. viewtopic.php?f=7&t=81386
Please! Complaining about the impact OCT has had on our ability to carry is NOT anti-OC. Find a post where someone says, "I'm opposed to OC. I think it should never pass". THAT would be anti-OC.
stingeragent wrote:As to grisham being arrested for "LEGALLY" open carrying an AR. Yes he was. He was doing what he legally could on a back roads area ( there is a youtube video of this ). That did in fact start the OCT movement. Would you have done any different? You get illegally arrrested for exercising your freedoms and don't try and do anything about it? That was the whole point for him starting the group in the first place.
OK, I'll forgive you for knowing nothing about me and not bothering to find out.
stingeragent wrote:Furthermore, I may be new to this forum but that does not make me any less relevant. I am pro gun. I have always been. I served 6 years in the army and have 3 tours to Iraq so do NOT treat me like I am insignificant because I don't have thousands of post like you do.
I never once said you or anyone else was less relevant. And I did not treat you as insignificant. I simply asked you to learn a little about the history of this forum before judging it. And for the record, I served six years in the US Navy during the Vietnam War.
stingeragent wrote:Lastly, as I said before, and your post clearly indicates it is all speculation that OCT caused anything. You posted links to news stories from 2014 that "proved" because of their antics weapons won't be allowed in their stores. Fair point, but that is not the case everywhere.
So you concede that they did do some damage but still complain it's speculation? Fine. You're entitled to an opinion, even when it makes no sense.
stingeragent wrote:Those same exact stores could have come to the same conclusion once open carry of handguns passed. You fail to realize the difference between a handgun and rifle.
Oh that's rich.
stingeragent wrote:Outside of the caliber and the weight and length, they can still take your life. That's all the Anti's care about. This same exact thing would have happened regardless of OCT. Some mom in Chipotle would of got offended because the law abiding LTC holder is sporting a Springfield XDS. They only brought the attention earlier than when the law was passed.
Yes, and gave the anti-gun forces plenty of time to gear up and propagandize. What do you suppose would have happened if law abiding citizens had OC'd on Jan 1, and then, when some anti noticed it and demanded the store put up signs, the store manager said, "What? We never even noticed that. The guy was obviously not causing a problem."?
stingeragent wrote:Quit being so naive.
Ooph! I'm almost 69 son. I left naive in the rear view mirror a long time ago.
stingeragent wrote:This same discussion would have happened irregardless of if OCT had never existed. If this law was passed on the backburner and no one was the wizer, don't you think the anti gun folks would notice citizens with hosltered handguns instead of AR-15's on their back. Do you thinks MDA cares if you have an open carried handgun vs a rifle? Nope. A gun is a gun. This arguement was unavoidable.
Yes, but it would have been fought on OUR terms, not theirs. Which would you rather do? Patrol openly through enemy ground? Or setup an ambush and wait for them to walk into it?
Edit: If you want more examples for anti-oc on this board. Look at the title of this very thread. Also see here. viewtopic.php?f=7&t=81545
or here viewtopic.php?f=7&t=81114
I am not gonna link every post disproving your opinion. Browse through this forum and you will see there is quite a few folks against OC
You have a very broad definition of what anti-OC means.
stingeragent wrote:Edit 2: Back to grisham and his initial arrest, he was doing nothing wrong. How did you expect him to react. Put yourself in his shoes and come up with a different scenario for how you would of reacted. Personally if I get arrested for something I'm 100% legally doing I am gonna make the worlds biggest fit about it too. I am assuming you are incorrectly looking at these issues after the fact when everything has been established and not putting yourself in that persons position. It's easy to criticize an officer invovled shooting after the video goes viral on youtube, but for that officer in that moment it is not so easy. It is their life or the suspects, and then they are judged by a jury of their peers based on that action.
Grisham didn't get arrested because he did nothing wrong. Nor was he convicted for doing nothing wrong. His BEHAVIOR was what got him arrested, and his behavior is what is causing all the problems now. And before you go off on my opinion about Grisham, go read my posts. He's a personal friend of mine, and I defended him on this forum long after the incident - until I could no longer deny that what he was doing was wrong.
If he had simply behaved like the professional soldier that he claimed to be, he never would have been arrested.