| Author | Post |
|---|
Rush Creek
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Nov 2nd, 2009 07:03 pm |
|
Please don't let your hearts be troubled over my apparent mental confusion regarding the laws in Texas. I only lived in Texas for 45 years - prior to moving to Colorado so I haven't had time to educate my self regarding Texas firearm law as well as some have.
I would actually prefer that no one be tempted to risk violating Texas law based upon the thoughts I have expressed. Finding one's self locked in the jaws of the criminal justice system of any jurisdiction can result in a heap of misery and cost a lot of money.
It is usually a very fine line that navigates between lawful and unlawful. I encourage others to study the law in Texas and come to their own conclusions . Keep an open mind about it and don't check your common-sense at the door. Hopefully in the not to distant future Austin will see the handwiting on the wall and issue an OC emancipation proclamation - until then I'll just keep on ... "traveling".
Last edited on Tue Nov 3rd, 2009 01:22 am by Rush Creek
|
mike75925
Regular Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 31st, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 25 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 16th, 2009 02:49 pm |
|
| the constitution's bill of rights explains the trumping power of it's self. the texas constitution says that it (the texas constitution) is subject only to the constitution of the united states of america. i seem to recall one of my history teachers saying that texas wrote their second in this manner to rejoin the union after the civil war. makes sense. the supreme court (us) at the time said that texas had not seceeded, yet the president at the time, said she had, and readmitted her to the union. by looking at various other rights, one can extrapolate the extents of given rights whether they be natural (god given) priveleges and immunities, etc. i asked around about opoen carry before doing so, and initially was told no i could not (i was also told that if i were to carry in my hands or if i had slung one over my shoulder a rifle, i would be arrested, we discussed that at length as well). i made my case to several officers and do occasionally OC in alto tx ( they just so happened to be somewhat patriotic, and knew me from my time here, and that i served our country). though in nacogdoches tx, i was searched (repeatedly) for a weapon by an officer who i had asked earlier about OCing. my belief is that the previous two hundred some odd years have produced enough precedent that the supreme court thought it silly to revisit a subject as covered as the second is. i cannot be of a mind to OC anywhere else due to certain complications on my end, due to exercise of certain other rights. it would only serve to hurt us all. dlawton, most peace officers are chaos officers. in that even if no one or more persons are being hurt, no property destroyed, etc, freedoms or rights are being infringed. i normally am of the mind we all could do without peace officers, judges, lawyers, you seem ok. i once was asked while on contempt (for claiming a right specified by the same judge just seconds earlier) if i would demand to know if someone was carrying, i said no, he a member of nacogdoches county's jail staff, looked at me if i was stupid or what have you. i called him back to the bars and declared to him, you chose your job as i chose to be in the military, that all residing inside the US and its territories have those rights spelled out in the constitution. at hearing i had served he dropped his cocky demeanor. i personally like these famous gun quotes by dictators and chancellors. mao tse tung, i believe said, 'one man with a gun can control a hundred others'. this is what most cops seem to do. i know a few people who did serve in the military who are know police officers. i asked them if they gave any thought to their oaths. being military is supposed to have nearly the same oath as judges, peace officers etc. defend the constitution. but there has been this oath on ' color of law'. the law is more often that not in contradiction with the constitution, and according to marshall, is hereby null and void. main problem is cops still enforce them. take the right to travel. if we are to throw off the tyrannical government, yet none who would do so have license or insurance etc, how are we to do such an undertaking. the right to travel is about as covered as is the second. just not stipulated in the bill of rights. the courts, the higher ones, recognize it as an inherenet right, so old that it need not be included into the bill of rights. alas, i feel i am losing my audience. have a great life, and god bless you all, if it be right that he should do so.
|
jsimmons
Regular Member
| Joined: | Thu Aug 20th, 2009 |
| Location: | San Antonio |
| Posts: | 44 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 17th, 2009 03:11 pm |
|
Regarding the LEO encounter in Shertz when you were open carrying on your own property...
They didn't arrest you did they? Can you give details of the verbal exchange? I live inside Loop 1604 and OC on my property all the time, and have never once been hassled by anyone.
|
Current time is 12:33 am | Page:   1 2 |
|
|
|
