Democrats new bill

[jbombelli]

It's not even three in the afternoon yet!






I guess I'm among friends.

You can't drink all day if you don't start early.

 

[foszoe]

3 pm just means switch to Guinness with Jameson on the side, but being Scotch Irish, maybe ill have a wee bit o Pinch

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Leaving office to watch Army-Navy game. INGO calls for sotol today.

 

[LEaSH]

Texan's wisdomust be called into question when they voted those abominations from Jack in the Box TACOs as best tacos.

No way Jose.

 

[drillsgt]

Is there something not working with their current law that this person thought needed changed?

 

[IndyDave1776]

Is there something not working with their current law that this person thought needed changed?

It strikes me as starting with the provision of the castle doctrine most likely to get traction to eliminate, later to be followed by no provision for indoor property and then a duty to retreat.

 

[fjw2]

Should have posted this earlier but have been busy all day. Giving credit to Kutnupe14 for further scrutiny first. Still consider any proposed legislation such as we have seen all over the country, as inroads to a greater goal.

 

[foszoe]

It strikes me as starting with the provision of the castle doctrine most likely to get traction to eliminate, later to be followed by no provision for indoor property and then a duty to retreat.

Sounds like you should use your INGO influence to gain us this right the Texans have that we don't!

I'm being oppressed! Help me!

 

[drillsgt]

Sounds like you should use your INGO influence to gain us this right the Texans have that we don't!

I'm being oppressed! Help me!

I'm not sure the reason for the snark?

 

[fullmetaljesus]

I love how we bicker about semantics while the enemies to the state run amuck. We need to mobilize and get the word out.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Sounds like you should use your INGO influence to gain us this right the Texans have that we don't!

I'm being oppressed! Help me!

Are you hitting the bottle already?

That didn't even make sense.

 

[jsx1043]

It strikes me as starting with the provision of the castle doctrine most likely to get traction to eliminate, later to be followed by no provision for indoor property and then a duty to retreat.

Still consider any proposed legislation such as we have seen all over the country, as inroads to a greater goal.

This. Incrementalism.

 

[foszoe]

Are you hitting the bottle already?

That didn't even make sense.

Well according to what I read, Texas Castle doctrine is more expansive than ours, so we are already deprived by that metric. If Texas is up against legislation to curtail a right we don't have and that starts them down the slippery slope you pointed out then wouldn't our response here in Indiana be to push for the same rights Texans currently have so we aren't in similar dangers?

 

[BigRed]

Actually, If you care to look, I said I hadn’t read the platform from the website. I don’t think it’s a stretch say, that concerning the 2A, you really don’t need to look at the platform from the actual website, to know what the intentions of Democrats are.

Well, that is certainly better.


​What a joke.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Well, that is certainly better.


​What a joke.

No. I wasn’t joking. I actually had a good idea of the policy without having to find the specific policy on the Biden website. You didn’t?

 

[BigRed]

No. I wasn’t joking. I actually had a good idea of the policy without having to find the specific policy on the Biden website. You didn’t?

Let me be very clear. I was not in any way implying that you were joking.

I was stating that you are a joke.

 

[Amishman44]

Just heard that the democrats are trying to pass a new bill that states,you can not use deadly force in your own home against a intruder!
Anyone else hear this?
Things are going from crazy to CRAZIER!

Where'd you hear that? State, Federal?

It was a state representative from Irving, Texas who introduced the bill and made a statement:
[FONT=&amp]
Posted on 12/9/2020, 1:49:29 AM by yesthatjallen[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Texas has a law that allows a home one to protect themselves and their property. This has long been a target for the left. See Below.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]In Texas, State Representative Terry Meza (D-Irving) has introduced HB196. Her bill would repeal the state’s “castle doctrine.”
This doctrine allows a homeowner to use deadly force against an armed intruder who breaks into his home.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Now listen to what she has to say...
”I’m not saying that stealing is okay,” Meza explained. “All I’m saying is that it doesn’t warrant a death penalty.
Thieves only carry weapons for self-protection and to provide the householder an incentive to cooperate. They just want to get their loot and get away.
When the resident tries to resist is when people get hurt. If only one side is armed fewer people will be killed.”[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Meza was quick to reassure that her bill “would not totally prevent homeowners from defending themselves.
Under the new law the homeowner’s obligation is to flee the home at the first sign of intrusion. If fleeing is not possible he must cooperate with the intruder.
But if violence breaks out it is the homeowner’s responsibility to make sure no one gets hurt.
The best way to achieve this is to use the minimum non-lethal force possible because intruders will be able to sue for any injuries they receive at the hands of the homeowner.”[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]“”In most instances the thief needs the money more than the homeowner does,” Meza reasoned. “The homeowner’s insurance we reimburse his losses.
On balance, the transfer of property is likely to lead to a more equitable distribution of wealth. If my bill can help make this transfer a peaceful one so much the better!"

IMHO...if you take the time to look her up, just one look and you'll see she's a complete nut-case!
And, when she says "I'm not saying that 'stealing' is okay." she's actually lying because later in her statement she says it is 'okay' to steal when she says
"On balance, t[/FONT]he transfer of property is likely to lead to a more equitable distribution of wealth."

 

[foszoe]

It was a state representative from Irving, Texas who introduced the bill and made a statement:
[FONT=&amp]
Posted on 12/9/2020, 1:49:29 AM by yesthatjallen[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Texas has a law that allows a home one to protect themselves and their property. This has long been a target for the left. See Below.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]In Texas, State Representative Terry Meza (D-Irving) has introduced HB196. Her bill would repeal the state’s “castle doctrine.”
This doctrine allows a homeowner to use deadly force against an armed intruder who breaks into his home.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Now listen to what she has to say...
”I’m not saying that stealing is okay,” Meza explained. “All I’m saying is that it doesn’t warrant a death penalty.
Thieves only carry weapons for self-protection and to provide the householder an incentive to cooperate. They just want to get their loot and get away.
When the resident tries to resist is when people get hurt. If only one side is armed fewer people will be killed.”[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Meza was quick to reassure that her bill “would not totally prevent homeowners from defending themselves.
Under the new law the homeowner’s obligation is to flee the home at the first sign of intrusion. If fleeing is not possible he must cooperate with the intruder.
But if violence breaks out it is the homeowner’s responsibility to make sure no one gets hurt.
The best way to achieve this is to use the minimum non-lethal force possible because intruders will be able to sue for any injuries they receive at the hands of the homeowner.”[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]“”In most instances the thief needs the money more than the homeowner does,” Meza reasoned. “The homeowner’s insurance we reimburse his losses.
On balance, the transfer of property is likely to lead to a more equitable distribution of wealth. If my bill can help make this transfer a peaceful one so much the better!"

IMHO...if you take the time to look her up, just one look and you'll see she's a complete nut-case!
And, when she says "I'm not saying that 'stealing' is okay." she's actually lying because later in her statement she says it is 'okay' to steal when she says
"On balance, t[/FONT]he transfer of property is likely to lead to a more equitable distribution of wealth."

I only had to read this one quote to reach a decision.

stealing is okay,” Meza explained. “All I’m saying is that it doesn’t warrant a death penalty.
Thieves only carry weapons for self-protection and to provide the householder an incentive to cooperate. They just want to get their loot and get away.
When the resident tries to resist is when people get hurt. If only one side is armed fewer people will be killed.”

Thats enough. I'd still like to ask her some questions like How in the hell can you make the homeowners responsible for the thieves safety?

 

[Expat]

Let me be very clear. I was not in any way implying that you were joking.

I was stating that you are a joke.

Better be careful. He would love to add another scalp to his ban list. He has to be running out of room on the lodge pole soon.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Let me be very clear. I was not in any way implying that you were joking.

I was stating that you are a joke.

Once again, I apologize for my perceived shortcomings.