Disbarr him for judicial tyranny. He knows that the law says it is legal; what he's doing is frightening people into not exercising their rights, anyway.
Posted on 02/05/2006 9:50:48 AM PST by SwinneySwitch
The Texas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union is unhappy about last Thursday's column concerning the state's new gun-toting law.
I know this because of an e-mail exchange I had with chapter spokesman Scott Henson, who chided:
—"Your interpretation of House Bill 823 relies on an analysis by a handful of prosecutors who opposed the law, but not the bill language itself."
—"It's true that some prosecutors are telling police to keep arresting people ... but they are raising a red herring. The law is really not unclear."
—"The lawmakers wanted drivers to be able to have a stowed gun driving to the bank or the grocery store."
And the real shocker:
—"I was closely involved in the legislative process that created the new law."
Somebody check the weather in Hades. Snowflakes must be falling on Beelzebub's head.
Whether this conservative turn is an ACLU aberration or a step in the right-wing direction won't be known for a while. But news of the organization's loose-gun-control stance will surely cause a few spluttering Sunday morning readers to lose their coffee.
Incidentally, if you missed Thursday's column ...
House Bill 823, which was passed by Texas legislators during the 2005 regular session, states that a person "is presumed to be traveling" and is legally permitted to carry a handgun in his car or truck if he is (1) in a private motor vehicle, (2) not engaged in criminal activity, (3) not prohibited by law from possessing a firearm, (4) not a member of a "criminal street gang" and (5) not carrying the handgun "in plain view."
The bill was vigorously opposed by prosecutors and law enforcement officials who believed it would increase the number of guns on the state's streets and highways and do more harm than good.
In the column, I quoted Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal, who said that in his jurisdiction, "It is still going to be against the law for (unlicensed) persons to carry handguns in autos." And I suggested that Texans should probably think twice before stashing pistols in their glove boxes or under their bucket seats.
That warning prompted the Henson-initiated e-mail exchange.
"The new statute says juries MUST presume a driver is traveling and therefore legally carrying a gun unless the state disproves one of the five elements," the ACLUer insisted. "State Rep. Terry Keel, who authored the bill, says: 'In plain terms, a law-abiding person should not fear arrest if they are transporting a concealed weapon in a motor vehicle.' ...
"The story here isn't that the law was poorly written. The story here is that some prosecutors are so arrogant they think they don't have to follow the law."
Still, Henson cautioned: "I agree that drivers should be wary. Until this is settled (in the courts), they risk arrest."
Toward the end of the e-mail exchange, I wondered about the potential ramifications of the new law and shared my concern with Henson:
"As I understand the intent of the original 'traveling' law, it was written so bona fide travelers could have a weapon (for protection) as they drove down the open road.
"It seems to me that HB 823 turned that intent on its head, allowing an individual to be armed going to the corner grocery store."
Unfazed, Henson responded with his "driving to the bank or grocery store" remark.
And that's pretty much the up-to-date story of the new gun law and the controversy surrounding it.
Henson said the ACLU has filed open records requests with prosecutors across the state to determine which ones are telling officers to continue making arrests, and he believes if state courts don't "slap them down," the House and Senate will spank them during the next legislative session.
Meanwhile, the debate over the new law will continue.
Frankly, I find myself leaning a bit left of the ACLU position.
But maybe I'm missing something.
Lend me a contemplative hand here.
Use the feedback information below to call or e-mail me your take on Texas' new gun-toting law.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To contact Roddy Stinson, call (210) 250-3155 or e-mail rstinson@express-news.net. His column appears Sundays, Tuesdays and Thursdays.
The new law states that a person is "presumed to be traveling" if he/she is ...
1. In a private motor vehicle.
2. Not engaged in criminal activity.
3. Not prohibited by law from possessing a firearm.
4. Not a member of a "criminal street gang."
5. Not carrying a handgun in plain view.
Here in Hosuton they are still prosecuting for this.
Additionally there has been an unwillingness to pursue violent criminals even before the increase in violent crime we got from the New Orleans evacuatees (who are still here, by the way).
The problem has gotten so bad that the city has partnered with the Guardian Angels vigilante group to establish a chapter here. Yet citizens still are prosecuted for defending themselves.
Rats run this city, can you tell?
Chuck Rosenthal is also the one who poorly defended the state's Same Sex Sodomy law.
I stopped voting for Chuck (R) years ago.
Get Down!
Now, let's get the same thing done regarding the Fed EPA and various state agencies regarding aftermarket auto parts.
By the way, the last time I drove through Texas, I had two guns in the car (a 10mm 1911 and a Mossberg 590) and I didn't get in trouble. I didn't get a roadside interview with a deputy, but no probs.
Checking the treetops for bacon ...
"The lawmakers wanted drivers to be able to have a stowed gun driving to the bank or the grocery store."
My suspicion is that this guy thinks he will undermine support for the law by encouraging this kind of interpretation. He says that he was closely involved in the drafting of the bill, but he does not say which side he was on.
On the other hand, if the ACLU were to change its stripes and endorse gun rights, that would be the kiss of death for the ACLU. It's liberal constituency would dump it like a sack of potatoes.
As far as I can see, Mr. Henson is not following by the national playbook. I don't think that Ms. Strossen will be voicing loud approval of his actions.
bookmark.
The ACLU gets on the right side of an issue every once in a great while to have something to refer to when accused of trying to destroy America. These are the same people who fought to have child pornography legalized.
Ping.
In the land of horse dung and gunsmoke, these kinds of advertisements go a long way during the aCLU's fundraising drives. I'll bet it's pretty difficult for the aCLU to get donations in Texas.
Disbarr him for judicial tyranny. He knows that the law says it is legal; what he's doing is frightening people into not exercising their rights, anyway.
Think that sounds good?
Any person who, acting as prosecutor for the state of Texas, seeks to prosecute someone who was carrying a firearm in the manner specified in [whatever section House Bill 823 ends up in] without being able to show probable cause for believing at least one of the conditions was not met, shall be subject to ten years' imprisonment, a fine of $100,000, or both.
Hope this law covers Ronnie Earle.
I still think that open carry [not waiving a gun around or pointing it in a threatening manner] should be the least objectionable form of carry to those who are for whatever reason are afraid of the lawful possession of and use of firearms.
Note: This is the Texas ACLU, not the national organization, whose position is that the second amendment protect the power of the states to maintain a militia. The Texas branch has other notions. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.