Texas to Supreme Court on historic gun ruling: bless your little hearts

By Ann Ivins

Generally, a combination of ladylike reticence and consideration for the insecurities of my fellow bloggers prevents me from mentioning the great state which I call home. Extraordinary circumstances, however, have at last overcome my scruples. In the light of today’s Supreme Court ruling forbidding states, cities and municipalities from forbidding handgun ownership, and before Scalia and company begin ostentatiously flinging sidearms to a cheering populace, I feel it is my duty to point out the leadership role of the land of my birth. In the fight to uphold the blessed Second Amendment of the Constitution of these here United States, Texas has always been a shining beacon of hope to the teeming masses who struggle for their God-given right to own unlicensed semi-automatics and carry a Colt .45 in any diaper bag.

Texans view today’s “landmark” decision in much the same way a fond parent regards the efforts of a four-year-old to load a single-action revolver: there’s a sense of indulgent pride, stifled giggles so as not to discourage the little cowboy, and the knowledge that once the Justices get past these first fumbling steps, they can look to us to lead the way into the explosively exciting world of unregulated gun ownership. Call us bellwethers; call us progressives; call us what you will… just don’t call us late at night without identifying yourself, ha ha. Because we can shoot you. No, really. We probably can.

In fact, whom we can shoot with impunity is the primary concern of the more judicially advanced Texas gun debate. The right to own guns hasn’t been an issue in Texas for.. for.. well, forever. We take for granted the ability to walk into Walmart and pony up for handguns, rifles and shotguns without all that permit, registration and licensing crap. We applaud our like-minded neighbors (most of the nation, you anti-gun anti-freedom bleeding hearts, and now the Supreme Court) but we’re so far past that old  argument it’s hard to get lathered up about it. What we want, what we demand, is the right to shoot more people in more situations with less provocation and fewer consequences. And I’m proud to say that progress continues. As of September 1st, 2007, any Texan, including me, now has the chance to legally live out that greatest of all Old West gunslinger fantasies.

I can shoot you for lookin’ at me funny.

Breathtaking, isn’t it? All I need to prove to a jury after I blast you into kingdom come is that I felt legitimately threatened by something you were doing: committing a crime, standing between me and the door, looking at my chi-chis in an ominous manner, whatever. I don’t have to try to get away or warn you that I’m armed (this is Texas, dumbass). And if I’m female, middle-class and white and you’re not, not and um, not – well, that’s a bet this modern Annie Oakley will take any time. Squeeze out a few tears, look vulnerable, and you’re in like an armor-piercing bullet with any red-blooded Texas jury.

So congratulations, Supreme Court. We here in the Lone Star State eagerly await the maturation of the rest of the nation’s views on the sacred rights to self-defense and blowing away pesky varmints at will, and we’ll be here to set the standard for generations to come.

Unless we cross someone’s property line after dark. Price of freedom, Bubba.

26 replies »

  1. I usually expect careful thought and consideration from articles on S&R. This particular piece of untreated effluent was more worthy of Ann Coulter. It doesn’t address the legal questions. It doesn’t address the historical or political framework of the issue. It doesn’t even try to consider the real-world implications.

    It consists entirely of snarky insults, slime-throwing and lies about gun owners and the gun control debate. Gun owners are variously likened to little children, stupid, dangerous, barely controlled criminals. This is precisely the sort of venom usually reserved by the Karl Rove and Michael Savage crowd for anyone even slightly to the Left of Attila the Hun.

    It ignores the fact that in most of the country gun there is no gun registration. “Must issue” concealed carry is the law in better than 60% of States. It has not led to an increase in violent crime with or accidental deaths from firearms. Quite the contrary.

    Worst of all, it’s just plain full of lies. Recognizing a right to own weapons, even to carry them in public, does not mean that there is a right to murder people with them. No State allows you to use deadly force for any reason other than to stop a serious felony such as rape, murder, burglary against an occupied dwelling, arson or armed robbery. Once again, Euphrosyne is so blinded byunreasoning hatred for people who aren’t just like her or him that he or she jettisons the truth and spews in all directions.

    This tiny-brained knee-jerk bigot also shows every sign of spouting off without knowing fact one about the issues at hand. How is a “semi-automatic” different than any other pistol? How is it more heinous? Does anyone in the civilized world or parts of West Texas actually carry concealed in a diaper bag? Do even the most backwards Texans want to be able to kill anyone for any reason?

    The answers are: E doesn’t have a freaking clue. It isn’t. No. And No.

    If you don’t want a gun, don’t have one. But at least have the common courtesy to respect the truth and base your opinions on fact and logic rather than bigotry, ignorance and blind hatred.

    Thus saith a lifelong Lefty, former hoplophobe (weapons fearer) and current gun owner with a CCW he never uses from Oregon

  2. My goodness, someone’s panties are in a serious (or takes-himself-waaaaay-too-seriously) wad this morning.

    Meanwhile, I’ll take my unreasoning hatred and pernicious ignorance out to the range for a practice round or two. Wait – I can’t own a gun. I wrote this. Oops!

  3. Sorry, Doc. You’ll never catch us. Come November, I hear there’s going to be overwhelming bipartisan support in the Legislature for a bill requiring all adult non-owners of handguns to file for permits, thus allowing local and state law enforcement to keep a closer eye on the hippies, Commies and subversives.

    Plus, we’re attempting to extend the Castle Doctrine to include seats on public transportation, gym lockers and “what are you lookin’ at?”

  4. Euphrosyne nailed it. I live in Texas. The next step in this state, being pushed by some of our legislators, is the right to keep weapons, on your person, wild west style, in a side holster, (or whatever) but forget the “concealed” part of the the law. The Grand Jury of Harris County is finally getting around to hearing the case of a man who shot – to death – in the back – two burglers, — on his neighbor’s property. They were no threat to him. He was in no danger. But, By God! He had a gun, and he was going to shoot somebody. According to the 911 tape he was “going to kill them.” So he did. His chances of the Grand Jury returning an indictment in Texas are probably — slim — and none. People here, (in Texas) take their rights to keep, bear, and use their handguns, and shotguns, very seriously. And they exercise them, whenever, and whereever they can.

  5. Pingback:
  6. Ah yes, the first refuge of the mudslinger – Shut up and take it. If I tell rather vicious lies it’s your fault for not liking them. While we’re at it let’s tell slap down the darkies who don’t clap at the minstrel show.

    Give it up, E. What you’re spewing here isn’t wit. It’s classic all-American Grade A bigotry with an extra helping of blame the target.

    Adjust a couple screws, flip a switch or two, and you’ll be ready for Fox. Falafel and Oxycontin or stringy blonde hair optional.

  7. Skyplumber, I think Dan understands ES is being satirical. He just think she’s a counterpart on the left to bigots on the right.

    But, Dan, kindly refrain from calling one of our staff bloggers names, like “tiny-brained.”

    Regarding the right to bear arms, I think everyone should have the right with the proper training. By training, I don’t just mean in the use of guns. Everyone who wants a gun should subject themselves to being shot, maybe in the posterior or some other fatty part of the body where it won’t cause serious harm. That way, they’ll know what they’d be inflicting on someone if they shot him or her.

  8. the right to bear arms, I agree with Russ (also living in the wonderful state of Texas BUT luckily in Austin ) that people need to be trained, not only on shooting but safety AND stressing when it is appropriate or not. I grew up in the Netherlands where you have to take drivers ed through a recognized driving school. Most people do not pass the first or even the second time around. here, psah! Anyone can teach anyone to drive and that explains the pathetic driving on the road, not to mention selfish driving. I’ll stay of my soapbox and spare you my rant..
    The right to bear arms in this day and age is dangerous since the time when that right was written into the constitution this country was still the wild west. Now, it is not as applicable -a-need. My husband has a gun which is tucked away safely under lock and key in one of those gun cases. To me, there’s really no point in having one. By the time you figure you’re being burglarized, you’re better of with the pepper spray and calling 911. If you live in the country, it might be a better safety guard as one wouldn’t have neighbours nearby. Plus, you never know if you encounter a wild animal (especially with people encroaching on their habitat).
    The key to having anything that is dangerous is education. Why shouldn’t there be one for owning a gun when you need to at least go through some token education when you want to drive a car?

    anyway..people tend to be reactionary either side without considering all the nuances. It is not a partisan issue but a safety issue. When the public discourse has switched from partisan to safety, I think people can discuss it more rationally.


  9. I thought it was fairly well-treated effluent myself. Nothin’ wrong with taking a few potshots at the overzealous. Well, except here in Texas, and we’re working on it. I’ve shared Dan’s political views on gun control all my lie, but jeez! Save the vitriol for someone who’s serious about it, like that guy in the wheelchair and his wife (was that too insensitive? I can never tell).

    This has long since become a bumper-sticker issue with no middle ground, so you might want to just conserve the energy you use for furious typing for something more useful, like trigger control practice.

    Russ- Are you volunteering? I will be happy to help, and promise not to hit your sciatic nerve.

  10. I had to say one other thing about the pepper spray: No, I’m not a burglar, but I have been sprayed with both CS and pepper spray, and I have to say, the effect on me would be to change my plans from burglarizing you, to burglarizing you, then killing you. And, no, I’m not that tough. At all. It just didn’t seem to inflict enough pain to stop me, but, boy, did it make me mad.

  11. wow, not as coherent as I intended it but I had my 10 yr old yappin’ in the background wanting to on…


  12. Thanks for the offer, Faithless. If my wife ever breaks down and lets me buy that shotgun I want for home defense, I’ll enlist your helping in “training” me.

  13. btw…euphry like ann coulter?? I have to politely disagree. ehem..
    and me an optimist?? naah.. I was talking about it in terms of ‘if’.. not expecting it to happen anytime soon.. and hey, perhaps we can ‘practice’ writing an awareness campaign for gun education.. how could one turn this discourse into a safety instead of partisan one?? that would be a fun thing to do.. (ok, speaking for myself..)


  14. I wasn’t going to mention it, Ingrid, but my hair is much, much fluffier than Ann Coulter’s, and the blonde dye job looks much more natural. So thank you.

  15. In most states, one is allowed to walk down the street carrying a gun in a holster….as long as it’s not concealed, it’s legal.


  16. OK, I’m late to this discourse and the passion of the issue may have waned by the time anyone reads this but I have to say I’m enraged by the arrogance of those who are forcing their guns on us.

    In 1999, Missouri, my home state, held a referendum and a majority of Missourians voted against concealed guns. Did that mean anything to the General Assembly? No. A few years later, they passed a concealed gun law and the governor signed it. The public be damned! We want guns!

    Texas has got nothing on Missouri.

    Now, rogue justices have ignored over half of the Second Amendment (the first thirteen words and the last four) to say the only thing we need to know is contained in the remaining ten (“the right of the people to keep and bear arms.”)

    Well, what about it?

    Never fear. Scalia tells us those ten words mean the Founders wanted us to have guns because over the last 20 or so years a lot of gun nut hacks have produced a lot of drivel and Scalia had access to it and he just likes guns so, obviously, the Founders wanted them.

    Maybe I’ll get a gun and if I’m ever diagnosed with an incurable, deadly disease I’ll know what to do with it.

    It’s the American way.

  17. Sorry Russ, if it’s a shotgun, and you really feel the need to empathize with your assailant, you’ll just have to resign yourself to only having one buttock. Best I can do, I’m afraid.

  18. If this article was intended as satire then the author needs to sharpen his/her writing skills, because even satire requires a smidgen of truth.

  19. Here you go, Lee. Unlike those fortunate souls who know everything without even trying, I am forced to do research… so here’s a few links.

    This is the ATF’s guide to state regulations – the next edition isn’t online yet, so this is from 2005.

    Here’s the NRA’s 2008 quick guideline publication:

    Click to access TXSL.pdf

    Here’s Gov. Perry’s press release about SB 378, the “Castle Doctrine” bill which went into effect Sept. 1 2007.

    Fortunately for Mr. Horn, he shot the two men who were robbing his neighbor’s house and crossed his own property line after Sept. 1. If you’d like to hear the 911 tape, in which the operator pleads with him to go back inside and not kill someone:


  20. Oh, and Dan? If you can overcome your rage issues for a moment, feel free to check out those links, too… you may want to familiarize yourself with the facts before you go off again.

    A couple of notes for the humorless zealot in general:

    I don’t distinguish between revolvers and semi-automatics; the Texas CHL statutes do. To carry a semi-automatic requires extra class and range hours… go ask an instructor why.

    As far as “ignoring the fact that in most of the country there is no gun registration?” Well, at first I was so reluctant to take this diatribe seriously that I couldn’t bear to point it out, and quoting yourself is such bad form anyway, but here goes:

    We applaud our like-minded neighbors (most of the nation, you anti-gun anti-freedom bleeding hearts,

    Couldn’t help it. It’s the English teacher in me. Chronic overexplainer…

  21. Not true. Texas CHL statutes require the exact same training and range time for a revolver or a semi-automatic. The only difference is that you must do the range time _with_ a semi-auto to _carry_ a semi-auto.

    edit: Crud-just noticed this thread was over 2 months old. Sorry for reviving it.