Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Those kids are traitors! Banish them to some commie state!

 jmurph wrote:
Actually, Texas used to have laws more strictly regulating sex toys than firearms- their sale was banned. Until the courts struck it down in 2008 (Fun Fact: Ted Cruz was the Solicitor General who proudly defended the Texas law).

It led to the best moment of the Republican primary;

tneva82 wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Well, one is an object that is permitted under the Second Amendment because it is clearly covered by the right to keep and bear arms. The other is an object of which the primary purpose is sexual stimulation, and is covered by a state law that makes it a misdemeanor punishable by a $500 fine to intentionally make an “obscene display or distribution.” http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.43.htm

Also UT has rules in place which prohibits the display of any “visual image” associated with obscenity, which would cover the dildo protest. So there are some nuances to consider before you try to equate a firearm and a sex toy used as an improvised club.

Just because law is so now doesn't mean it's good. I mean for christ sake lethal weapon is fine but toy for most natural thing is not? Crazy morality there.

Are there trigger warnings on these displays? I need my safe space!

In actuality it would only be comparable if the D's were concealed. Open display of a firearm on campus is illegal except for police and other authorized officers.

tneva82 wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Well, one is an object that is permitted under the Second Amendment because it is clearly covered by the right to keep and bear arms. The other is an object of which the primary purpose is sexual stimulation, and is covered by a state law that makes it a misdemeanor punishable by a $500 fine to intentionally make an “obscene display or distribution.” http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.43.htm

Also UT has rules in place which prohibits the display of any “visual image” associated with obscenity, which would cover the dildo protest. So there are some nuances to consider before you try to equate a firearm and a sex toy used as an improvised club.

Just because law is so now doesn't mean it's good. I mean for christ sake lethal weapon is fine but toy for most natural thing is not? Crazy morality there.

The lethal weapon is a constitutionally protected right. Sex toys are not. Also sex toys are allowed, you just can't use them for a display of an obscene "visual image", so using them in the privacy of your own home for most natural thing is perfectly fine and legal. Public displays, not so much.

Also legality (which I am limiting my discussion to) =/= morality

 Frazzled wrote:


In actuality it would only be comparable if the D's were concealed. Open display of a firearm on campus is illegal except for police and other authorized officers.

Which is actually the case here. Displaying a weapon could get you a brandishing charge and does break school rules.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Well, one is an object that is permitted under the Second Amendment because it is clearly covered by the right to keep and bear arms. The other is an object of which the primary purpose is sexual stimulation, and is covered by a state law that makes it a misdemeanor punishable by a $500 fine to intentionally make an “obscene display or distribution.” http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.43.htm

Also UT has rules in place which prohibits the display of any “visual image” associated with obscenity, which would cover the dildo protest. So there are some nuances to consider before you try to equate a firearm and a sex toy used as an improvised club.

Just because law is so now doesn't mean it's good. I mean for christ sake lethal weapon is fine but toy for most natural thing is not? Crazy morality there.

The lethal weapon is a constitutionally protected right. Sex toys are not. Also sex toys are allowed, you just can't use them for a display of an obscene "visual image", so using them in the privacy of your own home for most natural thing is perfectly fine and legal. Public displays, not so much.

Also legality (which I am limiting my discussion to) =/= morality

Yes as I said it's legal. Doesn't make it right. Stupid to value guns as more right to have around than sex toy. One is easily used to kill people, one is toy for very natural thing. The whole violence is okay but sex is not is silly and stupid. Guns are the ones that have no place in public. Not sex toys.

tneva82 wrote:


Yes as I said it's legal. Doesn't make it right. Stupid to value guns as more right to have around than sex toy. One is easily used to kill people, one is toy for very natural thing. The whole violence is okay but sex is not is silly and stupid. Guns are the ones that have no place in public. Not sex toys.

Stupid in your mind, but not in the eyes of folks who understand our constitution.

 CptJake wrote:

tneva82 wrote:


Yes as I said it's legal. Doesn't make it right. Stupid to value guns as more right to have around than sex toy. One is easily used to kill people, one is toy for very natural thing. The whole violence is okay but sex is not is silly and stupid. Guns are the ones that have no place in public. Not sex toys.

Stupid in your mind, but not in the eyes of folks who understand our constitution.

Considering that Freedom of speech is in the Constitution...Having dildos in public is quite constitutional. Also nifty that freedom of speech doesn't have a well-regulated rider attached to it. Hmmm...

Besides, part of the discussion was based on the statement from the gun club that clubs are illegal. I would think that since clubs are 'arms' that they would be as protected as firearms.

tneva82 wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Well, one is an object that is permitted under the Second Amendment because it is clearly covered by the right to keep and bear arms. The other is an object of which the primary purpose is sexual stimulation, and is covered by a state law that makes it a misdemeanor punishable by a $500 fine to intentionally make an “obscene display or distribution.” http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.43.htm

Also UT has rules in place which prohibits the display of any “visual image” associated with obscenity, which would cover the dildo protest. So there are some nuances to consider before you try to equate a firearm and a sex toy used as an improvised club.

Just because law is so now doesn't mean it's good. I mean for christ sake lethal weapon is fine but toy for most natural thing is not? Crazy morality there.

The lethal weapon is a constitutionally protected right. Sex toys are not. Also sex toys are allowed, you just can't use them for a display of an obscene "visual image", so using them in the privacy of your own home for most natural thing is perfectly fine and legal. Public displays, not so much.

Also legality (which I am limiting my discussion to) =/= morality

Yes as I said it's legal. Doesn't make it right. Stupid to value guns as more right to have around than sex toy. One is easily used to kill people, one is toy for very natural thing. The whole violence is okay but sex is not is silly and stupid. Guns are the ones that have no place in public. Not sex toys.

No you are not getting it. Both are legal. Carrying around D's marching just makes your university look stupid and your parents extremely angry to be spending VAST sums of money for you to go there.

 skyth wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

tneva82 wrote:


Yes as I said it's legal. Doesn't make it right. Stupid to value guns as more right to have around than sex toy. One is easily used to kill people, one is toy for very natural thing. The whole violence is okay but sex is not is silly and stupid. Guns are the ones that have no place in public. Not sex toys.

Stupid in your mind, but not in the eyes of folks who understand our constitution.

Considering that Freedom of speech is in the Constitution...Having dildos in public is quite constitutional. Also nifty that freedom of speech doesn't have a well-regulated rider attached to it. Hmmm...

Besides, part of the discussion was based on the statement from the gun club that clubs are illegal. I would think that since clubs are 'arms' that they would be as protected as firearms.

There are and have been obscenity and 'lewd acts' laws. But you know that.

I was replying specifically to the idea that it is 'stupid to value guns as more right to have than sex toy'. Freedom of political speech generally has nothing to do with sex toys. In this specific case the kids and their faculty are using them in political speech, and are allowed to do so and SHOULD be allowed to do so. Yet guns are very much part of the second amendment. You can wave your rubber cock all day to protest and lament that fact, but it is a fact. Because it is a fact, it is not 'stupid' to value the possession of guns.

I have no problem with people at school carrying around dongs, dildos, vibrators, magic butterflies, pink rabbits, double plungers, butt plugs, anal beads, John Holmes Life-Like replicas, true-skin/rubber/glass models, inflatables, penis pumps, strap-ons, micros, macros, fleshlights, or even Gianna Michaels life-like Privates masturbaters.

I had a point, but I forget what it was, now.

 kronk wrote:
I have no problem with people at school carrying around dongs, dildos, vibrators, magic butterflies, pink rabbits, double plungers, butt plugs, anal beads, John Holmes Life-Like replicas, true-skin/rubber/glass models, inflatables, penis pumps, strap-ons, micros, macros, fleshlights, or even Gianna Michaels life-like Privates masturbaters.

I had a point, but I forget what it was, now.

Brings a whole new meaning to the school orientation.

 CptJake wrote:

 skyth wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

tneva82 wrote:


Yes as I said it's legal. Doesn't make it right. Stupid to value guns as more right to have around than sex toy. One is easily used to kill people, one is toy for very natural thing. The whole violence is okay but sex is not is silly and stupid. Guns are the ones that have no place in public. Not sex toys.

Stupid in your mind, but not in the eyes of folks who understand our constitution.

Considering that Freedom of speech is in the Constitution...Having dildos in public is quite constitutional. Also nifty that freedom of speech doesn't have a well-regulated rider attached to it. Hmmm...

Besides, part of the discussion was based on the statement from the gun club that clubs are illegal. I would think that since clubs are 'arms' that they would be as protected as firearms.

There are and have been obscenity and 'lewd acts' laws. But you know that.

I was replying specifically to the idea that it is 'stupid to value guns as more right to have than sex toy'. Freedom of political speech generally has nothing to do with sex toys. In this specific case the kids and their faculty are using them in political speech, and are allowed to do so and SHOULD be allowed to do so. Yet guns are very much part of the second amendment. You can wave your rubber cock all day to protest and lament that fact, but it is a fact. Because it is a fact, it is not 'stupid' to value the possession of guns.

Considering that the first doesn't have a well regulated clause I'd say dildos are more constitutionally protected than firearms. Plus even non-political speech is free.

Besides the fact that the person you were replying to mentioned both were legal...they just had an opinion that wanting to carry a gun is stupid. Throwing the Constitution in their face is ridiculous in this case as the 2nd amendment no where says that other people can't consider you an idiot for abusing this right...

Not to mention that having the right to do something doesn't automatically make it a smart thing to do.

We all have the right to spend all our money on an extensive collection of chocolate teapots but that doesn't make doing so a smart move. It also doesn't make it not stupid to value your massive collection of chocolate teapots.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Not to mention that having the right to do something doesn't automatically make it a smart thing to do.

We all have the right to spend all our money on an extensive collection of chocolate teapots but that doesn't make doing so a smart move. It also doesn't make it not stupid to value your massive collection of chocolate teapots.

Thats my point. They have the right to protest. The manner they are protesting in is infantile and beneath a top ten/top 20 university.

In the words of the immortal bard: Gig 'em Aggies.

 Frazzled wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Not to mention that having the right to do something doesn't automatically make it a smart thing to do.

We all have the right to spend all our money on an extensive collection of chocolate teapots but that doesn't make doing so a smart move. It also doesn't make it not stupid to value your massive collection of chocolate teapots.

Thats my point. They have the right to protest. The manner they are protesting in is infantile and beneath a top ten/top 20 university.

In the words of the immortal bard: Gig 'em Aggies.

Feeling the need to open carry is just as infantile...

 skyth wrote:
[

Considering that the first doesn't have a well regulated clause I'd say dildos are more constitutionally protected than firearms. Plus even non-political speech is free.

Besides the fact that the person you were replying to mentioned both were legal...they just had an opinion that wanting to carry a gun is stupid. Throwing the Constitution in their face is ridiculous in this case as the 2nd amendment no where says that other people can't consider you an idiot for abusing this right...

The "well regulated" part of the Second Amendment doesn't mean what you think it means. "Well regulated" in the late 1700's meant "properly functioning" . Just like "A moment of privacy" meant you needed to take a dump.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 skyth wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Not to mention that having the right to do something doesn't automatically make it a smart thing to do.

We all have the right to spend all our money on an extensive collection of chocolate teapots but that doesn't make doing so a smart move. It also doesn't make it not stupid to value your massive collection of chocolate teapots.

Thats my point. They have the right to protest. The manner they are protesting in is infantile and beneath a top ten/top 20 university.

In the words of the immortal bard: Gig 'em Aggies.

Feeling the need to open carry is just as infantile...

It's not open carry. That would be illegal on campus. They have concealed carry. According to the FBI concealed carry individuals are the least likely persons to commit a crime. That's approximately 1/37 the national average, 1/6 that of a police officer, and slightly less than an Amish.

Feeling the need to open carry is just as infantile...

Agreed open carrying D's on campus is infantile.

 Frazzled wrote:

Feeling the need to open carry is just as infantile...

Agreed open carrying D's on campus is infantile.

I was, of course referring to firearms.

I thought so, but I was desperately trying to keep you from looking utterly ignorant of the the topic and the actual law.

 Frazzled wrote:
I thought so, but I was desperately trying to keep you from looking utterly ignorant of the the topic and the actual law.

I think you are showing your ignorance of the law...as the law has no bearing in how you are perceived. You can act like a child and tote your gun around. It may not be illegal but it sure makes you look infintile.

The law as been pointed out is about carrying concealed. The vast majority of the students there will never know who is carrying and only a small number of them will anyway.

No where has open carry been suggested as legal.

 skyth wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
I thought so, but I was desperately trying to keep you from looking utterly ignorant of the the topic and the actual law.

I think you are showing your ignorance of the law...as the law has no bearing in how you are perceived. You can act like a child and tote your gun around. It may not be illegal but it sure makes you look infintile.

We'll try it one more time (belts out like a drunken OReilly on Star Trek).

The law and the issue they are protesting about is CONCEALED carry of a pistol. You are talking about OPEN carry of a pistol which continues to NOT BE LEGAL.

We are agreed that what you are talking about is infantile, and illegal, however its not what they are protesting. If you wish to add in additional things that are infantile well thats cool and you should start another thread about it, but on this one its trolling and will be reported because it has nothing to do with the issue.

tneva82 wrote:
Yes as I said it's legal. Doesn't make it right. Stupid to value guns as more right to have around than sex toy. One is easily used to kill people, one is toy for very natural thing. The whole violence is okay but sex is not is silly and stupid. Guns are the ones that have no place in public. Not sex toys.

As a native European who moved to America I understand that guns, and the laws and culture associated with them are different to what most Europeans are used to. And that's ok. Every country has a right to decide their own laws and cultures.

You can argue that "[s]tupid to value guns as more right to have around than sex toy", but that ignores that;
- guns are a constitutionally protected right
- in the state of Texas owning a sex toy is not a crime
- in the state of Texas openly displaying a firearm (unless a LEO, etc.) is a crime, as is the open display of a dildo
- no one except you is arguing that violence is ok and that sex is not

Besides, part of the discussion was based on the statement from the gun club that clubs are illegal. I would think that since clubs are 'arms' that they would be as protected as firearms.

I am all for that. Texas non-gun weapon laws are fairly poor.

As a CHLer heading to one of the UT schools very soon, I have been watching this hand wringing for a while and I can't help but laugh/cry. At least the UT carry guidelines no longer require you have to carry with an empty chamber.

The vast majority of the students there will never know who is carrying and only a small number of them will anyway.

This. I think a lot of folks (especially the protestors) don`t realize how small a population we are talking about.

 SOFDC wrote:
At least the UT carry guidelines no longer require you have to carry with an empty chamber.

Ugh. That was a real thing previously?

Yes it was, only for semiautos though (?!?!) revolvers didn't seem to be included. That idiocy is thankfully gone.

The requirement for a holster that completely covers the triggerguard is still in, but that actually makes SENSE. (Though I have to have aliengear make me a couple custom shells now.)

 SOFDC wrote:
Yes it was, only for semiautos though (?!?!) revolvers didn't seem to be included. That idiocy is thankfully gone.

The requirement for a holster that completely covers the triggerguard is still in, but that actually makes SENSE. (Though I have to have aliengear make me a couple custom shells now.)

The holster requirement does make sense, and I don't know anyone who would have a problem with that. The no round in the chamber is ridiculous though. That's like one or two steps removed from saying "no ghost guns."

I can't remember where I read it, but I think someone did the projected math on how many students would be armed on campus. It's actually very few.

In order to be armed you need to have your permit, which means you need to be 21, a legal resident of the US, a resident of Texas or a state that has a permit Texas recognizes, not have a drug conviction, not have been institutionalized, not have been charged with domestic violence, not have a restraining order, not too many DUI's.

That means that with a student body of 50,000 only 9,000 would even be eligible to get a permit. Only 2% of those polled said they would be interested in getting a permit, so that look like 180 people. Even if you are permitted to carry, it doesn't mean you will. Statistics say only 1/5 of people with permits actually carry.

So, it looks like there will be 36 guns on campus.

 Hordini wrote:

 SOFDC wrote:
At least the UT carry guidelines no longer require you have to carry with an empty chamber.

Ugh. That was a real thing previously?

As someone who knows next to nothing about guns, does that mean that guns would have to be unloaded (no ammunition in weapon) or simply not "cocked" (loaded but not able to fire until you chamber a round)?

The first one is a little stupid (if you do have to have one, it's useless without ammo), but the second one could make sense as a safety thing, assuming that's what it means. It's just pulling back the slide on most pistols, right? You should be able to do that while you draw it I think.