TexasCHLforum.com

My one and only concern with open carry would be the possible restriction of my right to carry concealed so that guys who are not willing to go through the necessary steps or don't have to spend a few bucks. Why would I want to risk my right to carry for a person too darned lazy to do it the way the rest of us do. If the only reason is to protect me from possible prosecution in cases of failure to conceal... I say... learn to conceal better.

I am trying hard to picture a world in which I get to continue to ignore a gun busters sign while open carry guys must disarm. Somehow that picture involves open carry proponents causing me to have to honor the sign because they do and being willing to cause me this loss simply because they are too darned cheap or lazy to just play ball by the rules we already have.

My first and second paragraphs are related, for the folks who like to pick apart posts, in that I am worried signs that presently don't apply to me by law, will apply to me once open carry is approved and the average citizen is having to see guns being carried about in an open manner.

03Lightningrocks wrote:My one and only concern with open carry would be the possible restriction of my right to carry concealed so that guys who are not willing to go through the necessary steps or don't have to spend a few bucks. Why would I want to risk my right to carry for a person too darned lazy to do it the way the rest of us do. If the only reason is to protect me from possible prosecution in cases of failure to conceal... I say... learn to conceal better.

I am trying hard to picture a world in which I get to continue to ignore a gun busters sign while open carry guys must disarm. Somehow that picture involves open carry proponents causing me to have to honor the sign because they do and being willing to cause me this loss simply because they are too darned cheap or lazy to just play ball by the rules we already have.

My first and second paragraphs are related, for the folks who like to pick apart posts, in that I am worried signs that presently don't apply to me by law, will apply to me once open carry is approved and the average citizen is having to see guns being carried about in an open manner.

We now know via the McDonald decision that the 2nd Amendment applies to the states. Obviously only the "keep" part of the right has been litigated so far. That will change and the "bear" part will be explored. 03Light, what do YOU think the 2A protects? That is, what is the core portion that the government cannot regulate? I would suggest that there is no more simple "bear arms" scenario than open carry.

As a CHLer I don't want to see more 30.06 signs either. I do not underestimate or downplay this concern! Charles has said more than once that his personal opinion is pro-OC but that more 30.06 signs is the blocking issue and that seems to be the case for many here. Where we part company is that my view of the 2A overrules practical concerns. Similarly suspicions about peoples motives, commitment, or investment also must fail. It is our RIGHT. There are inconveniences that freedom causes but that's the nature of liberty. The McDonald opinion notes that many of the amendments in the Bill of Rights have societal costs (such as evidence that is suppressed because of police misconduct) and the 2A is no different.

SA-TX

The way you get around the 30.06 issue is that your new bill specifies that "Sufficient Notice" is all that is required to prevent unlicensed carry, you go just a little further and have your legislation a CHL is not sufficient to open carry past "sufficient notice." It would also be wise to have the legislation specifically state that 30.06 does not apply to open carry (requiring two different signs to completely ban carry). I think it would also be prudent that any OC legislation would not permit OC in many locations permitted with a CHL (such as businesses that have alcohol sales for on premises consumption).

I reread 30.05(f) and I don't see why legalizing unconcealed handguns would cause signage problems that (already legal) unconcealed long guns don't.

Perhaps I too lack sufficient imagination.

Well I would be all for OC being legalized if somehow laws were written to keep businesses from posting signs forbidding my right to carry. I am in the HVAC business so I won't bother to pretend I know law and have no idea how the complexities of it would work, I just know I would feel more comfortable about it if it were not for my concern I mentioned above.

I believe folks would be weirded out by seeing guys walking around my particular city with a gun hanging off their hip. Unless it were a law enforcement officer wearing his/her uniform. I live in Plano, where most of the folks are conservative but also very much the "City Slickers".

P.S. Maybe I am wrong about how folks around my area would react, but based on conversation with the average everyday sheeple i have around Town, i believe they would be weirded out by seeing guns hanging off the hips of the everyday citizen.

03Lightningrocks wrote:Well I would be all for OC being legalized if somehow laws were written to keep businesses from posting signs forbidding my right to carry. I am in the HVAC business so I won't bother to pretend I know law and have no idea how the complexities of it would work, I just know I would feel more comfortable about it if it were not for my concern I mentioned above.

I believe folks would be weirded out by seeing guys walking around my particular city with a gun hanging off their hip. Unless it were a law enforcement officer wearing his/her uniform. I live in Plano, where most of the folks are conservative but also very much the "City Slickers".

P.S. Maybe I am wrong about how folks around my area would react, but based on conversation with the average everyday sheeple i have around Town, i believe they would be weirded out by seeing guns hanging off the hips of the everyday citizen.

I think you're probably right. We put 11,000 miles on our truck and 'lil RV last summer through at least seven (7) western states that allow OC and I only saw one guy in rural CO with an OC. I know that jerk and he needs to carry a gun.

I, for one, don't need OC. (there's a difference between need and want)

I lived in Virginia for 4 years and the commonwealth gun laws very confusing. Have seen it done a few times but it always raises eyebrows. Virginia is a very gun owner friendly state as long as all laws are followed. Took about a month to get my CHL there.

tacticool wrote:It's frustrating to realize that most Texans are not pro gun enough to accept open carry.

If we want to sugar coat it, we can say they're "not comfortable enough with guns" to tolerate open carry, but it boils down to the same thing. If people got upset whenever they saw an interracial couple holding hands, and tried to pass laws against it, we could say they're "not comfortable" with it, but it doesn't change the facts.

It has NOTHING to do with how "pro gun" we are. It has EVERYTHING to do with the political realities in Texas.

Texas voters sent 12 democrats to the US house in 2008. Obama got 44% of the vote in this state. The republicans hold a majority here, but it is a slim one. Yes, I understand Texas democrats are probably more likely to be pro gun than say a New York democrat, but to ignore the fact a large part of the Texas population probably wouldn't be so friendly to CHL laws (if they even knew about them) is a mistake.

I KNOW Kommiefornia is not Texas, but if you've visited Austin lately, you'd see they have more in common with Sacramento than say, Amarillo. And the tactics of OC proponents there not only failed to help their cause, but caused the California Assembly to pass a law trying to ban even that slim sliver of their 2A rights they had left. Is that progress to you?

It has taken us years of hard work to get to this point. I simply fail to understand why OC advocates fail to grasp political reality. Mr. Cotton, who's been on the front lines for years, so to speak, has laid out repeatedly the steps needed to be taken in order for OC to become an issue for TSRA. If OC advocates are not willing to take those steps, accusing the concealed carry crowd "not pro gun" is certainly not going to help you. If you're willing to insult those who have the most in common with you, good luck convincing legislators who aren't your friends to back your cause.

74novaman wrote: It has NOTHING to do with how "pro gun" we are. It has EVERYTHING to do with the political realities in Texas.

Texas voters sent 12 democrats to the US house in 2008. Obama got 44% of the vote in this state. The republicans hold a majority here, but it is a slim one. Yes, I understand Texas democrats are probably more likely to be pro gun than say a New York democrat, but to ignore the fact a large part of the Texas population probably wouldn't be so friendly to CHL laws (if they even knew about them) is a mistake.

I KNOW Kommiefornia is not Texas, but if you've visited Austin lately, you'd see they have more in common with Sacramento than say, Amarillo. And the tactics of OC proponents there not only failed to help their cause, but caused the California Assembly to pass a law trying to ban even that slim sliver of their 2A rights they had left. Is that progress to you?

It has taken us years of hard work to get to this point. I simply fail to understand why OC advocates fail to grasp political reality. Mr. Cotton, who's been on the front lines for years, so to speak, has laid out repeatedly the steps needed to be taken in order for OC to become an issue for TSRA. If OC advocates are not willing to take those steps, accusing the concealed carry crowd "not pro gun" is certainly not going to help you. If you're willing to insult those who have the most in common with you, good luck convincing legislators who aren't your friends to back your cause.

This.

I detailed, in another thread, how I best thought OC proponents should proceed, taking Mr Cotton's and others' recommendations into consideration.
It can be found here: viewtopic.php?f=94&t=34530&p=413426#p413426" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Politics is complicated, and the TSRA only has a certain amount of political capitol to "spend". It would "Cost" More to dig OC out of it's hole that was dug for it last session right now, than it would "Cost" to get 2 very other important laws passed. Parking Lot and Campus Carry.

From it's "financial" perspective, it's all about risk vs reward. You can "Spend" less on multiple lower/mid-risk "funds", and get more in return, granted, at a slower pace, or you can "Spend" everything on one Super-High-Risk "Fund", and possibly lose everything.

I'm sure Dave Ramsey would agree
Enough financial references?

74novaman wrote:

tacticool wrote:It's frustrating to realize that most Texans are not pro gun enough to accept open carry.

If we want to sugar coat it, we can say they're "not comfortable enough with guns" to tolerate open carry, but it boils down to the same thing. If people got upset whenever they saw an interracial couple holding hands, and tried to pass laws against it, we could say they're "not comfortable" with it, but it doesn't change the facts.

It has NOTHING to do with how "pro gun" we are. It has EVERYTHING to do with the political realities in Texas. snip.........................................

and snip again......... If OC advocates are not willing to take those steps, accusing the concealed carry crowd "not pro gun" is certainly not going to help you. If you're willing to insult those who have the most in common with you, good luck convincing legislators who aren't your friends to back your cause.

I actually agree with everything in your post 74novaman, but believe these are the two main points the OC fanatic crowd fail to grasp. They seem to think by hurling insults at the folks most likely to take their side is somehow going to help them. Quite the contrary... it makes me think that maybe folks with such a bad attitude should not be walking around with a gun.

03Lightningrocks wrote: I actually agree with everything in the post but believe these are the two main points the OC fanatic crowd fail to grasp. They seem to think by hurling insults at the folks most likely to take their side is somehow going to help them. Quite the contrary... it makes me think that maybe folks with such a bad attitude should not be walking around with a gun.

I fully agree with the sentiment, and I attempted to setup a website that would eventually be turned over to a Texas based org. However I have since taken it down due to emails I received that bordered on threats. Once I did that they (the email senders) felt pretty smart because they found where I posted my phone number here and started calling me. I simply set my phone and voicemail to ignore numbers with the caller ID blocked. ANYONE who is so fanatical that they feel a need to behave in this manner has no business trying to represent a pro-gun effort/community/organization. I still support getting OC in Texas however I will not support any effort associated with OCDO as I can not, and will not, be associated with such behavior.

My thoughts from another topic:

No one asked but I'm happy with my Texas CHL. No one needs to know whether I'm carrying until they need to know it.

Furthermore, I do not have a problem with the background check either. Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, there are definitely people walking around that don't need to be carrying a gun - OC or CC. (The people I'm talking about are allowed to breed and vote and that's dangerous enough.)

I like open carry. I do it here in Kentucky now. I have to be a citizen of the commonwealth for 6 months before I can apply for a CCDW permit. If I had also done the Utah, Florida or Pennsylvania permit, I'd still be able to conceal carry once that license was updated with my new address.

An abnormal amount of the posters on OCDO have some serious cranial/rectal inversion. Some of the simplest posts turn into insulting flame threads and the "moderators" usually just let it go.

74novaman wrote:

tacticool wrote:It's frustrating to realize that most Texans are not pro gun enough to accept open carry.

If we want to sugar coat it, we can say they're "not comfortable enough with guns" to tolerate open carry, but it boils down to the same thing. If people got upset whenever they saw an interracial couple holding hands, and tried to pass laws against it, we could say they're "not comfortable" with it, but it doesn't change the facts.

It has NOTHING to do with how "pro gun" we are. It has EVERYTHING to do with the political realities in Texas.

I disagree. It has EVERYTHING to do with how pro gun we Texans are in general. The "political realities" are a consequence of the lack of a pro gun population.

The reality is open carry wouldn't be an issue in a pro gun state, just as openly gay men and women aren't an issue in pro gay cities like San Francisco and Houston. That's not only "political reality" but real reality.

This thread is probably about to go south at this point, but I have no idea what "OPENLY GAY" means. Do they have a badge or something? If they do, I am going to be upset that I don't have a CHL badge. That is just not fair.