• 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?


  • Total voters
    35
"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.

Most gun haters are reticent about explaining what REALLY motivates their anti gun nonsense. so they come up with moronic facades to hide their true motivations
 
I'm not familiar with her...what's the story behind that comment?

She married a guy who was willing to cash in his 401(k) in order to put her through law school, and on the day that he made the last payment, she left him. But she left him with the kids because she wanted a political career, and being "mom" was such a time-wasting drag, you know. He even got custody of the kids that weren't his, which virtually never happens in Texas.
 
So your theory about OC making you a target for attack doesn't really stand on it's leg then.

It makes you a target during an attack. It would not often be the motivation for the attack in the first place. That does not translate to an expectation of "mass attacks."
 
She married a guy who was willing to cash in his 401(k) in order to put her through law school, and on the day that he made the last payment, she left him. But she left him with the kids because she wanted a political career, and being "mom" was such a time-wasting drag, you know. He even got custody of the kids that weren't his, which virtually never happens in Texas.

No, that's the ridiculous smear campaign fed to you by the GOP. Her children have soundly debunked it. Congrats on buying the BS though.
 
Last edited:
I personally think anyone open carrying is compensating for something...
I admit that there is a TedyBear element in carrying a gun. I feel more relaxed knowing that there's a way to deal with the worst situation should it arise.
 
I admit that there is a TedyBear element in carrying a gun. I feel more relaxed knowing that there's a way to deal with the worst situation should it arise.

A situation like a mass shooting? If I'm the shooter and I see your holster, you're my first target. Better that you conceal it so that I won't know you're the guy to go after first.
 
See also:
*****
Having warded off 2 road-rage incidents with nothing but carrying a gun openly, I support OC. Which ever way this election goes, I hope Texas can join the OC community sooner than later. Think what you will about OC vs. CC, but people should be free to make their own choice imo.

It's political fluff. TX is full of brain-dead xenophobic right wingers running around and nothing gets them riled up more than gun-friendly talk.
 
I strenuously support open and concealed carry, without a permit.
 
A situation like a mass shooting? If I'm the shooter and I see your holster, you're my first target. Better that you conceal it so that I won't know you're the guy to go after first.

Or, you might not attack because you know that someone is going to shoot back.
 
Or, you might not attack because you know that someone is going to shoot back.

There is no shooting back because I get to shoot first.
 
Or, you might not attack because you know that someone is going to shoot back.

Yeah because mass killers like that are the bastion of rational thinking:roll:
 
Not on everything. They have strong right to work laws

"right to work" laws have nothing to do w/a right to work. It's simply a ban on union security agreements, which are voluntary, contractual agreements between a group of workers and an employer--in other words, such laws are an example of government intervention into private agreements (a no-no in a free market).

Employers who have never signed such an agreement are always free to hire anyone they want even in states with no so-called "right to work" laws. But of course, the uneducated righties that mostly populate the state of TX don't know that, making them easy prey for the stale dishonest rhetoric of pols that promise to enact these anti-market laws.

TX is also the state that has decided to ban Tesla from directly selling cars to consumers, another anti-freedom, anti-market practice.

I could list all the other anti-freedom, anti-market measures that the lower-midwestern right wing ****hole has enacted, but it would crash the forum.
 
It makes you a target during an attack. It would not often be the motivation for the attack in the first place. That does not translate to an expectation of "mass attacks."

OC is a dumb practice, but govts. shouldn't ban it. And CC is likely to be somewhat more effective in states where it's banned.
 
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
.

That makes no sense at all. Criminals just do whatever it takes to win. They'll send in some dude into the bank to case the place and they'll know beforehand and prep for it. As soon as the OC dude exits the door, the criminals will pop him and move in.
 
A situation like a mass shooting? If I'm the shooter and I see your holster, you're my first target. Better that you conceal it so that I won't know you're the guy to go after first.
That post didn't specify OC. I could be carrying concealed.

Someone has to be shot at first, may as well be me. I've always been told that I 'look military', even when I had long hair and in highschool; I frequently wear military related shirts and hoodies, and have a high&tight cut, so if you're looking to take down what looks like a hard target I'm probably going to be your first pick anyway. I don't go to bars anymore because even before I joined the service I was the first guy that punk trying to impress is girlfriend came after. It's something I've just learned to deal with.

When I OC people just assume I'm a cop. Chances are you might assume the same even if you don't see a gun because off duty cops CC too.
 
Last edited:
That makes no sense at all. Criminals just do whatever it takes to win. They'll send in some dude into the bank to case the place and they'll know beforehand and prep for it. As soon as the OC dude exits the door, the criminals will pop him and move in.
If you don't like OC, then don't OC. Others should be free to make their own choice.
 
Yeah, she's been a party line leftist democrat and supports all this unconstitutional gun control garbage yet to distract from all that she makes a big public show of being pro open carry. The devil's going to be in the details though with this lady.
 
It's political fluff. TX is full of brain-dead xenophobic right wingers running around and nothing gets them riled up more than gun-friendly talk.
Well maybe after Texas becomes the next state to legalize weed they'll stop running around and settle down to watch some cartoons.
 
"right to work" laws have nothing to do w/a right to work. It's simply a ban on union security agreements, which are voluntary, contractual agreements between a group of workers and an employer--in other words, such laws are an example of government intervention into private agreements (a no-no in a free market).

Employers who have never signed such an agreement are always free to hire anyone they want even in states with no so-called "right to work" laws. But of course, the uneducated righties that mostly populate the state of TX don't know that, making them easy prey for the stale dishonest rhetoric of pols that promise to enact these anti-market laws.

TX is also the state that has decided to ban Tesla from directly selling cars to consumers, another anti-freedom, anti-market practice.

I could list all the other anti-freedom, anti-market measures that the lower-midwestern right wing ****hole has enacted, but it would crash the forum.

not exactly, the employer has to sign the union security agreement, if enough workers want to be unionized, and if an NLRB sanctioned election in that workplace leads to a majority vote for unionization.
 
No doubt she will present as quite the reasonable 'moderate'...right up until the final vote is counted.
 
Back
Top Bottom