TexasCHLforum.com

Beiruty wrote:Even when I am unemployed, I am thinking of going ahead with NRA lifemembershio. At $300, it is good deal for the next 10 yrs.

I went ahead with the NRA endowment membership but still need to join the TSRA.

Its jokers like Coleman that don't stop to realize that it was numerous "tragedies" that happen on a daily basis that justified the "stand your ground" / "no escape" laws in the first place. In my eyes, him and people who think like him, are undermining the scores of people who fall victim of crime every day by escalating this one case over all others in using it as justification to change a good law that protects us from criminal behavior.

I don't think it's simply the matter of not thinking things through.

bzo311 wrote:Its jokers like Coleman that don't stop to realize that it was numerous "tragedies" that happen on a daily basis that justified the "stand your ground" / "no escape" laws in the first place. In my eyes, him and people who think like him, are undermining the scores of people who fall victim of crime every day by escalating this one case over all others in using it as justification to change a good law that protects us from criminal behavior.

Coleman gives "jokers" a bad name.

waybig wrote:I don't think it's simply the matter of not thinking things through.

I think he knows what he's doing and thinks there's enough dirtbags in his voting district to get reeelected if he says decent people shouldn't be alowed to shoot dirtbags who break into their homes, vehicles, and places of business.

...I'm hopin' that that part of his constituency that either can't or doesn't vote...or gets caught carrying at the polls...

There is nothing in this thread to get worked up about. Before the Representative can introduce a bill he has to get elected again. Even then the proposed legislation hasn't been written so folks are getting worked up about something that does not exist. The bill, if written, would be going into a Republican-dominated committee for review and if passed out to the floor would be voted on by a Republican legislature. Really now, y'all are getting your panties all in a wad over nothing.

...it's high time we "get worked up" and "get our panties in a wad"...being complacent and adopting a "wait-and-see" posture has gotten us to where we are...

There are plenty of issues related to CHL that are real. Get yourself worked up about those and forget about fairy tale issues that will never see the light of day. Keep in mind who made the statement, to what audience, and under what circumstances. Take a deep breath. This is not Florida.

...I respect your right to dismiss it...now, please excuse me while I huff and puff...

gdanaher wrote:There is nothing in this thread to get worked up about. Before the Representative can introduce a bill he has to get elected again. Even then the proposed legislation hasn't been written so folks are getting worked up about something that does not exist. The bill, if written, would be going into a Republican-dominated committee for review and if passed out to the floor would be voted on by a Republican legislature. Really now, y'all are getting your panties all in a wad over nothing.

You say he has to get elected again but you ignore that the "Republican legislature" has to get elected again too. Even if that happens after Obama's October surprise, you also ignore the self defense bills that the "Republican-dominated" calendars committee intentionally killed last session. If they're opposed to a bill that would expand self defense it's not a big stretch those same legislators would support a bill that would limit self defense.

...that's why we don't need any favors from Washington...what they give us, they can take away...

After watching the anti-gun, anti-self-defense crowd since I was about 16 years old (I'm now 63), I have come to the conclusion that, propaganda rhetoric notwithstanding, their advocacy of a disarmed populace has nothing to do with reducing crime. It is all about reducing citizens to the status of helpless, defenseless, compliant serfs for them to control and exploit.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Rep. Coleman couldn't pass gas.

Chas.