• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Texas gov candidate Wendy Davis supports open carry law

Do you support Open Carry?

  • I live/d in TX and I generally support OC

    Votes: 11 31.4%

  • I live/d in TX and I generally oppose OC

    Votes: 3 8.6%

  • I have never lived in TX and I generally support OC

    Votes: 18 51.4%

  • I have never lived in TX and I generally oppose OC

    Votes: 2 5.7%

  • Other

    Votes: 1 2.9%
  • Total voters
    35
Ockham said:
I generally agree --- sounds like she's scrounging for votes to me and what hot button issue will rile up the Texans? Guns of course! So blatant and obvious....
Click to expand...
To add to her credentials..she was a Republican up until 2006. No true Texan would lean backwards.
 
cpgrad08 said:
Please tell me what I'm compensating for?
Click to expand...

It varies from person to person, but the general mindset is to want to be calling attention to yourself, to be the big man strutting around. Wanting to present an overt threat.

It's not about protecting yourself. Open carry does that worse than concealed carry. Element of surprise, and all that. Criminals have the initiative by nature. Open carry makes you the first target, and you can't draw until they done something or else you are the criminal.
 
cpgrad08 said:
Are you going to attack someone that you know has a gun?
Click to expand...

Yes. I'm going to make sure I attack and disable that person first, giving them no chance to actually use that gun. I, the theoretical criminal, get to decide how this confrontation begins. I'm going to start by shooting you in the back of your head, or maybe just hitting you on the back of the head with a large rock. So easy a caveman could do it. So much for thousands of years of weapons advancement.
 
winston53660 said:
So where is the money going to come from?
Click to expand...

Pretty eager to divert from the weaknesses of the candidate under discussion to anything else?

Are you sort of in the I-said-I-supported-her-and-so-now-I'm-stuck trap?
 
Who with any sense would believe her now? Here's an opportunity to keep a liar out of office. We already know what happens after they get in office. Period.
 
Deuce said:
It varies from person to person, but the general mindset is to want to be calling attention to yourself, to be the big man strutting around. Wanting to present an overt threat.

It's not about protecting yourself. Open carry does that worse than concealed carry. Element of surprise, and all that. Criminals have the initiative by nature. Open carry makes you the first target, and you can't draw until they done something or else you are the criminal.
Click to expand...

Will you just failed to describe me what so ever.
 
Deuce said:
Yes. I'm going to make sure I attack and disable that person first, giving them no chance to actually use that gun. I, the theoretical criminal, get to decide how this confrontation begins. I'm going to start by shooting you in the back of your head, or maybe just hitting you on the back of the head with a large rock. So easy a caveman could do it. So much for thousands of years of weapons advancement.
Click to expand...
If it so easy how come their aren't mass attacks on cops to take their guns?
 
Deuce said:
It varies from person to person, but the general mindset is to want to be calling attention to yourself, to be the big man strutting around. Wanting to present an overt threat.

It's not about protecting yourself. Open carry does that worse than concealed carry. Element of surprise, and all that. Criminals have the initiative by nature. Open carry makes you the first target, and you can't draw until they done something or else you are the criminal.
Click to expand...

no it doesn't, most criminals are oppurtunistic, not tactical. a criminal can pick your lock and disable your alarm too, but most won't, because there's plenty of people with no alarms who leave their doors unlocked.

this is a myth, it so rarely happens that it's not really a valid argument.
 
just because of this thread, when I ran to the bank and the grocery store this morning, instead of dressing preppy and fashionable with a glock in a skinny holster concealed, I dressed in jeans, a thick flannel, and boots for the rural appearance, and I strapped on my glock out in the open on my belt. went to bank, did my business, went to the grocery store, did my business, and I did not witness one disarming attempt, I wasn't "shot first" even once........

hmmmm something must be going on here

maybe the criminals who seek out open carriers to disarm and shoot first all had the day off today.... ;)
 
Last edited:
EMNofSeattle said:
just because of this thread, when I ran to the bank and the grocery store this morning, instead of dressing preppy and fashionable with a glock in a skinny holster concealed, I dressed in jeans, a thick flannel, and boots for the rural appearance, and I strapped on my glock out in the open on my belt. went to bank, did my business, went to the grocery store, did my business, and I did not witness one disarming attempt, I wasn't "shot first" even once........

hmmmm something must be going on here

maybe the criminals who seek out open carriers to disarm and shoot first all had the day off today.... ;)
Click to expand...

The good news is...you didnt have to shoot anybody for cutting you off in traffic. We'll call this an all around good day!
 
cpgrad08 said:
If it so easy how come their aren't mass attacks on cops to take their guns?
Click to expand...

Because there aren't mass attacks going on in the first place.
 
cpwill said:
Wow. Wendy Davis is getting desperate.


Good. She sacrificed her kids for her own political career. May that career now crumble to dust.
Click to expand...

Amen!
 
Deuce said:
Because there aren't mass attacks going on in the first place.
Click to expand...

So your theory about OC making you a target for attack doesn't really stand on it's leg then.
 
cpwill said:
Good. She sacrificed her kids for her own political career. May that career now crumble to dust.
Click to expand...

I'm not familiar with her...what's the story behind that comment?
 
Lursa said:
I'm not familiar with her...what's the story behind that comment?
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter. Once a Democrat espouses any of their beliefs, they're selling out everyone.
 
Lursa said:
I'm not familiar with her...what's the story behind that comment?
Click to expand...

she made some incorrect statements on her campaign bio, which were seized upon by conservatives.... and then the critics began making assumptions as to why some details were incorrect, with the idea being she divorced her husband and left the marriage to abandon her kids.... it's a bit of a story to describe...

As some called Wendy Davis a bad mother, her daughters stepped forward | Dallas Morning News
 
LOL Oh that's rich. Such hypocrisy....nobody would have even noticed if it had been a man.
 
Deuce said:
I personally think anyone open carrying is compensating for something, and is pretty much a dumbass, but I think it should be legal.

Also, if I were a violent criminal intent on causing harm, it would be really convenient to know which douchebag I should shoot first.

edit: And if it were in Florida, I could just say I felt my life was in danger and I'd be acquitted!
Click to expand...

Im so sick of those that think that people that OC are compensating for something or just wanting attention.

Their are pros/cons to both OC and CC. Here are the reasons why I OC over CC.

I carry larger frame and larger caliber guns and with the clothes I wear for most part means they are going to leave an inprint their at that point you might as well OC.

I find OC for myself more comfortable then CC because my because gets a rash when exposed to lubricant on my guns.

The draw from OC for me is more comfortable and natural then CC.

Their is the deterrent of OC. In most cases if a criminal sees carrying a gun they are not going to attack you since they prefer soft targets.

When I OC I go one with my business and do nothing like " look at me I have a gun" 97% of people that I come across when I OC never realize I have a gun on me.
 
The Open Carry Argument

First One To Be Shot:
There are some who criticize open carry and claim it will make you more of a target or ‘the first one shot’ when a robber walks into the 7-11, despite the absolute lack of credible evidence that this has ever happened.

If the robber walks in and sees that you’re armed, his whole plan has encountered an unexpected variable. In bank robberies where he might expect to see an armed guard he will have already factored that possibility into his plan, but only for the armed guard, not for open or concealed carry citizens. No robber robs a bank without at least a rudimentary plan. Nevertheless, being present for a bank robbery is an extremely remote possibility for most of us regardless of our preferred method of handgun carry, so let’s go back in the 7-11. If the robber sees someone is armed he is forced to either significantly alter the plan or abort it outright. Robbing is an inherently apprehensive occupation, and one that doesn't respond well to instant modifications. He is not prepared to commit murder when he only planned for larceny. He knows that a petty robbery will not garner the intense police manhunt a murder would. He doesn't know if you’re an armed citizen or a police officer and isn't going to take the time to figure it out.

Either way, if someone in the 7-11 is unexpectedly armed, how many others might be similarly adorned and where might they be? Does this unexpectedly armed individual have a partner who is likewise armed nearby, someone who is watching right now? Self preservation compels him to abort the plan for one that is less risky. So we see that the logic matches the history; open carriers are not the first ones shot because it doesn't make sense in any common street crime scenario that they would be. If your personal self protection plan emphasizes “Hollywood” style crimes over the more realistic street mugging, it might be best to stay home.
 
Jerry said:
The Open Carry Argument

First One To Be Shot:
There are some who criticize open carry and claim it will make you more of a target or ‘the first one shot’ when a robber walks into the 7-11, despite the absolute lack of credible evidence that this has ever happened.

If the robber walks in and sees that you’re armed, his whole plan has encountered an unexpected variable. In bank robberies where he might expect to see an armed guard he will have already factored that possibility into his plan, but only for the armed guard, not for open or concealed carry citizens. No robber robs a bank without at least a rudimentary plan. Nevertheless, being present for a bank robbery is an extremely remote possibility for most of us regardless of our preferred method of handgun carry, so let’s go back in the 7-11. If the robber sees someone is armed he is forced to either significantly alter the plan or abort it outright. Robbing is an inherently apprehensive occupation, and one that doesn't respond well to instant modifications. He is not prepared to commit murder when he only planned for larceny. He knows that a petty robbery will not garner the intense police manhunt a murder would. He doesn't know if you’re an armed citizen or a police officer and isn't going to take the time to figure it out.

Either way, if someone in the 7-11 is unexpectedly armed, how many others might be similarly adorned and where might they be? Does this unexpectedly armed individual have a partner who is likewise armed nearby, someone who is watching right now? Self preservation compels him to abort the plan for one that is less risky. So we see that the logic matches the history; open carriers are not the first ones shot because it doesn't make sense in any common street crime scenario that they would be. If your personal self protection plan emphasizes “Hollywood” style crimes over the more realistic street mugging, it might be best to stay home.
Click to expand...

true, when robbers see me packing this baby at the convenience store they bugger off :mrgreen:

flamethrower-m2a1-71.jpg
 
cpgrad08 said:
I knew you had to get all your hot air from some where. :2razz:
Click to expand...

Hot air is merely a byproduct of those suckers. btw that is what inflicts most casualties of flamethrower victims. scorched air
 
Deuce said:
I personally think anyone open carrying is compensating for something, and is pretty much a dumbass, but I think it should be legal.

Also, if I were a violent criminal intent on causing harm, it would be really convenient to know which douchebag I should shoot first.

edit: And if it were in Florida, I could just say I felt my life was in danger and I'd be acquitted!
Click to expand...
"Anyone" is very general. I highly doubt that anyone who openly carries is compensating for something.

Actually, now that I think about it....I don't consider the whole "compensating for something" line to hold any substance - I most often hear it used by persons who tend towards the "anti gun" or "more gun control" side of things, and I think it's just a somewhat hackish statement that is far too often used, mostly by persons who aren't really considering the matter all that seriously or thoughtfully.

Kinda a throwaway statement, really.

Then again most political arguments are filled with such things....from all sides.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom