Does Carson get the 2nd?

Dr Ben Carson gets the 2nd amendment.  Full disclosure, I am a casual Ben Carson supporter that will continue to keep a watchful eye on the presidential hopeful.  Dr Carson has been criticized for his stance on gun rights because of a 2013 interview conducted by Glen Beck.  Beck conducted a rapid fire question session and asked "Do I have the right to own a semi automatic weapon?" and Carson replied "It depends on where you live. I think if you live in the midst of a lot of people and I’m afraid that that semi-automatic weapon might fall into the hands of a crazy person, I would rather you not have it. If you live out in the country somewhere by yourself, I have no problem.”
Since the 2013 Beck interview Dr Carson has had a lot of speaking engagements to include an appearance at the NRA convention in Nashville in 2015.  Carson supports the 2nd amendment

“This isn’t any evolution of my views, just that I’ve learned how to express myself..."

Dr Carson started his speech by saying: “This isn’t any evolution of my views, just that I’ve learned how to express myself, I assumed everyone knew what I was talking about when I was saying something . . . but the world of politics is different from the world of medicine. Just recently, Chris Cuomo was trying to trick me and he ended up looking like a fool. Just for the record, let me be extremely clear, I am extremely pro–2nd Amendment, no question about it,” As Carson continued, he obviously understands why the 2nd amendment is necessary. "having a population that is defenseless against a group of tyrants who have arms. And that is what we have to bear in mind.”
On April 10, 2015 Carson was interviewed by Brietbart about guns and the 2nd amendment.  

"The 2nd Amendment is incredibly important for a couple of reasons. Number one, our Founders felt that our nation, if ever invaded by outside forces, would be much stronger if the people could help repel those forces. Number two, and perhaps even more importantly, is if the government–our own government–ever became tyrannical, and wanted to dominate the people, the 2nd Amendment guarantees the people the means whereby to defend themselves."

The Dr also submitted an opinion on the real purpose of the 2nd amendment:

"The real purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to allow citizens to be able to protect themselves against an overly aggressive government. In order to do that, they need to have any kind of weapon that they may have, legally. And that includes semiautomatic weapons.
So, if the source that is trying to dominate you has those weapons, but you don’t have them–if all you have are pea-shooters–then your defense of yourself is not going to be very effective."

One thing remains to be seen on the doctors position, where does he sand on constitutional carry?  I will continue to dig deeper and report back what I find.  If you have any documentation on his position please let me know by emailing me.

Are you III%

You may be wondering what this means, I don't think that I am a good enough writer to explain it...  But I found someone who is good enough to articulate the ideology of the three percent movement.  I love God, this nation, the constitution and my wonderful family.  I am willing stand up to tyranny and defend the constitution, come what may.

Take a few minutes and read this post as the author gives a very good definition of what it means to be a III%er.  “Yeah, but what does that Three Percent thing MEAN?”

If after reading you are interested in connecting with like minded patriots let me know...

Thanks for reading and God bless us all

Steve
][][][%

Texas HB910 (Licensed Open Carry) Approved by Senate???

I have been following open carry legislation very closely over Texas' 84th Legislative Session.  There seems to be some political tug of war and it is not what you may think...  Many may think that the republicans in Texas would all be in favor of liberty and the democrats would provide opposition to any expanded gun rights, but you would be wrong!

Many republicans that ran their last election campaigns on expanding gun rights, err privileges, I would like to call out some of the activities and some of the most divisive representatives and senators.

The Senate passed SB17 in March 2015 and referred it to the House where it sat idle.  SB 17 would allow those who have qualified for a CHL to also carry a handgun openly, in a belt or shoulder holster. Current Texas law allow the open carry of long guns like shotguns and rifles.

House Bill 910 sponsored by state Rep. Larry Phillips (R-Sherman) would allow current CHL holders to openly carry in a belt or shoulder holster.  This bill was was passed by the House on April 20, 2015 and was referred to the Senate where it sat idle until May 18, 2015.  It was finally picked up by the committee for public testimony.  Senator Joan Huffman (R-Houston) presided over the testimony and while there were a dozen or so Mom's Demand Action supporters that recited a form letter, there were only a handful of open carry supporters two in particular CJ Grisham of Open Carry Texas and Terry Holcomb Sr of Texas Carry who both stated that they would be the only people testifying in favor of HB910 from their respective groups as not to delay the proceedings any further.  Senator Estes made a motion to remove what was known as the Dutton amendment which would have prevented law enforcement officers from asking a person who is openly carrying a pistol for a license without probable cause or reasonable suspicion that a crime had been committed.  Then HB910 finally placed on the calendar May 21, 2015, it went on to have its 2nd reading May 22 where some some shenanigans came up.  The bill was expected to easily pass and then a heated debate came up.   Amendments were added, withdrawn, postponed.  The most controversial amendment that was added back to HB910 by Senator Huffines to put a ban on police from stopping people solely because they are visibly carrying a handgun.

The Dutton/Huffines amendment stirred up the political elite and law enforcement agencies.  The Dutton/Huffines’ amendment simply enforces or codifies our federal constitutionally protected 4th amendment right.  The bill was postponed until later in the evening.

"This is a mistake, and I think it's a mistake the state of Texas will come to regret," said Sen. Joan Huffman, R-Houston. Huffman, a former prosecutor and judge, added: “This is just a backdoor to constitutional carry, because, really, any person could just carry a gun without a license because they know the police can’t inquire of them if they have a license.”

Rep. Gene Wu, D-Houston, a former prosecutor, said that with the amendment, HB910 would be the effective equivalent of so-called "constitutional carry" 

The amendment took on bi-partisan support with nine democrats voting for the bill with the amendment as a way to reduce perceived racial profiling.  

“If somebody is going to be profiled for walking around the streets of Houston or Austin with a gun, someone who looks like me is more likely to get stopped,” said Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, who is black.

courtesy www.opencarrytexas.org

HB910 finally passed the Senate vote and should move straight to the Governor, but wait, there’s more.  Oh, snap there is a clerical error in the wording of the amendment that will require HB910 to go back to the House.  I guess you want to read the clerical error?

So, now the bill is sitting on the House calendar today May 26, 2015 and it is expected that the House will overwhelmingly pass and move to the Governor’s desk for signage.

This post is not to discount the desire to pass unlicensed open carry but a recognition that there has been a lot of hard work by countless people and groups to expand gun rights in Texas.  Texas is currently one of only 6 states that do not permit some form of open carry of modern handguns.  Many of the gun rights groups maintain that the compromise is a win while other contend it is simply a weak legislature that did not have the appetite to go on record with their vote for unlicensed open carry.  I fall in the latter camp.  We can continue to fight for an expansion of our gun rights by supporting groups like Lone Star Gun Rights and Open Carry Texas.  These groups will be active post 84^th legislative session by outing the RINOs like Senator Huffman, Representative Phillips.  At the same time these groups will applaud liberty loving legislators like Representative Stickland and Huffines.   

Permits?

Today I am thinking about constitutional carry and how there are so many people that are clamoring for permits or licenses for all firearm carry. I am personally opposed any license requirements.  The idea of requiring a permit to carry a handgun is akin to asking permission to practice your religion.  Would you tolerate that?  So, I think that we can open this conversation up with a run down of some of the Bill of Rights.  Let's dive in.

Amendment I (1): Freedom of religion, speech, and the press; rights of assembly and petition
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

If we take the 1st amendment and break it down we will see a few things that are completely unacceptable to license or require a permit to exercise  The 1st amendment protects our freedoms (given to us by God) to practice the religion of our choice.  Should we have to get a permit to go to church?  How about the freedom of speech?  Would you tolerate having to get a license to speak or write what is on your mind?  I think you would be in a real tizzy about that one...  While there are limited permit requirements for marches and other protests they are based on locations just like a parade.  Could you imagine what would happen if we were not allowed to protest openly about <insert you issue here> without a license?  I don't support all of the reasons people protest but I will absolutely support their right to protest.

Amendment VI (6): Rights to a fair trial
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Rights to a fair trial should require a license too if we use the same logic as the folks saying we need handgun permits.  Could you imagine that only paid permit holders have the right to a fair and speedy trial?  A license to be able to be confronted by witnesses against you or having witnesses in your favor?  That is preposterous!

These examples may seem far fetched but I think we can draw some pretty close parallels with the upcoming proposals the Texas legislature will take up debate on in January. Several open carry type bills are have been filed but nothing less than a constitutional carry option should be accepted.

Please feel free to drop your comments below and we can have an adult debate but I ask that you keep it civil and no name calling.

Thanks for reading!
Steve

Freedom to Carry in Texas

I have had many discussions recently on our beloved Facebook where the uninformed are just up in arms about open carry, freedom to carry or constitutional carry (all the same thing) in Texas.  Jonathan Strickland authored HB 195 to go before the 84th Legislature in Texas.  This bill was filed on the first day it was possible and will hopefully be put to a vote very early in the legislative session.  If the bill passes with 2/3 majority in both houses and is signed into law by Governor Elect Greg Abbott it could go into effect immediately  If it does not garner a 2/3 majority in both houses but passes and is signed into law, then on the 91st day after the close of the 84th legislative session we could have this freedom to carry openly or concealed.  This would be a cause for celebration!  That means that the 708,048(calendar year 2013) active license holders will not be taxed when their current license expires and there are countless others who will not be taxed as they decide to carry how they would like.

Now, many of you may say "oh my stars, what will we do when Bubba is behind me at Starbucks and he has a pistol on his hip?!?!?"  I say you should order your coffee.  Bubba is not the one you should be worried about.  You should be worried about the criminal who is not openly displaying his firearm and is going to follow you to your car and try to harm you.  Make no mistake, there will be criminals after a freedom to carry law is passed that are prohibited by law from possessing a firearm today and will be prohibited in the future as well. READ THE TEXT OF THE BILL. LISTEN - they don't follow the law today and they won't tomorrow either.  Criminals are just that, criminals.  Law abiding citizens should not be punished because of the acts of criminals.  Law abiding citizens should be judged on their own individual actions.

She looks like a threat, right?

"But Steve, what about not having any training requirements?"  Now that people will not be required to spend hundreds of dollars on a license and fingerprints and other fees they will have some money to take training.  If mandating training to carry firearm is the answer then we should mandate training to prepare us for parenting, driving, cooking, swimming, using machine tools, buying a house and oh yeah, being married.  That is not the governments job!  The government has no right to delegate itself as a  nanny over us like that. Eleven states already have laws on the books where no training is required and everyone is just fine. Check these - AL, DE, GA, ID, IN, MD, MS, NH, PA, SD, WA.  The training question is a good one though.  Most responsible people get training for many of the things they like to do that is outside of their areas of expertise, but it is not mandated.  This law could open a new market for CHL instructors to expand their businesses to include additional training which people may be able to afford since they aren't being taxed by license requirements.

"Wait a minute you said they wont have to get a license!"  That's right there will be no requirement for a license.  The license comes into play if you want to carry in another state that has a reciprocity agreement in place with Texas.

So look, there is a lot more to discuss in this debate and I would love to have an adult conversation with any of you who can clearly articulate your position without getting mean and nasty and name calling.  I will not hesitate to delete your mean spirited comments and block you from further commentary.  I would also like to hear from any of you who think I have missed some key elements or have additional information you would like to share with my readers.

Until next time!  
Steve

When I say, I am a Christian

I have read this poem,When I say, “I am a Christian” many times and it has always resonated with me by showing me that being a Christian isn't about being perfect.  It is about accepting Jesus as my personal savior.  I don't look like the typical Christian, many times I don't sound like the typical Christian and often I don't act like a typical Christian.  I have found that Jesus loves me just the way I am at this moment.  I know that the Holy Spirit speaks to me and many times I don't listen and I pay the consequences.  The point of this post is say up front I make tons of mistakes.  If you are looking for an religious scholar who is always Godly you may be in the wrong place.  If you are looking for a guy that writes about his personal experiences, failures and successes and opinions (right or wrong/good or bad), to help you learn how to handle the cards that life deals out, then you may have landed in the right place.  Take what you think is a typical Christian and open your heart and mind and realize that Christians don't all look sound or act the same.  The Good News is, we are all loved the same by a most AWESOME God! What are we going to do with that love?

When I say, “I am a Christian”              
I’m not shouting, “I’ve been saved!”
I’m whispering, “I get lost sometimes
That’s why I chose this way”

When I say, “I am a Christian”
I don’t speak with human pride
I’m confessing that I stumble –
needing God to be my guide

When I say, “I am a Christian”
I’m not trying to be strong
I’m professing that I’m weak
and pray for strength to carry on
                      
When I say, “I am a Christian”
I’m not bragging of success
I’m admitting that I’ve failed
and cannot ever pay the debt

When I say, “I am a Christian”
I don’t think I know it all
I submit to my confusion
asking humbly to be taught

When I say, “I am a Christian”
I’m not claiming to be perfect
My flaws are far too visible
but God believes I’m worth it

When I say, “I am a Christian”
I still feel the sting of pain
I have my share of heartache
which is why I seek God’s name

When I say, “I am a Christian”
I do not wish to judge
I have no authority
I only know I’m loved
Author Carol Wimmer