Bullies: I Told You So!

The Texas Concealed Handgun License Law passed in 1995 and became effective January 1996. It seems to me that we are working now with almost 10 years of experience and data from the Concealed Handgun Law and yet we have not seen any real use of the legislation where a concealed carrier has throttled a threat of any major nature. We also have seen very little abuse of the system—proof that by enlarge most licensed concealed carriers are law abiding citizens—a compliment to the license screening conducted by the State.

I felt very against the provision when it was initially debated and still feel the same way. Those that pushed through the legislation in the 90s were one contingent, but those pushing the further extension of the provisions are of another nature entirely—bullies! They have divided both the Texas Senate and the House of Representatives right along party lines—the votes dramatize this phenomenon very well. How else does one explain this?

These Republicans cannot be that much smarter than their Democrat colleagues—if they were, they would be in business making real money instead of living in Austin for 140 days every other year.

The Bullies have taken over the Texas Senate and quite possibly the House of Representatives. What bills pass routinely do so on a party split vote 20 to 11 (Republicans over Democrats). I don’t think ether groups have their finger on the pulse of their constituents at all. It’s always the same few “fringers” who demonstrate and show up when the need arises. We saw that earlier this year with the questionable actions of those guys up in the Ft. Worth area—their stories quickly changed when the microscope was applied.

Here’s the two questions I ask myself when the original legislation was proposed:

(1)   What if something does happen and some CHL holder helps stop the threat? Those pushing the legislation will proudly step forward and say: “I told you so!”

(2)   What if the legislation is not passed and down the road something does happen and nobody is there to help stop the threat? Those pushing the legislation will proudly step forward and say: “I told you so!”

After almost ten years, the “fringers” haven’t been able to point to a single Texas situation that really proves the need for their cause—a solution still in search of a problem. Oh, there have been the here and there problems around the country, in general, that have taken place and there remains doubts that a single hand gun in the area would have made anything but a marginal difference.

My original questions remain the same today as back in 1995. The question needs to be put in front of the everyday Texan. Of course there is no hope of that happening because the Repubs draw the voter boundaries and remain elected in spite of their records and value to Texas.

I wrote earlier about putting this in the hands of the people conducting business and their life in the public sector:

“I am not going to sit in a crowded restaurant with some yahoo who has a gun strapped to his belt (or shoulder) with my family. I am going to calmly get up and exit the establishment and never return until the owner recognizes that he has a business problem and does something about it.

I call on every right thinking Texan to let the businesses where they conduct their lives to know how they feel about guns in their surroundings.”

(See Guns, Guns Everywhere – 20 March 15 below)

Additionally, I would propose that we start proliferating our message using the HashTags: #OpenCarryDoNotGoThere and #OpenCarryDoNotGoHere

The message needs to get out.

Guns, Guns Everywhere

I’m watching these debates that have taken place over the last couple of days in the Senate Chamber (& over the last several years) and I still wonder when will the cooler heads prevail?

The Senate is supposed to be the “more mature” chamber, but it looks like this is no longer the case.

The Gun Legislation is a bad deal. I don’t know if this will make one iota of a difference in the landscape of the safety in Texas; it doesn’t seem to have so far with the CHL license.

From a practical point of view, I wonder what is going to happen when patrons of business establishments (of all kinds) will do when they start losing business because people start walking for the door when they notice gun totters enter a business.

I am not going to sit in a crowded restaurant with some yahoo who has a gun strapped to his belt (or shoulder) with my family. I am going to calmly get up and exit the establishment and never return until the owner recognizes that he has a business problem and does something about it.

I call on every right thinking Texan to let the businesses where they conduct their lives to know how they feel about guns in their surroundings.

I have been a lifelong hunter and gun owner and have always known there are some out there that will stretch the beliefs as far as they can chunk them. Nobody in their right mind sees a problem here needing a solution—one should spend a little time considering why the Senate Members think this is the solution. If they are spending their day being threatened by their surroundings, they have not been doing the job we sent them to Austin to do.

A Few Topics Off the Top of My Head – Guns, North Korea & Welfare Payments

I’m kinda fed up with a few of the hot topics being bantered around in the news these days. So I wanta get a few things off my chest.

Let’s start with the Gun Control hot topic. I am thoroughly fed up with the GUILT TRIP the President and the media is trying to lay on us. I feel very sad about the loss of life that took place in each of these events. But, having stated that, I do not feel an ounce of guilt over there events. We are experiencing an inordinate amount of throat shoving by both the President and the news media. I don’t like it a bit.

My feeling toward this matter is: “one of the big reasons for the split in Red/Blue America is due to the pushing back and forth by the patricians playing their game of politics. I am not a member of the NRA and see zero need to become one. This organization has only the power that we the public grant them. I liked what one of the two Senators said about pushing the compromise bill through: (my summation) He couldn’t get behind what was happening and didn’t want to get caught up in legislation he couldn’t support. His answer was to get behind legislation he could support. I hope we get somewhere that we all can live with.

Then there’s that little snot from North Korea! What is gonna happen here is anybody’s guess. If he intends to excite a war, he just might do so. I don’t believe, at this point, that the US has anything to worry about. We do have troops that are in harm’s way should he decide to cross the 38^th. Make no mistake, this will get bad if that happens. Right where China stands on this matter is the larger question that only China can answer. The US can handle the little snot and his military very well, but early on, there will be a huge price to pay. Does anyone believe the people of North Korea are behind this guy?

Here in Texas, we once again, have the legislation pushing forward wit a bill that will require all (or most, I’m not real sure at this point) welfare recipients to go pee in a cup—drug testing. There hasn’t been any validation of a need for this action. Here, again, we have some patrician legislators pushing an agenda where there just might not be a problem. Somebody will have to pay for all this getting there, peeing, getting back from there  and the testing—you can darn well bet, it’s gonna be you and me. I’m not real sure how they are proposing the work-around to get needed funds to the children of the failure group—they say they have a way. But, doesn’t it sound like an increase in government (both people and funds) for a problem that may not even exist?

Arizona Shooting speculation - 21 Jan 11

Some of the commentary currently taking place almost exactly duplicates what I have been saying all along. Do not get me wrong! I am completely for Americans keeping and baring arms. I believe the Second Amendment to be completely clear on the subject and that the framers of the Constitution meant exactly that – it is our right.

Having said that, my experience has fully taught me that those not trained AND full time experienced in the appropriate response to situations like that that took place in Tucson, AZ have no business caring a concealed weapon and acting as the law and order in like situations.

All situations not being equal, this time the answer was citizens with their bare hands. No one or multiple individuals could have stopped the rapid fire occurrence that took place – it was over in a matter of seconds. Joe Zamudio was almost the culprit in what was soon to be a much worse tragedy – had it not been for the other unarmed citizens that “yelled that he had the wrong guy” there just might possibly been more than six dead – it was just that close. The fact that Joe has a gun and was ready made absolutely no difference whatsoever. His training “working at his mother’s art gallery” did not come into play.

For those that don’t know who Joe Zamudio is, he is just a guy that had just bought a pack of smokes in the Walgreens and upon leaving the store herd gunshots ring out. Joe hauled himself over to the Safeway with gun in hand, ready to do his duty. Joe went after the wrong guy; after all Joe works in his mother’s art gallery and is not a trained first responder. Joe almost shot the wrong guy; a hero doing his best trying to hold down the real perpetrator. Waving a gun around might had made Joe the second gunman feared to be involved at the onset. Joe, another hero, just might himself have been shot by another first responder. Had the events speculated actually took place the tragedy that took place in Tucson doubly tragic.

I take the details of Joe’s actions and situation from a commentary published in the Denver Post (Close Call at the OK Corral) and authored by Mike Littwin, dated 19 Jan 2011.

I don’t have the answers to what we need to do. I do believe there are two areas where we need to do better. First, those individuals identified with mental trouble need to be identified and prevented from purchasing any sort of firearm. Second, assault type rifles have no business in the hands of civilians; it was a mistake to ever allow this to become the norm. There is absolutely no need for anybody outside of the military and law enforcement to have this capability. BUT, how do you turn back the hands on the clock? This is the conundrum that we face – but face it we must.

Gunners come out again

The Gun Control fanatics (those from both sides) will be out for their quarterly rampage on our sensibilities. They will be ignited by yesterday’s little show over on the tu campus (TU for you non-the-wise).

This event had very little to do with guns and more to do with someone just wanting to commit suicide. As yet there is only four shots reported (officially) to have been fired while the individual was entering and walking across campus to the library. Once there, he evidently shot himself, his intended act all along, firing at least one more shot. Our total seems to have been five shots. Anyone with any experience with automatic weapons will tell you that it is very hard to control the numbers of shots fired on auto – three-four-five-six, it’s hard to keep the number down.

The weapon was most likely not an AK-47; probably only a look-alike. At best it may have been a semi-automatic knockoff.

Before we get too carried away by the gunners, we need to step back and look carefully at the facts.

Would have the ability to have legally concealed handguns on campus have made any difference? Maybe, that’s a qualified maybe, at best.

The entire incident was over in almost no time at all. But the lockdown continued for quite some time. Why? The answer to that question is very easy. Excitement! Yes, excitement is the reason the incident continued for some time. Those around the action were excited. They couldn’t get the eye-witness facts straight. They couldn’t describe the shooter or what he was wearing. They couldn’t count to one, the actual numbers of shooters involved. Oh yes, there were some that remained cool, calm and collected and gave appropriate information that allowed the police, both campus and city, to follow and pressure the shooter into quickly completing his intended purpose – suicide and nothing else.

But still, the police, due to bad descriptions kept the campus on lockdown for several hours while they searched for the guy they already had laying under a sheet.

Had some of these description givers been armed, they just might have taken innocent lives in their attempt to be the next Lone Ranger. The concealed handgun license (CHL) requires certain abilities be met for its issuance to take place. Not one of these abilities requires or proves that the licensee will be able to act cool, calm and collected when Chicken Little becomes the message giver. Even the police have a problem with this fact. This is one of the main reasons that the Austin Police Department (APD) no longer assigns two patrolmen to a vehicle – cuts down on the excitement level under exciting conditions. Remember these are the guys carrying weapons everyday. If they fear excitement levels being elevated; what would one expect from the CHL guy//gal who is not under this level of pressure everyday or at this level of training and discipline routinely?

Imagine what those SWAT and other responders have to face when they start rolling up to a campus of 50,000 and are surprised by 20,000 to 35,000 students running around with their guns awaving – hopefully not afiring. Lets hope we never have to worry about those around us coming unglued due to the excitement around us and firing off their concealed handgun in our proximity.

Firing a gun is not an action one can take back – once its done, its final!

Guns on Campus Legislation still in the MIX

Leaders, statewide, need to quit sitting back and hoping this dies on the vine. It just might pass – wouldn’t that be something?

Every thinking individual needs to come out against this tomfoolery and put a stop to it right now.

The pro-Guns guys are hitting this as hard as they can; it’s all about their Second Amendment rights or so they would like you to think. We have lived without this law for decades and can keep on living without this.

Gun guys will argue that there is not a downside to this legislation as we have had a CHL law in place for a decade proving the point. Actually, this is just as false an argument as the anti-gun guys arguing the reverse – we have had a CHL law in place for a decade and there has been no evidence that it has really protected anybody.

A few university professors have come out in favor of the bill; but to date not one university president has indorsed the legislation – very few have spoken up at all. Are they silent for the same reason that the legislators are vocal? Where are they when they should be heard?

The back and forth comment section on the Statesman website is humorous at best. There is so much bad info there; it is regrettable.

Consider this:

The DPS website states that there are 314,000 CHL’s in place out of a population of twenty-three million Texans. That’s 1% and 1% is not gonna protect us from a wacko; it just will not happen.

The instructors have to go through a renewal course every two years to maintain certification. Holders of CHL’s have to recertify every five years. Why aren’t the holders treated as restrictively as the instructors; after all they are holding the guns?

There hasn’t been any drastic case of “blood in the streets” or “wild west” incidents over the life of the CHL period. Pro Gunners would like you to think that is a result of the pistol packers out there. Actually, the converse might falsely be argued by the anti-gunners.

The simple fact probably is that the law requiring the proofs//checks that it takes to obtain the license also conversely renders those with CHL’s to be very unlikely to initiate an incident AND are very unlikely to be involved or where an incident might occur – it looks like the carry ability and carry need have offset one another thereby nullifying the need in the first place.

Universities and Gun Control

I was proud to see Bill Powers come out opposing Guns on Campus today. Finally a cool head with a background of respect stated an opinion. (William R. Powers, Jr. – President of the University of Texas at Austin)

This is what has been missing from the debate so far to date.

Those in the Legislature, primarily the Senate, have just been posturing for position to appease a small, but vocal, part of their constituency on this subject.

If this isn’t what the Senate Republicans have been doing, its time for their form of “lack of leadership” to move on. There are much better people out there that can do this job without the absurd type of legislation the Senate has wrapped itself up with during this session.

Universities must remain “gun free” zones. As Mr. Powers wrote: “Universities should be a safe environment for free speech and civil discourse. Students are expected to express their opinions and make decisions about social interactions free of intimidation. So are faculty, counselors and other staff members.” (Commentary in the Austin American Statesman, dtd 22 May 09, p A10)

I would hope the other leaders of the major universities have the gumption to stand up and speak out also. This threat to our ability to build the best leaders of tomorrow can not go unheeded. Neither can it be sweep under the rug as if there is no way this kind of legislation can make it to the Governor’ desk. It just might get there.

Gun Control and where we are headed?

It looks like the Congress has been eating at the same trough that the Texas Legislature has been feeding out of; another bill allowing people to carry guns somewhere they aren’t allowed to do so now.

What is going on?

This has gotten way outta hand!

Before you know it, we will have guns everywhere; the grocery store, church pews, elementary school restrooms and who knows where-else?

Where are the cool heads of our Leaders?

ATF and gun control

Watching the comments to the Statesman article in today’s paper makes you want to throw up. There is so much miss-information being bantered back and forth that logic couldn’t get a word in edge-wise.

Tracing 90% of Mexico’s confiscated guns back to the US: is it 90% or just 17%. The actual percentage doesn’t matter. It’s the total of weapons being purchased here to go there. Seventeen percent of a big number is a big number. Its illegal and should be stopped.

Then there’s the argument about the AK-47 “look-alikes” and its comparison to a 30-06 rifle. Here’s some of the facts:

AR-15 vs. M16 or M4
Semi Auto vs. your choice (one guy said 3 round burst – if you have a twenty or thirty round mag inserted; it’s a 20 t0 30 round burst – not 3 rds

AK-47 vs. 30-06
7.62x39mm cartridge vs. 7.62x63mm cartridge
120 grain rd vs. 180 grain rd
2300 ft/sec vs. 2900 ft/sec

AK-47 is a little less powerful until you compare the standard magazine load: 30 rounds to the 30-06 5 round or 7 round capacities. The difference in power means absolutely zero when you are on the receiving end; you’re just as dead either way.

As to the argument that the Austin Police Department officers would rather have a CHL holder (concealed handgun license) out there when they arrive on the scene; I not so sure I would like to be that guy. The APD’s record over the last two to three years concerning officer involved shootings would convince me that I would want no part of having a gun drawn when APD shows up to a scene.

Cooler heads will have to prevail. Luckily none of the wackos are in charge of our lives and will never be.