The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://www.texaschlforum.com/
mr.72 wrote:I think these gentlemen are debating the merits of being able to surprise an attacker by drawing your gun, which was concealed, vs. the merits of deterring the attack in the first place in the event you were openly carrying. This is a common OC vs. CC argument. FWIW, it is an argument that I do not happen to agree with, but it has been discussed thoroughly on this forum already.
I don't think that the proposed tactical advantage of having your weapon concealed outweighs the passive deterrent effect of having a weapon openly displayed. But this is impossible to prove, only possible to speculate and argue. It's a moot point anyway since you don't have the choice in TX.Shorts wrote: Which is?
I know what you mean about CC v OC being debated thoroughly...on every gun forum
mr.72 wrote: I don't think that the proposed tactical advantage of having your weapon concealed outweighs the passive deterrent effect of having a weapon openly displayed. But this is impossible to prove, only possible to speculate and argue. It's a moot point anyway since you don't have the choice in TX.
One fact is for sure: in Texas, the BG doesn't know if you are carrying or not. You have a distinct tactical advantage if you are
Someone appears to have filed a false police report and possibly violated the law using and abusing the police to harass me. I received no warning to leave the property before the police showed up which I believe is a prerequisite for the trespass complaint. Restaurant owner denies that he or any of his staff made the call, which would mean that it was someone with no authority to request my removal by the police. I'm going to try to meet with the area captain next week.bdickens wrote:iratollah, I really think you need to sue for their violation of your civil rights.
There are no brandishing laws in Texas AFAIK. Just general breach of peace ones they will try to get you on.Shorts wrote:mr.72 wrote:, unless its a long gun and you don't mind the "brandishing" charge you'll likely get
that's what i'm finding out .frreed wrote: The funny thing is, if you knew how many "people of collar" carry daily, they would be amazed.
chamberc wrote:It would be interesting to know where he took his class. This is clearly not correct.mr.72 wrote:etc. Unfortunately it turns out that his CHL instructor told them in no uncertain terms that carrying at church was illegal. Great!
You didn't read through it all dsim. On p.41 :dsim wrote:How is it not correct? PC 46.035 (b) says "A license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun under the authority of Sub-chapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of weather the handgun is concealed, on or about the license holders possession: (6)on the premises of a church, synagogue, or other established place of religious worship"chamberc wrote:It would be interesting to know where he took his class. This is clearly not correct.mr.72 wrote:etc. Unfortunately it turns out that his CHL instructor told them in no uncertain terms that carrying at church was illegal. Great!
Sok. I made exactly the same misteak in July.dsim wrote:I just finished reading it about 2 minutes after I posted that.
I just got my CHL and I was reading thru the laws (just happened to be at PC 46.035) refreshing my memory when I happened on this post. darn me for not reading the entire section. I hate lawyer-speak.
MMMMMM.....joe817 wrote:
Sok. I made exactly the same misteak in July.
PappaGun wrote:MMMMMM.....joe817 wrote:
Sok. I made exactly the same misteak in July.
I love misteaks
