Convince me that constitutional carry is a good thing

[RJGold]

I think what some believe when comparing constitutional carry vs. licensed carry is that somehow, licensed carry is limiting those who carry only to those with a license. That's just not true. Anyone who wants to carry can carry. It's their choice and they would have to deal with whatever consequences arise from any shooting, LEO stop, etc.

I suspect should constitutional carry pass, it would be much like open carry, not much change to notice...

My two cents...

[suthdj]

No rights are absolute. Freedom of speech has limitations.
.

Show us your training and proof of payment for your FOS (freedom of speech) card.

[TexasJohnBoy]

Does constitutional carry mean that career criminals/felons maintain the right to keep and bear arms? No penalty for a career criminal carrying, but not committing a crime at the time? If not, how can it be called constitutional carry? If so, criminals already carry, we know that, but do we want them to?

I would say no. When you commit a crime, you forfeit portions of your rights. When you commit a felony, you forfeit more of your rights. In Texas for example, a felon can't even possess a firearm, at all. Not even "here, we're at the range you want to pop a couple off?"

Back to the original topic -- if we got constitutional carry in Texas, I will still maintain my license to carry without hesitation.

[Teamless]

Carry by everyone, as you say, will they know the laws?
My guess is likely not

If they do not, and there are even a small amount of issues with the law, or wrongful shootings (however one would define them) they will then peel away the great record we have as a group of peoples

Then if there is a movement to remove unlicensed carry, it will not simply revert to licensed, I don't believe, but a full on ban on carry and we are back to 1981 again (when the original concealed carry push began)

[anygunanywhere]

That's fair, and I agree. The only thing that gives me pause is the mentally ill, violent felons, drug addicts, etc. Do they have a 2A right? Should they be allowed to carry in public?

I believe most of those folks are already prohibited, per current law. So if they carry, they are doing so illegally. And we all know how effective laws are at stopping criminals from doing things that are illegal. ...lol

This.

[Lynyrd]

That's fair, and I agree. The only thing that gives me pause is the mentally ill, violent felons, drug addicts, etc. Do they have a 2A right? Should they be allowed to carry in public?

I believe most of those folks are already prohibited, per current law. So if they carry, they are doing so illegally. And we all know how effective laws are at stopping criminals from doing things that are illegal. ...lol

You know, I just can't think like a criminal.

[bblhd672]

I personally feel better knowing that an LTC holder has been thoroughly vetted by the state before they are allowed to carry in public.

I know I would feel better knowing voters were properly vetted before voting and if journalists were properly vetted before doing whatever journalists do.

That's fair, and I agree. The only thing that gives me pause is the mentally ill, violent felons, drug addicts, etc. Do they have a 2A right? Should they be allowed to carry in public?

Many voters and "journalists" are mentally ill, violent felons, drug addicts, etc. and have no restrictions on voting or lying to the people.

[txglock21]

I see both sides of it and to be honest, I don't care either way...but I DO like "by-passing" the NICS call every time I buy a new gun. Now some may say it only takes a few minutes more, but I have had several issues in the past (pre CHL) where the computers/phone lines were down, "may take awhile, don't call us, we'll call you", etc...

[TXBO]

I see both sides of it and to be honest, I don't care either way...but I DO like "by-passing" the NICS call every time I buy a new gun. Now some may say it only takes a few minutes more, but I have had several issues in the past (pre CHL) where the computers/phone lines were down, "may take awhile, don't call us, we'll call you", etc...

Many states with constitutional carry maintain a licensing program also.

[rotor]

HB 375 was filed today, which does away with the licensing requirements to carry a handgun.

I know where folks come from on 2A unlicensed carry, I really do.... but at the same time I'm hesitant for my own selfish reasons. I feel like going through the class and shooting test make you a better 2A citizen. Without the class requirements, how would every day citizens be expected to know the law, when you can and cannot escalate force, etc?


Convince me otherwise (or agree with me too!).

I tend to agree with you and I really don't expect this to pass in Texas. The argument is that it is a constitutional right and other things are just a privilege like driving a car. i would sure hate to see people on the road without passing an exam and some knowledge of the law, be it driving or carry. We have an excellent record in the public's mind right now, it may not be so good if completely untrained people carried. Of course, I would like to see a literacy test before getting into the voting booth. I am sure that I will be flamed over this but so what.

[steveincowtown]

I see both sides of it and to be honest, I don't care either way...but I DO like "by-passing" the NICS call every time I buy a new gun. Now some may say it only takes a few minutes more, but I have had several issues in the past (pre CHL) where the computers/phone lines were down, "may take awhile, don't call us, we'll call you", etc...

Many states with constitutional carry maintain a licensing program also.

Yup.

Yes to Constituional Carry.

Yes to continued licensing for reciprocity purpose.

I wish this thread was "Convince me constitutional carry is a bad thing." There just isn't evidence in the states that have it that it is a problem.

[parabelum]

I thought that BO signed up to the forum and posted this when I read the topic name.


Do we also need a class on free speech, so that we may speak freely?

Do we also need a class on quartering soldiers in our homes during peacetime?

What about class on unwarranted searches and seizures?

...

I for one find it offensive, to say the least, that in this regard, liberal Vermont is ahead of Texas.

It is your Right. This Right shall not be infringed.

[goose]

If a completely free society, we would begin where no activities would be barred. When problems arise, we build social structures to help address them. This may involve laws and restrictions, etc. But these laws and restrictions should only be in place to fix a problem. Constitutional carry has not proven to be an issue of any magnitude in any of those states that have enacted it. So that freedom should be available to all.

We should not start with a locked down Utopian society and then free up rights and privileges as deemed appropriate by the masses.

Using the 80/20 rule, the first paragraph gives us a mostly free society. The second paragraph/line gives a society that is mostly not free.

[TXBO]

...The argument is that it is a constitutional right and other things are just a privilege like driving a car. ....

That's not an argument. That's a fact.

[rotor]

...The argument is that it is a constitutional right and other things are just a privilege like driving a car. ....

That's not an argument. That's a fact.

All constitutional rights have some restrictions. I can only say that when I took my CHL class there were some not so sharp people taking the course that really did not know anything about handguns. At least after the range work they knew the basics. I think most people on this forum from what I have seen are pretty sharp about firearms. I don't believe the general public is. I don't think every yahoo out there is safe enough to carry a handgun. I trust the people on this sight as they have not only proven their safety but I can tell by their writing that they know what they are doing.