Gun Control Debate - Houston, TX

guns allow the old, the young, the handicapped, the minorities a chance to defend themselves on a more-equal footing from the brutes or the lynch mob. Empowering the disadvantaged is a profoundly democratic principle.

Is it not true that an estimated 50,000 people have lost their lives in Mexico, and someone wants to ban handguns in Texas.DAH! Are you serious? WTF!(This is a politically incorrect remark and I am not sorry)

ussurf wrote:

Is it not true that an estimated 50,000 people have lost their lives in Mexico, and someone wants to ban handguns in Texas.DAH! Are you serious? WTF!(This is a politically incorrect remark and I am not sorry)

Nothing politically wrong with it. For several years I lived in South Texas and leased land for hunting. We used to watch the migrant workers move back and forth across the border. They came to the farms and ranches, worked and went back home when the job was finished. But, this changed and we started to see large groups coming in but not going back out. The Border Patrol began to patrol the ranch lands regularly. Drug runners began coming in. Our camps were broken into. First they only took food and clothing. But, soon enough, they began to steal everything and trash the place. It became dangerous to ride alone down a sendero. We always went armed with longgun and handguns. No longer was this a good place to camp and hunt. The new breed of illegal alien began to come...drug runners, criminals...and the cayotes who preyed upon them. I don't go there anymore...not worth the effort. I wouldn't go within 50 miles of the border today if it was not necessary.
Last night Barack Hussein Obama says he wants to pass "comprehesive immigration reform." That is bullshit, what we need is to enforce the laws we now have. Illegal aliens and those who hire them are the problem, not our immigration system.
And until we address this problem you had better have a weapon of some sort handy all the time.

It always amazes me that the folks that don't like guns benefit from them, but will not admit it. If you don't believe me, put a sign on your residence indicating that you do not believe in firearms. The fact that you choose not to openly display your disdain for guns shows also, that you gun control advocates know this down deep.

I can hear it now "well, that's why nobody should have a gun". Guns are out there and you can't put the genie back in the bottle. That's evident by looking at how we are doing in the "drug war".

Mark wrote:

Having arms is my constitutional right and can't be taken away.

oh yes they can smartass.

Client wrote:

<quoted text> oh yes they can smartass.

How so?

believe its our right to protect ourselves.

i am a female and i need to protect myself and kids

seedtick wrote:

<quoted text>
This is one crude individual.

Agree some anger issues here. One person responds, and is not even disagreeing but supporting his right to who he loves, and he still craps all over her for agreeing.

Independent patriot wrote:

<quoted text>
It's my right to own a weapon under the Constitution. The US Constitution doesn't address sexual preferences or love lives.
It's your preference to have sex with whoever you have sex with and you can love anyone you want to love. It's your preference to have sex at all, or to love at all, actually. Why should anyone be concerned with your sex/love life, as long as you have willing partners who are of the age of consent?
Your life doesn't inform or affect my life, or anyone else's. As I said, do your thing. So you complain that I said 'do your thing?' I'm quite sure you don't fixate on the love lives of everyone else.
Bottom line: no one cares about your life except you. That's the way it is. You're the one who invited comments about your preferred lifestyle by posting it in a public forum. I couldn't care less about you, but I never pass up an opportunity to point out the kind of illogic and lack of reason as you possess. Get over yourself.
As a veteran to another veteran - you can kiss anyone's ass except mine. I don't want your obvious hate near mine. You have seriously sick anger issues - the kind that make owning a handgun necessary.

Correct the Constitution does not state sexual preference specifically. Though the Civil Rights Act and Equal Rights Amendment, which addresses the Constitution more specifically does: Sex, Race, Religion, Age, Sexual Orientation, and Disability. This would be a more detailed explanation of where the Constitution states All men are created equal.

The crazy thing is that not all of these laws are fully enforced, and I am sure many of us could point out exceptions to were they are not treated as equal.

seedtick wrote:

<quoted text>
Two good thoughts posted on here earlier:
"I can't carry a cop, so I carry a gun."
"When seconds count, the police are minutes away."
I know you don't like to hear stuff like this, but then you have another option...just lay down and take it.
The next time you talk to your local Chief of Police, just ask him what his estimated response time to a call is versus the actual response time was over the past year. Then ask him how you should keep a criminal out of your home until the cops arive. And ask him what you should do after you hide in your bedroom only to have an intruder kick the door down and come after you.
Many police officials will tell you that you should keep a firearm for protection while others will tell you that no one should own a gun...even when it means they will die while unable to defend themselves from an armed intruder.

To add to your examples. The police can keep a guy to protect themselves and others, but we are not? We need should have the same right to be able to protect ourselves. It is silly to think that someone will always be there to protect us, and that someone else will be able to do so before we are actually wronged. Referring to being able to stop the situation once it has started.

I will also point out that gun laws are only effective against law bidden citizens. If the person is not law bidden it would not matter to them if they are breaking a gun law. Hence, it puts guns in criminals, and disarms law bidden citizens. Thus empowering criminals, while making law bidden citizens more defenseless.

I think this is our freedom to use the gun but if it is needed for an emergency then we can use of it but in other situation we should not show it to the public that we are having the gun. We should be very careful in using because it can turn our life in to ups and down .First-class peoples use it for the protection and cheap rate peoples use it for the thief and murder work. So I cannot come in to the conclusion whether I can support or oppose

smithdennis wrote:

I think this is our freedom to use the gun but if it is needed for an emergency then we can use of it but in other situation we should not show it to the public that we are having the gun. We should be very careful in using because it can turn our life in to ups and down .First-class peoples use it for the protection and cheap rate peoples use it for the thief and murder work. So I cannot come in to the conclusion whether I can support or oppose

Just who are "cheap rate peoples"? Sounds to me that you think the right to defend one's self should be a means tested right.