TexasCHLforum.com

Nigel Foundling is his name? No wonder he's mad at everybody.

anygunanywhere wrote:

Nachos Libres wrote:That is dumb. But if I was her I would have concealed instead of open-carry as I'd hate for someone to know I had a gun and be able to grab it or make me their first target.

**sigh**



---------------------------------------

My comment on the original post is that the sheriff should be run out of town. He is obviously one of those who thinks free rational individuals of sound character and no criminal history should not be allowed to exeercise their God given right to keep and bear arms.

He should have told the panty wetters to mind their own business.

Anygunanywhere

double sigh...

I wonder why some people would want to hit the accelerator on this bus that is heading down the slippery slope we are on these days...Right???

Oldgringo wrote:Nigel Foundling is his name? No wonder he's mad at everybody.

Almost nearly as bad as naming your son, "Sue"...

pbwalker wrote:It's listed on Fark. If you've got 15 minutes to kill and want to read 'some' comical arguing on this article, check it out.

http://forums.fark.com/cgi/fark/comment ... nk=3898683" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

OK, you get a big noogie for causing OJ to spew forth from my nostrils...

Why must people always be ignorant! I would be so irritated had something like that happened to me! Heck bassed ont he LEO's actions, all the more reason to be armed there!

Just to update, she got a judge to overrule the sheriff.

http://www.whtm.com/news/stories/1008/561391.html

The sheriff was wrong, the judge followed the law, albeit begrudgingly, and I'm glad she got her concealed weapon permit back.

However, we should note that the reaction of the non-carrying people at this public event is exactly what I fear would happen in Texas. The fact that open-carry is technically legal in 44 states, doesn't meant that carrying openly doesn't cause the gun owner problems. I acknowledge that my concern about Texans' reaction to open-carry may prove to be unfounded. It's unfortunate that supporters of open-carry won't admit that the claim that it's legal in 44 states and "doesn't cause any problems" is misleading at best.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:The sheriff was wrong, the judge followed the law, albeit begrudgingly, and I'm glad she got her concealed weapon permit back.

However, we should note that the reaction of the non-carrying people at this public event is exactly what I fear would happen in Texas. The fact that open-carry is technically legal in 44 states, doesn't meant that carrying openly doesn't cause the gun owner problems. I acknowledge that my concern about Texans' reaction to open-carry may prove to be unfounded. It's unfortunate that supporters of open-carry won't admit that the claim that it's legal in 44 states and "doesn't cause any problems" is misleading at best.

Chas.

So basically, this is why we can't have nice things?

I'm with you on this one. As with any newly recovered freedom, there will be those who insist upon taking advantage of it as quickly and annoyingly as possible, just because they can. When I was in college, the city (80% students, 20% locals) was dry on Sundays, including restaurants. Finally, the city was convinced to lift the Sunday suspension for a year, because the case was made that restaurants did not want to come to the town for fear of losing money on Sundays. Sure enough, on the first Sunday, there were lines of students hundreds of feet long at every restaurant trying to take advantage of the new law. All it did was reinforce in the city's mind that students were going to start causing trouble on Sundays, etc. A few new restaurants moved into town that year, but the city reinstituted the ban the next year, and the restaurants are now wanting to leave. As wonderful and as nice as a majority of gun owners and CHLers are, I just know that there are going to be those few who insist on being idiots and showing off their "new freedom" in the worst ways possible (from a PR perspective).

I'll support an OC movement, but I'm definitely not pushing for it.

Deleted duplicate post.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:However, we should note that the reaction of the non-carrying people at this public event is exactly what I fear would happen in Texas.

What, impotent fuming by the other side, while the actual law is followed?

Charles L. Cotton wrote:The sheriff was wrong, the judge followed the law, albeit begrudgingly, and I'm glad she got her concealed weapon permit back.

However, we should note that the reaction of the non-carrying people at this public event is exactly what I fear would happen in Texas. The fact that open-carry is technically legal in 44 states, doesn't meant that carrying openly doesn't cause the gun owner problems. I acknowledge that my concern about Texans' reaction to open-carry may prove to be unfounded. It's unfortunate that supporters of open-carry won't admit that the claim that it's legal in 44 states and "doesn't cause any problems" is misleading at best.

Chas.

I agree, Charles, this is what concerns me about OC is the reaction of the public that has been educated by the media that guns are evil and people that carry them are evil. I am all for our rights, but I fear this will be a set back for all of us. I just can not see how this would serve to further our cause with CHL carry. We have came a long way, however, we still have a long ways to go. I just do not see the logic of OC at all.

I just had a conversation with my nurse this morning. She comes to my house every two weeks and therefore she was aware that I had taken the CHL test and we were talking this morning and she said "Why would you want to carry a gun?" I tried to explain to her the reason I carry and then she said "I just don't want to even see a gun...they scare me!!! There are a lot of people out there that have that same ideology when it comes to guns.

-geo

No kidding. I had a conversation with a friend while driving on a long trip lately and he said "I can't think of any situation where I would prefer to have a gun in my hand".

Some folks are irrationally afraid of guns.

I am on the fence about the OC issue, but I am glad to see the rule of law eventually prevailed in this case in PA.

I have been pretty indifferent about this whole open carry thing, but Ike has drastically changed my living arrangements and I'm finding a little more sympathy lately with the OC crowd. I car carry a lot when I go to my job. I used just carry it into my car from my home into my car parked on the driveway. Now I find myself living in hotelrooms and now an apartment untill I can fix my house. I find it just a bit demeaning that I have to hide my gun while I bring it to my car. If I could I would just carry my holstered gun to my car like I used too.

KBCraig wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:However, we should note that the reaction of the non-carrying people at this public event is exactly what I fear would happen in Texas.

What, impotent fuming by the other side, while the actual law is followed?

This one incident happened in a public area and involved a sheriff who overstepped his authority. The end result was correct, because it involved solely a question of law.

I've made it clear in other posts that I don't believe reaction to open-carry in Texas would result in significant changes to our laws. (That opinion may change in November if the Democrats make significant inroads in the Texas Legislature.) My concern lies with the likely response from the business community. If this incident happened in a Texas Home Depot, the parents who objected to the lady in PA carrying at a ball park would also complain to the Home Depot Manager. I am very concerned that this manager would choose to post 30.06 signs, rather than risk his store's profitability and his compensation. This would apply equally to any business whether or not they are part of a major chain. Remember, Texas CHLs make up less than 3% of the population. This means a business owner can ban guns and risk alienating 3% of the population, or he can refuse to respond to customer complaints and risk alienating the 97% of Texans who are not CHLs. I fear this would be an easy business decision for the owner or manager and almost 300,000 CHLs will no longer be able to carry their defensive handguns in many businesses.

But again, my point in commenting on this thread was to note that PA is one of the 44 states that technically allow open carry and one of the states cited by open-carry proponents as "not having any problems." Based upon my travel all over this country for 30 years and on my discussions with others who have traveled extensively, I do not believe open-carry is common anywhere in urban or semi-urban areas. We simply cannot predict likely response to open-carry in Texas cities (where the voting power lies) by looking to the rural areas of other states.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

KBCraig wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:However, we should note that the reaction of the non-carrying people at this public event is exactly what I fear would happen in Texas.

What, impotent fuming by the other side, while the actual law is followed?

This one incident happened in a public area and involved a sheriff who overstepped his authority. The end result was correct, because it involved solely a question of law.

I've made it clear in other posts that I don't believe reaction to open-carry in Texas would result in significant changes to our laws. (That opinion may change in November if the Democrats make significant inroads in the Texas Legislature.)

The gun culture in Texas and Pennsylvania are pretty similar. Both are mostly rural states with a strong heritage of hunting and firearms ownership. Both have some metropolitan areas that believe they should be above state law, but they are kept in check by strong preemption and court rulings (PA has actually strengthened their preemption in recent years).

The biggest difference is that PA licenses are issued by sheriffs, some of whom try to impose their own limitations, just like this case. They are consistently overturned by the courts, and there hasn't been any successful movement to weaken gun laws, despite an anti-gun governor and Democrat majority in their house of representatives.

My concern lies with the likely response from the business community. If this incident happened in a Texas Home Depot, the parents who objected to the lady in PA carrying at a ball park would also complain to the Home Depot Manager. I am very concerned that this manager would choose to post 30.06 signs, rather than risk his store's profitability and his compensation. This would apply equally to any business whether or not they are part of a major chain. Remember, Texas CHLs make up less than 3% of the population. This means a business owner can ban guns and risk alienating 3% of the population, or he can refuse to respond to customer complaints and risk alienating the 97% of Texans who are not CHLs.

I believe your concern is excessive. Why would Texas businesses react differently from those in other states? In the case of Home Depot and other major chains, almost all follow the Wal-Mart model: their policy is to follow the laws of the state in which the store is located. If open carry causes undue concern in a particular store, the customer may be asked to conceal (if legal), or leave. They don't ban all carry just because someone openly carries there.

Even when someone is asked to leave, it's usually an overzealous employee rather than a worried member of the public. Anecdotal reports on opencarry.org show that following up with national headquarters usually resolves the problem in favor of the person openly carrying. Home Depot (to use your example) has specifically clarified on multiple occasions that they don't ban lawful gun owners, and that store managers are not free to impose their own gun policy. Same with Wal-Mart. Same with Best Buy. Same with Sam's.

One exception is Costco, which has an anti-gun national policy. They don't usually post legally binding notices, but they will enforce the policy if someone carrying comes to their attention.

To borrow an analogy about overstated fears, I really don't worry that the streets will be flowing with 30.06 notices if legal open carry passes in Texas. Texans were proven to not be more likely to gun each other down over fender-benders when concealed carry passed. I don't think Texans will be any more likely than other states to OC if the law changes. I also don't think Texas businesses will be any more likely to ban carry than their counterparts in other states, especially if they are part of a natinal chain.