TexasCHLforum.com

If it comes close to passing we should all invest in a CHL badge company.....

hirundo82 wrote:An important element of an open carry bill should be to specify that open carry alone does not qualify as an offense under §42.08:

Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:
(8) displays a firearm or other deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm

I can see a lot of arrest for open carry (especially in the big cities) if it is not made explicit that open carry is not disorderly conduct.

Something along the lines of "A person licensed to carry a handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code does not commit an offense under subsection (a)(8) if the sole element of the conduct is the person carries a handgun in an unconcealed manner."

"manner calculated to alarm" is plain enough. NOthing else needed.

I wish the bill was for unlicensed carry but we take what we can. I hope it gets through in time.

I work in Baytown, and they have some sort of police training center there that attracts lots of LEOs that carry openly in plain cloths and without displayed badges. I haven't seen many women with vapers. I have carried and seen lots of people carry in Arizona. Haven't heard any screaming and passed out soccer moms yet.

This bill is receiving discussion and noise than it will ever see in the state house. I don't mean any disrespect, but it is submited by Rep. George Lavender, who nobody knows, and who doesn't belong to any of of the appropriate committees. He has been sitting on this bill for week, so one has to question his enthusiasm for this thing. We have bills that have been been filed in the house with the majority signed on before the session even opened, that are all still languishing in committee.
This one has practically no citizens support pushing for it.

While the TSRA and NRA will just ignore the bill, A group called Lonestar CDL is pushing for this bill, but who are these people? They do have a whopping 25 members in their closed forum last time I checked. I haven't seen any history of them existing before Dec. of 2010. They have no history of getting bills passed.

No open carry bill is going anywhere until they get the TSRA and NRA on board with this. The Open Carry people aren't ever going to win people over with their confrontational methods.

If it passes, what does that mean for chl's? I just paid my 100 bucks to go be an instructor.

Mr.ViperBoa wrote:If it passes, what does that mean for chl's? I just paid my 100 bucks to go be an instructor.

It won't pass (at least this year), and if it were to pass it would still require a license to open carry.

hirundo82 wrote:

scud runner wrote:

hirundo82 wrote:No, but HPD isn't a big fan of CHLs.

That's too bad. I hope they're the ones who get laid off by the budget cuts.

They've gotten better, but if open carry were to pass and they started getting "man with a gun" calls from soccer moms who get the vapors from seeing someone not in uniform carrying a gun some of them are going to try to get a charge to stick.

Maybe we need to stamp out some open carry badges...

hirundo82 wrote:

scud runner wrote:

hirundo82 wrote:No, but HPD isn't a big fan of CHLs.

That's too bad. I hope they're the ones who get laid off by the budget cuts.

They've gotten better, but if open carry were to pass and they started getting "man with a gun" calls from soccer moms who get the vapors from seeing someone not in uniform carrying a gun some of them are going to try to get a charge to stick.

I live in Houston and see LEOs in civvies carrying all the time. I have yet to see a burst of luminous vapors erupt from any nearby Soccer Moms. Please bear in mind that that is simply my own observation.

Liberty wrote: I don't mean any disrespect, but it is submited by Rep. George Lavender, who nobody knows, and who doesn't belong to any of of the appropriate committees. He has been sitting on this bill for week, so one has to question his enthusiasm for this thing. We have bills that have been been filed in the house with the majority signed on before the session even opened, that are all still languishing in committee.

That was my observation too. Waiting until almost the deadline to fill the bill doesn't seem like a smart thing to do.

I do think they're on the right track though to get this thing done correctly. First make it licensed open carry, then push for constitutional carry if that goes well.

My hope is that open carry would cause no problems and lead to easier passage of constitutional carry.

That being said, the OC people seem to completely disregard the fact that their plans lump open and concealed into 30.06 and to "walk by unenforceable signs" will ABSOLUTELY result in people putting the effort into getting the proper signage up.

out of sight, out of mind will no longer apply, and that may be a detriment to our current ability to carry concealed practically anywhere.

Liberty wrote:The Open Carry people aren't ever going to win people over with their confrontational methods.

I'm assuming you mean the Open Carry Dot Org people. Please don't lump all of us OC supporters in with them. There are plenty of us who favor OC rights but don't approve of OCDO's methods. Not all who favor OC are confrontational, rude, etc. The majority of us are level-headed, respectful, and recognize that OC is only one part of the overall 2A agenda.

While I don't think it will gain enough ground to get through the process for passing, the one positive note is it got introduced. This is farther than any open carry bill of any type has made it in Texas as far as I know. This says something about the fact that people are starting to realize that there is a need for this legislation and to regain our rights.

Just remember, it took 10 years for CHL legislation to get passed and enacted, it has taken several sessions for Parking Lot and Campus carry bills to get as far as they have. So, we need to keep a positive outlook and hope for more support in this and future sessions in the effort to retake some of the rights that have been removed from us over the years.

Bullwhip wrote:"manner calculated to alarm" is plain enough. NOthing else needed.

How are they supposed to know what the person is thinking when they open carry? Wouldn't it be simpler to arrest and let a jury determine if the manner was calculated to alarm?

hirundo82 wrote:

Bullwhip wrote:"manner calculated to alarm" is plain enough. NOthing else needed.

How are they supposed to know what the person is thinking when they open carry? Wouldn't it be simpler to arrest and let a jury determine if the manner was calculated to alarm?

The more relevant question is how the prosecution intends to prove what the person was thinking when they OC.

jordanmills wrote:

hirundo82 wrote:

Bullwhip wrote:"manner calculated to alarm" is plain enough. NOthing else needed.

How are they supposed to know what the person is thinking when they open carry? Wouldn't it be simpler to arrest and let a jury determine if the manner was calculated to alarm?

The more relevant question is how the prosecution intends to prove what the person was thinking when they OC.

This falls back to the law most states have for 'brandishing'. It has a VERY wide broad scope and leaves too much room for personal interpretation. Just ask skidmark who is awaiting trial now in Virginia http://texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php? ... 4&p=517868" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

jordanmills wrote:

hirundo82 wrote:

Bullwhip wrote:"manner calculated to alarm" is plain enough. NOthing else needed.

How are they supposed to know what the person is thinking when they open carry? Wouldn't it be simpler to arrest and let a jury determine if the manner was calculated to alarm?

The more relevant question is how the prosecution intends to prove what the person was thinking when they OC.

You should see how DA's "prove" intent in courthouses all over the state every day...we just don't like those people as much so we don't care....

sjfcontrol wrote:

hirundo82 wrote:

scud runner wrote:

hirundo82 wrote:I can see a lot of arrest for open carry (especially in the big cities) if it is not made explicit that open carry is not disorderly conduct.

Do they arrest a lot of bank and armored car guards for disorderly conduct where you live?

No, but HPD isn't a big fan of CHLs.

Neither is APD

I've never had APD give me any grief over my CHL. They act surprised that I'd actually be carrying every time that I inform them that I am (when they ask after I present my CHL), but they've never reacted negatively.