The Gun Revolution

Don Surber ^ | June 18, 2021 | Don Surber

[Vlad The Inhaler]

Without firing a shot (except at the firing range), Americans have won a revolution -- state by state.

Texas is the latest to join the freedom coalition. The Texas Tribune reported to its dismay, "Texans can carry handguns without a license or training starting Sept. 1, after Gov. Greg Abbott on Wednesday signed the permitless carry bill into law.

35 years ago, it was illegal in 16 states (including Texas) for a civilian to carry a concealed weapon. Only Vermont did not require a pistol permit.

Working through the slow process of going state to state to change the law, the revolution happened.

First came the switch from no permit to may permit. That placed the decision on issuing permits in the hands of elected sheriffs, which explains why California and New York have not budged. Democrat sheriffs pocket a lot of money from patrons who want to carry.

Then came shall permit. This put the onus on law enforcement to show why a person should not carry a concealed weapon.

Finally, came freedom. 19 states no longer require the state's permission to carry a concealed weapon.

Texas and many other states went from red (a ban on concealed carry) to yellow (may issue) to blue (shall issue) to green (no permission necessary).

[Vlad The Inhaler]

The Gun Revolution

https://donsurber.blogspot.com/2021/06/the-gun-revolution.html#more

[exnavy]

“shall not be infringed”.

[Texas Fossil]

Correct.

[eastexsteve]

Texas is the latest to join the freedom coalition. The Texas Tribune reported to its dismay, "Texans can carry handguns without a license or training starting Sept. 1, after Gov. Greg Abbott on Wednesday signed the permitless carry bill into law.

Constitutional carry is just one of the gun laws Texas passed. And, in my opinion, is not the most important one. To me, HB2622 may prove to be much more impactful in the long run.

Text of law here.

[joma89]

Buy more...even at current prices. You will thank yourself if/when you need it.

[Bonemaker]

In 1965 I was stationed at Westover AFB, MA. Being from IL I was delighted to find out MA had shall issue. Went to Chicopee PD and got permit with no problems. Chief’s only admonishment was to keep it concealed when carrying! It took 48 years and a court order to get the same right in illannoy.

[hardspunned]

“shall not be infringed”

We shall see. With all the race baiting BS and covid buffoonery we tend to forget that the new regime is quietly working towards blowing up the Supreme Court. All senate democrats and their “independent” fellow travelers will vote to end the filibuster and to fix the court. It will be done before November ‘22. There is only one way to stop it and we’ve shown we don’t have the belly for that.

[Noumenon]

I have as many as I can reasonably use, but never as many as I want. Anmo’s the thing.

[exnavy]

Yes, that might overturn the gun control act of 1935. That would in turn repeal nearly all firearms restrictions nationally.

[exnavy]

I got a permit here in Michigan when they started “allowing” it, never renewed because i will not pay fpr a constitutional right.

[exnavy]

I will never give up my constitutional rights.

[justme4now]

In United States v. Cruikshank (1876), the Supreme Court ruled that, "The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence.

The problem is that we have given the SCOTUS the final word on everything!

We weren't set up to be that way!

What if all nine "justices" were radical democrats and to them .. every law that a radical congress .. (or even a state) would pass .. they'd endorse!?

In Marbury v. Madison the Supreme Court announced for the first time the principle that a court may declare an act of Congress void if it is inconsistent with the Constitution.

The following should explain it.





The one thing that I don't agree with on these Constitutional Rights rulings is that, Our Rights Do not come from the Constitution!

THE 2ND AND THE CONSTITUTION

[Theophilus]

Apparently in AL we still have to pay the Sheriffs a $300 toll to cross that bridge they put over our 2nd Amendment.

[hardspunned]

I won’t either. The regime will have no problem, if push comes to shove, of prying our weapons from both our cold dead hands.

[Ancesthntr]

Note that this only applies to laws or refs passed after 1/19/2021; everything passed before that by the Feds is thus deemed OK by state.. including the entirety of the 1934 NFA.

[suthener]

“Apparently in AL we still have to pay the Sheriffs a $300 toll to cross that bridge they put over our 2nd Amendment.”

I’m not defending permits by any means, but an Alabama permit is $20 a year. It’s free to veterans. We can’t get constitutional carry because the sheriff’s departments make too much money off of them.

[Theophilus]

Let’s pray we prevail. It’s not just the money, it’s the data they should not collect.

[eastexsteve]

Note that this only applies to laws or refs passed after 1/19/2021; everything passed before that by the Feds is thus deemed OK by state.. including the entirety of the 1934 NFA.

It actually says:

"Subsection (b) does not apply to a contract or agreement to provide assistance in the enforcement of a federal statute, order, rule, or regulation in effect on January 19, 2021."

It's not a federal law it was speaking of, but any "contract or agreement to provide assistance" in enforcing said law. So, no it would be illegal for local LE to assist the feds in enforcing any federal gun law unless an agreement was previously made between local LE and the feds to provide assistance in a particular instance, and this agreement was still in effect on January 19, 2021.

So, if your local PD shows up at your door with the feds after 9/1/2021 to enforce a federal gun law, and they weren't under agreement to assist them with your case back on Jan 19, then your local PD is breaking this law.

[LouAvul]

It shows kalifornia as “may issue.” Good look with that in LA county or in san fransicko.

[Paleo Pete]

Anyone who hasn’t read that Texas Tribune article about the constitutional carry law should. It shows just what frauds that rag are. Same as the rest of the MSM. The tone is definitely liberal, yet the webpage claims the TT is a non-profit, non partisan organization...

QUOTE

Disclosure: The University of Texas at Austin has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

END QUOTE

They have repeatedly quoted a Texas Tribune/UT poll claiming a majority of Texans don’t want permitless carry. That can only be true if they selectively polled Austin and UT students, mostly liberal as they can be. If they polled around here it would be 90% in favor of it...probably the rest of Texas too.

Then again I’m not surprised, that seems to be standard procedure these days...

Texas Tribune announcement after the bill passed:

https://www.texastribune.org/2021/06/16/texas-constitutional-carry-greg-abbott/

I discussed it with a couple of friends this weekend, we plan to go with mostly concealed, under the shirt tail. The reason being, if someone turns up at a local business like wally world with bad intent, the guy with a visible gun on his belt will be his first target. I’m probably going to go with a 9mm Bond derringer until things start to get ugly...

I still need to read through the bill making Texas a 2nd amendment sanctuary state, open in a other tab...