The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Down Range Cafe => Topic started by: Paraguy on February 15, 2011, 05:57:11 AM
-
Finally, CCW holders viewed as the good guys!
Welcome to the Texas Capitol, where children go through metal detectors... but gun-toting visitors breeze straight in
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 6:32 PM on 14th February 2011
Comments (3) Add to My Stories .
There's an easy way to skip the long lines of children and tourists waiting to be security-checked at the Texas Capitol - take a gun.
In a remarkable loophole, visitors with a concealed handgun licence do not have go through the metal detectors and security scanners put in place last year after a gunman fired shots outside the government building.
But not everyone bypassing the checks is carrying a gun. Lobbyists and journalists have signed up in droves to get a licence before this month, when the legislature is convened and the Capitol is at its busiest.
Skip the line: Children face a long wait for security checks at the Texas Capitol - while concealed handgun licence holders go straight through the CHL lane
Self-defence: Texas state senator Dan Patrick says he always carries his gun inside the Capitol
Carrie Knoll, advocacy director at the Texas Paediatric Society, decided to get a licence before the new legislative session to avoid being stuck behind crowds of schoolchildren.
She said: 'Do I think it's silly? Yes.'
Licence-holders enter the building in a special 'CHL access' lane, bypassing the metal detectors and X-ray scanners used for everyone else.
But Tela Mange, a spokeswoman for the Texas Department of Public Safety, said state troopers stationed at the building's four checkpoints inspect the licences to make sure they are valid.
'It's not like they just whoosh on through,' she said.
Would-be licence-holders must take classes and have criminal background checks before they can get a permit, which costs $140.
Under Texas law, citizens can carry a gun with them - as long as they have a permit and keep it hidden.
The loophole was introduced to stop them having to take their guns out at security checkpoints.
More than 460,000 people in the state have a concealed handgun licence - including state senator Dan Patrick, who says he carries his gun at the Capital most of the time.
Gun-friendly zone: Lobbyists and have rushed to get concealed handgun licences which allow them to skip scanners at the Texas Capitol, Austin
He said: 'I don't ever want to be in a situation where I don't have the chance to defend myself, my family or my friends.
'We live in a world where you can encounter danger at home or work or on the street.'
It was Mr Patrick's office gunman Fausto Cardenas visited before firing several shots outside the building last year in the incident that prompted tighter security checks.
Hidden away: A model demonstrates how handgun can be concealed. In Texas, citizens can legally carry guns - as long as they have a permit
Richard Robertson, who brought his gun into the Capitol this weekend, said he is glad he can - and defended the state against gun campaigners who have criticised the system.
He told Reuters: 'It's not the Wild West mentality where I'm hoping to get into a fight, but if some lunatic tries something, I'd feel better having the means to put an end to it.
'Around here, it's not that big of a deal (to have a gun at the Capitol). Someone from out of state may think we're a bunch of yahoos.'
-
To bad Colo. & other states don't follow Texas
-
To bad Colo. & other states don't follow Texas
Colorado, like many other western states, has been infiltrated by tree and bunny hugging liberal yuppies, trying to escape the big cities for greener pastures. They have been raised on a steady diet of libtard gun hatred, and will never vote, or be a part of anything that is pro Second Amendment. Here in Arizona we've got Prescott to deal with. While not as bad as Colorado, there is a lot of white flight from California running there. They are bringing a lot of their stupid liberal thinking with them. Bill T.
-
Don't know about Prescott, Az., it sounds as though they may be Boulderized! The republic of Boulder has gone as far as banning airsoft guns! That is what I had heard on the radio a week or so back. Apparently it stems from an incident that occured in Lakewood, Co. where a couple of kids (approx. 13 yrs old) were goofing with airsofts and one shot the other in the eye, the parents of the kid that got shot took him to the Doctor and things went down hill from there. Lakewood P.D. arrested the 13 yr old and he faces serious chrges that will ruin him for life. The Jefferson County DA is pressing charges, the DA has reluctantly lowered some of the chrges only after numerous folks have hammered him and his office. To date I don't know of what has come of this poor kid and the charges he is charged with. It's a sad day in America :'( This is what we face in Colorado.
-
The way it should be everywhere, and airports too.
-
To bad Colo. & other states don't follow Texas
2 main problems with CO, Denver, and Boulder. ::)
-
The way it should be everywhere, and airports too.
just becuase some one has a CCW, does not mean they are good person.
As I've said many, many times. there is not a member here that has not commited a felony at some point in thier life. We have just never been cuaght. There are lots of felonys out there. Every taken a cat off a car or truck? felony. put some thing on a rail road track or walked down a railroad track? felony. In many states having a fire work is a felony( az for example) there is one southern state where oral sex with some one other then your wife/husband is a felony. the list goes on and on and on.
The diffrence between a felon and the rest of us is they got cuaght, its really that simple.
there should be no diffrence in treatment between ccw holders and nonccw holders.
-
I think this is the third time I've seen this story come up in as many years. Every time the anti's have something on their mind to push or the anti-gun movement is getting lethargic they run one or two of a handful of stories, and this is one of their favorites. It always leads to letters to the editor and editorials about the lack of security and how scary a given city or state is.
Get a gun, shake the hand of your "good ol boy Sheriff" and strut around where every you'd like, just like Wyatt Earp.
-
There are lots of felonys out there. Every taken a cat off a car or truck? felony.
A cat? You mean like a meow kitty cat? ??? Bill T.
-
catalytic converter
-
catalytic converter
Can honestly say Nope, at least not without putting one back on.
-
Its just one of many very common felonys that most "car guys" do at some point. The chances of you being cuaght with it are extremly low, but it is a federal felony.
-
Its just one of many very common felonys that most "car guys" do at some point. The chances of you being cuaght with it are extremly low, but it is a federal felony.
You get caught with it very easily, but they usually chose to not push it. However it is like the IRS codes used to catch Al Capone. It was these car emission laws that brought Boyd Coddington down - or would have brought him down if he hadn't died first :'(
-
Tab you are seriously reaching on this one. Have most of us here broken the law and not even known it? Probably. Would they be cases that a FEDERAL prosecutor would take the time to file charges? Highly doubtful. You are talking a bout laws written 80 years as a knee jerk reaction to an immediate problem. They are irrelevant now and I would bet that most prosecutors don't even know what they are.
I'm with 2How on this. If you have gone through the hoops and gotten your CCW, that should be your security check. Building, AIRPORTS, and anywhere else. You have already been more thoroughly screened than the other sheep going through the metal detector.
And YES I think you should be able to carry on a plane. Get rid of the stupid air marshals, and the TSA. (How much would THAT cut from the budget? ::) ) And let's get back to traveling like responsible CITIZENS instead of being herded like little kids in day care!
I am surprised that you are so afraid of someone with a CCW. Most are better trained and more responsible with a weapon than the cops.
-
just becuase some one has a CCW, does not mean they are good person.
there should be no diffrence in treatment between ccw holders and nonccw holders.
Bravo, TAB......you just (in one simple statement) solidified the argument that myself and many on here have been saying all along about "bearing arms".
Roll back the laws 200 years and let everyone be on equal footing and let the chips fall where they may. If you can legally buy a gun, you can legally carry a gun...anywhere.... no need for red tape and permits.
JC covered the rest of your hollow argument on the felonies.
-
just becuase some one has a CCW, does not mean they are good person.
As I've said many, many times. there is not a member here that has not commited a felony at some point in thier life. We have just never been cuaght. There are lots of felonys out there. Every taken a cat off a car or truck? felony. put some thing on a rail road track or walked down a railroad track? felony. In many states having a fire work is a felony( az for example) there is one southern state where oral sex with some one other then your wife/husband is a felony. the list goes on and on and on.
The diffrence between a felon and the rest of us is they got cuaght, its really that simple.
there should be no diffrence in treatment between ccw holders and nonccw holders.
TAB, That is an idiotic statement that ignores the fact that CCW holders have already gone through at least one back ground check for the permit and most likely another for the hand gun.
You may be a felonious scum bag, I am a double checked Federally approved law abiding citizen. ;D
-
TAB, That is an idiotic statement that ignores the fact that CCW holders have already gone through at least one back ground check for the permit and most likely another for the hand gun.
You may be a felonious scum bag, I am a double checked Federally approved law abiding citizen. ;D
If you're going that route, hell the ATF, and FBI have given me the probe 5 times.
Once for CCW, twice for class three tax stamps, and twice for security clearance. And that's not counting the background checks I have gone through when I was a carpenter working in federal buildings.
You are also forgetting that a CCW removes the need for a NICS phone call, because the background check for CCW is already far more extensive.
-
If you're going that route, hell the ATF, and FBI have given me the probe 5 times.
Once for CCW, twice for class three tax stamps, and twice for security clearance. And that's not counting the background checks I have gone through when I was a carpenter working in federal buildings.
You are also forgetting that a CCW removes the need for a NICS phone call, because the background check for CCW is already far more extensive.
I think thats BS as well. you can't us a NICS from 2 years ago, why should you be able to use a background check for CCW from 2 years ago?
-
TAB, That is an idiotic statement that ignores the fact that CCW holders have already gone through at least one back ground check for the permit and most likely another for the hand gun.
You may be a felonious scum bag, I am a double checked Federally approved law abiding citizen. ;D
If you're going that route, hell the ATF, and FBI have given me the probe 5 times.
Once for CCW, twice for class three tax stamps, and twice for security clearance. And that's not counting the background checks I have gone through when I was a carpenter working in federal buildings.
You are also forgetting that a CCW removes the need for a NICS phone call, because the background check for CCW is already far more extensive.
+1 Tom and JC.
Although based on the 2nd A we shouldn't need permits, since we do have the process in place, CCW holders should reap the benefits of submitting themselves to the scrutiny of the state/federal background check procedure.
-
I think thats BS as well. you can't us a NICS from 2 years ago, why should you be able to use a background check for CCW from 2 years ago?
Here is where TAB shows that he spends his life jumping from our our bandwagon to the anti's bandwagon. Unless I read this wrong, Tab is stating that we need stronger background checks ???
One foot in the grave, one on a banana peel, and the only thing holding us up is the Second Amendment and someone has lit that on fire >:(
-
I think thats BS as well. you can't us a NICS from 2 years ago, why should you be able to use a background check for CCW from 2 years ago?
Horseshit, TAB.....less than 1% of CCW holders are found to be criminals or commit crime after licensing.
Check out Florida's issuing info and do the math.
Licenses Issued: 1,918,601
Crime After Licensure: 5295
That's about what, 0.275% ??
http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/stats/cw_monthly.html
Kansas= 0.7%
http://www.ksag.org/files/media/concealed-carry/FY_2010_Annual_Report.pdf
Uh oh, Texas with a whopping 0.2612%
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/ConvictionRatesReport2007.pdf
-
I think thats BS as well. you can't us a NICS from 2 years ago, why should you be able to use a background check for CCW from 2 years ago?
Very simple, NICS is an instant check. It checks to see if you are a current felon or anything pending against you. A CCW is a total anal probe. IF you have a felony pending against you the first thing they do is suspend your CCW. Making it irrellevent. No revokation, no problem.
I don't know what you put in your kool aid this morning, but you are willing to give up way to much to the anti's.
-
I think thats BS as well. you can't us a NICS from 2 years ago, why should you be able to use a background check for CCW from 2 years ago?
That also is crap.
They can use a Misdemeanor charge from 40 years ago to deny you one.
If you yelled at your wife, and she called the cops on you 30 years ago they can still deny you your Constitutionally guaranteed right.
TAB is just an ignorant nanny state Fudd.
-
Very simple, NICS is an instant check. It checks to see if you are a current felon or anything pending against you. A CCW is a total anal probe. IF you have a felony pending against you the first thing they do is suspend your CCW. Making it irrellevent. No revokation, no problem.
Very true. Also there is no fingerprint card run through the FBI's database for NICS - there is for a CCW permit.
-
Very true. Also there is no fingerprint card run through the FBI's database for NICS - there is for a CCW permit.
Depends on the state.
-
Depends on the state.
Which states don't require prints?
-
Which states don't require prints?
Can't speak for the rest of them, but Alabama does not require fingerprints. I just filled out a little paperwork. She called it in, and I walked out with my permit. 15-20 mins total.
-
Can't speak for the rest of them, but Alabama does not require fingerprints. I just filled out a little paperwork. She called it in, and I walked out with my permit. 15-20 mins total.
That must be nice, renewal is like that here, but when I applied, I had to do prints, background check, took almost 4 months.
-
Which states don't require prints?
No prints required in Iowa, either. Just the training and the anal probe.
-
Which states don't require prints?
NH , Me I'm not sure, they didn't when I had mine there but that was a long time ago. None of the "Constitutional carry" states
To apply I filled out a 1 page app. Name, address phone # SSN (optional ), height, weight hair, eyes and gender, current employer, last employer and 3 references that they did not contact. took 2 weeks because the clerk was out with the flu, sign it and pay $10 and go home.
Renewal was the same form on Friday afternoon, $10 and pick it up Monday noon.
Forgot to mention, no restrictions on Open carry or knives. and ClassIII friendly ;D
Basiclly the only restrictions on gun ownership in NH are imposed by your bank balance ;D
-
Which states don't require prints?
Minnesota
-
Prints are not required in NH or ME for an out of state license. MA requires for everyone as does CT. Still trying to get information on RI, that might be a tough one for me.
In MA, CT and ME, even a suspected domestic squabble where the cops are brought in, without even being arrested can cost you your CC license.
-
No prints required in Iowa, either. Just the training and the anal probe.
But you deserve it ;D
-
I'm surprised at the number that don't require prints.
AZ used to require even for renewal, as if they could change a whole bunch. You might have added a scar or three but the basic print isn't going anywhere soon.
-
Ga used to require it for the initial permit but not for renewal (except for the print on the actual license). I got printed 20+ years ago and had not had to do it again until last year. They went to electronic scans and I had to be reprinted at city hall. Do not know if it will have to be done each time from now on or not.
I hear north Georgia and in the larger cities that it can be a pain to get the paperwork done on time, but in rural areas like mine it is pretty much a breeze. Ga just made a few changes to the laws last year to speed up the process. My last renewal took a little longer because I had to leave the Probate Court to go to city hall for the printing......and the cost of the GBI background fee went up. Total cost was nudging $70 and and hour and a half of time.....Got the license in the mail in 6 days.
-
look, my point is, why should we treat some one diffrent becuase they jumped thru a few more hoops?
not all states have extensive back ground checks, some its litterly pay the fee and wait for them to process the paper work.
I just think its a joke that you one person has to pass a back ground check every time they buy and gun and another can use a background check from years ago.
Now I know we should not have to have background checks, but guess what, they are here to stay. I'm a firm beleaver that guns should be cash and carry, but the public will not stand for that. the whole waiting thing is BS, make the call and give them the gun.
-
look, my point is, why should we treat some one diffrent becuase they jumped thru a few more hoops?
not all states have extensive back ground checks, some its litterly pay the fee and wait for them to process the paper work.
I just think its a joke that you one person has to pass a back ground check every time they buy and gun and another can use a background check from years ago.
Now I know we should not have to have background checks, but guess what, they are here to stay. I'm a firm beleaver that guns should be cash and carry, but the public will not stand for that. the whole waiting thing is BS, make the call and give them the gun.
You mean CA will not stand for that. I have never had to wait for a gun, even before I had a CCW. I walked in, they made the call, and I walked out with a new toy.
-
look, my point is, why should we treat some one diffrent becuase they jumped thru a few more hoops?
not all states have extensive back ground checks, some its litterly pay the fee and wait for them to process the paper work.
I just think its a joke that you one person has to pass a back ground check every time they buy and gun and another can use a background check from years ago.
Now I know we should not have to have background checks, but guess what, they are here to stay. I'm a firm beleaver that guns should be cash and carry, but the public will not stand for that. the whole waiting thing is BS, make the call and give them the gun.
That is the nice thing about living in a Republic! We have a Constitution and we have three branches of government. While we elect two out of three of the branches democratically, all three branches are charged with protecting and leading us based on the Constitution. However, we have perverted the system from both sides, and all three branches have become nothing more than job candidates protecting their own turf.
Legislating and policy setting is not about poll data or electability. Legislating and policy setting is about taking today's needs and protecting citizens Rights while not destroying the country we were gifted by so many that gave so much.
TAB, you keep asking why someone who jumps through "a few more hoops" should be given special treatment. Please explain to me why someone should be required to "jump thru a few more hoops" to exercise their Constitutionally protected Rights.
-
look, my point is, why should we treat some one diffrent becuase they jumped thru a few more hoops?
not all states have extensive back ground checks, some its litterly pay the fee and wait for them to process the paper work.
I just think its a joke that you one person has to pass a back ground check every time they buy and gun and another can use a background check from years ago.
Now I know we should not have to have background checks, but guess what, they are here to stay. I'm a firm beleaver that guns should be cash and carry, but the public will not stand for that. the whole waiting thing is BS, make the call and give them the gun.
You answer your own question
-
You mean CA will not stand for that. I have never had to wait for a gun, even before I had a CCW. I walked in, they made the call, and I walked out with a new toy.
no I mean nation wide, people generally support back ground checks. Back ground checks are not going to go away. so it should go in, drop your cash on the counter, they make the call, walk out.
so tom explain to me how its logical to use a back ground check from 2 years ago. when every one else needs to have a back ground check done when they buy. If you walk back into the store 2 mins after the last one, you still need to be back ground check.
CCW, can be political... locally there were a few people that were friends of the sheriff. only they could not legally own guns. Corruption is a world wide deal...
-
no I mean nation wide, people generally support back ground checks. Back ground checks are not going to go away. so it should go in, drop your cash on the counter, they make the call, walk out.
Is that not considered cash and carry? It sounded to me like you were talking about waiting periods? So do you also support licensing every firearm you own?
I have never licensed any weapon that I have. Nor will I.
As much as I am torn about this, on principle I think that once you have served your sentence even a felon should be able to go purchase a firearm. Go on with your moral objections, but once you are released from prison, and served your parole, your rights as a citizen should be fully reinstated.
Having said that I also support punishments that actually fit the crimes committed. Which is why I support what Arpaio has done to the prisons in AZ.
-
That is the nice thing about living in a Republic! We have a Constitution and we have three branches of government. While we elect two out of three of the branches democratically, all three branches are charged with protecting and leading us based on the Constitution. However, we have perverted the system from both sides, and all three branches have become nothing more than job candidates protecting their own turf.
Legislating and policy setting is not about poll data or electability. Legislating and policy setting is about taking today's needs and protecting citizens Rights while not destroying the country we were gifted by so many that gave so much.
TAB, you keep asking why someone who jumps through "a few more hoops" should be given special treatment. Please explain to me why someone should be required to "jump thru a few more hoops" to exercise their Constitutionally protected Rights.
TAB,
I'd like your thoughts on this!
-
no I mean nation wide, people generally support back ground checks. Back ground checks are not going to go away. so it should go in, drop your cash on the counter, they make the call, walk out.
so tom explain to me how its logical to use a back ground check from 2 years ago. when every one else needs to have a back ground check done when they buy. If you walk back into the store 2 mins after the last one, you still need to be back ground check.
CCW, can be political... locally there were a few people that were friends of the sheriff. only they could not legally own guns. Corruption is a world wide deal...
Never said anything about using a background check from 2 years ago for buying a gun, it was in reference to going into the Court house where the other's may have never had one done.
You know, the original topic .
-
look, my point is, why should we treat some one diffrent becuase they jumped thru a few more hoops?
not all states have extensive back ground checks, some its litterly pay the fee and wait for them to process the paper work.
I just think its a joke that you one person has to pass a back ground check every time they buy and gun and another can use a background check from years ago.
Now I know we should not have to have background checks, but guess what, they are here to stay. I'm a firm beleaver that guns should be cash and carry, but the public will not stand for that. the whole waiting thing is BS, make the call and give them the gun.
By that logic anyone with a security clearance should have to pass a background check every time they were handed a classified document.
-
In TEXAS if you ccw buying a gun is as close to cash & carry as it get's fill out the form & pay no fuss ,no muss, no wait ,no phone call.
-
By that logic anyone with a security clearance should have to pass a background check every time they were handed a classified document.
security clearance is drasticly diffrent then a ccw.
M58 we have several hundred years of case law that say otherwise.
-
Is that not considered cash and carry? It sounded to me like you were talking about waiting periods? So do you also support licensing every firearm you own?
I have never licensed any weapon that I have. Nor will I.
As much as I am torn about this, on principle I think that once you have served your sentence even a felon should be able to go purchase a firearm. Go on with your moral objections, but once you are released from prison, and served your parole, your rights as a citizen should be fully reinstated.
Having said that I also support punishments that actually fit the crimes committed. Which is why I support what Arpaio has done to the prisons in AZ.
I have to agree with you, JC.
As a matter of fact, I tend to think that if, for some reason, a person cannot be trusted with a firearm, they shouldn't be walking free on the streets.
If for some reason, perhaps mental or physiological handicap, or a disposition to crime, or whatever, they cannot be trusted not to harm others or themselves if they have access to a firearm, they can't be trusted not to harm others if they have access to hammers, baseball bats, gasoline or automobiles, etc. either.
-
security clearance is drasticly diffrent then a ccw.
M58 we have several hundred years of case law that say otherwise.
How so? You get the same type of screening and background checks. Plus you are not trusting CCW holders with matters of National Security. Tell me what CCW holder has done more damage than the army puke (sorry his name escapes me at the moment) that leaked thousands classified documents to wikileaks?
-
As much as I am torn about this, on principle I think that once you have served your sentence even a felon should be able to go purchase a firearm. Go on with your moral objections, but once you are released from prison, and served your parole, your rights as a citizen should be fully reinstated.
Given a recidivism rate in the 60% range (assuming there are more that don't get caught), I'm not sure I agree with this. Too bad we don't have a good way of differentiating the people that screwed up and learned their lesson from the truly bad people who just don't give a sh!t.
-
Given a recidivism rate in the 60% range (assuming there are more that don't get caught), I'm not sure I agree with this. Too bad we don't have a good way of differentiating the people that screwed up and learned their lesson from the truly bad people who just don't give a sh!t.
I'm very mixed on this issue (as others have mentioned previously) as well.
I understand where you're coming from and I agree that it is one big caveat to the restoration of rights to a felon after a full service of sentence. However, if the guy (or gal) decides to return to criminal behavior, then theoretically it wouldn't matter in the grand scheme of things. If they want a gun, they can get one. It would merely mean they might purchase it from a valid store (and produce a traceable paper trail) instead of out of the trunk of a car in a dark alley.
-
How so? You get the same type of screening and background checks. Plus you are not trusting CCW holders with matters of National Security. Tell me what CCW holder has done more damage than the army puke (sorry his name escapes me at the moment) that leaked thousands classified documents to wikileaks?
not even close. The clearance I got was to work ok nuke plants. I had people that I'd not seen/ talked too in 10+ years call me up and say, you know the FBI, just showed up and asked me some questions about you. They litterly wanted to know every thing and asked for more 7 or 8 times.
I had lower level clearance in the USCG, it took litterly 10 mins to get it.
-
security clearance is drasticly diffrent then a ccw.
M58 we have several hundred years of case law that say otherwise.
And I have called BS on you for that response on many topics. If we just relied on "case law" and never fought back to restore our Rights we wouldn't have any personal guns anymore in this nation.
Quit hiding behind Sarah Brady's skirt and give us (me) your true beliefs.
-
Without getting into the basic fray. I'll add in TAB's defense.....EEEE GADDDSS!
Security clearances I've had are:
Top Secret in the Military, Secret at General Dynamics and I was badged at a few nuclear power plants over the years. All three required an extensive, FBI door to door visit of friends I had in High School, Navy buddies, etc.... As TAB said, I had guys calling me wondering what shitstorm I'd started.
They even scared my dear old Mum....G-men in dark glasses... ;)
Our CC license in MA took about two weeks. No way they can do a complete, state by state felony check, fingerprint analysis, etc....in two weeks. Remember, PD's, the FBI, CIA, et al. don't share information.
I'm in no way agreeing with anything else young Mr. TAB from Kookyfornia is saying...
Rights are rights, period!
-
If we just relied on case law Obummer would be picking cotton with the rest of the slaves.
-
If we just relied on case law Obummer would be picking cotton with the rest of the slaves.
Good place for him! Ooooops! Are those the black helicopters I hear :o
-
Good place for him! Ooooops! Are those the black helicopters I hear :o
No, it's Al Sharpton.....you done did it now, sport.