TexasCHLforum.com

And we're back

http://tlcsenate.granicus.com/MediaPlay ... nt_id=1345" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Knock off the personal attacks and childish ranting. I'm sick of this crap! Take it to OCT's Facebook page.

Chas.

mojo84 wrote:
Are you OK with them detaining you long enough to call it in or run it through their computer system to make sure it's still valid?

This is exactly what's going to happen in some cases. You're walking down a sidewalk enjoying a Saturday shopping with your wife, then some huffy-puffy cop pulls up in his cruiser, lights flashing, steps in front of you and demands to see your CHL, after taking your gun ("for your and my protection"), then steps over to his car to run it for warrants, etc. Meanwhile another cruiser or two pulls up, just in case, all of them with lights flashing, while a crowd grows nearby. Then he comes back and starts asking you 20 questions about where you're from, where you work, where you're going, etc. etc. then eventually returns your gun with the clip out and a handful of loose bullets. Sure, some cops will be decent about it all, but others will have a power trip field day, especially those who have been instructed by their chiefs (e.g. Acevedo) to "make those idiots miserable."

Removing the Dutton amendment is a horrible, horrible idea.

mojo84 wrote:

safety1 wrote:

NotRPB wrote:http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news/op ... men/nmJYB/
in part:

By Chuck Lindell - American-Statesman Staff


A bill allowing for openly carried handguns will be stripped of a House amendment that bans police stops to check for concealed handgun licenses when the legislation is considered by a Senate committee Monday, the bill’s Senate sponsor told the American-Statesman.

Sen. Craig Estes, R-Wichita Falls, said the amendment will be removed from House Bill 910 at the request of Sen. Joan Huffman, R-Houston, who is chairwoman of the State Affairs Committee.

So that it can pass possibly ...


If the take away here is the House will move forward with SB11, I'll take the trade.
I don't have a problem with a LEO checking, it's a feel good thing in my opinion and will not be as big an issue as some think.
If you are not doing anything wrong...what does it matter? Show proof and move on, it's really that easy.
We come back in 2 years and get it removed.

Are you OK with them detaining you long enough to call it in or run it through their computer system to make sure it's still valid? What about patting you down while they are at it? Well, they are there so why not search your vehicle? How about run your gun serial number to see if it is stolen? Don't forget, calling for the drug dog to sniff because your allergies are causing your eyes to be red? What if you get nervous and they take that as you hiding something?

What appears to be an innocent no big deal encounter can turn bad in a snap without valid justification.

I understand removing it in order to get it moving but I wouldn't go so far as to say it's no big deal if we have nothing to hide.

We should not need the amendment. If you are open carrying does not give reason for police to check for your license anymore than driving a car gives them reason to check for your drivers license. Therefore the 4th should still be intact. Not telling the police they cannot check your license does not give them permission to check unless they have reason to believe you've broken the law.

safety1 wrote:

steveincowtown wrote:

safety1 wrote: If you are not doing anything wrong...what does it matter? Show proof and move on, it's really that easy.
We come back in 2 years and get it removed.

Because freedom.

I was at Crawfish boil a few weeks ago and a younger guy was saying the same thing. I told him that I was going to ask to see his ID every time I ran into him at the party, but ONLY if he had a beer in his hand. After about the 10th time having his ID "checked" he understood my point.

So don't advance our 2A rights, because your hyper concerned about your 4A rights

What's being advanced? We already have to be licensed to exercise our constitutional right, I'd rather not be hassled just to do it. This is just like being pulled over for the officer to make sure you have a drivers license.

Campus carry is much more important than open carry. IMHO, open carry get us nothing. It only proves that if you whine loud enough you can sometimes get your way. Campus carry will allow more people to legally protect themselves. Open carry would not do that.

Open carry supporters have been duped. We really get nothing out of the deal but we've spent a lot of political capital for it.

mojo84 wrote:

safety1 wrote:

NotRPB wrote:http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news/op ... men/nmJYB/
in part:

By Chuck Lindell - American-Statesman Staff


A bill allowing for openly carried handguns will be stripped of a House amendment that bans police stops to check for concealed handgun licenses when the legislation is considered by a Senate committee Monday, the bill’s Senate sponsor told the American-Statesman.

Sen. Craig Estes, R-Wichita Falls, said the amendment will be removed from House Bill 910 at the request of Sen. Joan Huffman, R-Houston, who is chairwoman of the State Affairs Committee.

So that it can pass possibly ...


If the take away here is the House will move forward with SB11, I'll take the trade.
I don't have a problem with a LEO checking, it's a feel good thing in my opinion and will not be as big an issue as some think.
If you are not doing anything wrong...what does it matter? Show proof and move on, it's really that easy.
We come back in 2 years and get it removed.

Are you OK with them detaining you long enough to call it in or run it through their computer system to make sure it's still valid? What about patting you down while they are at it? Well, they are there so why not search your vehicle? How about run your gun serial number to see if it is stolen? Don't forget, calling for the drug dog to sniff because your allergies are causing your eyes to be red? What if you get nervous and they take that as you hiding something?

What appears to be an innocent no big deal encounter can turn bad in a snap without valid justification.

I understand removing it in order to get it moving but I wouldn't go so far as to say it's no big deal if we have nothing to hide.

Huge slap in the face to the 4th amendment.

And what about them detaining you, etc. if you REALLY have to pee? Would you say it's just a "minor inconvenience?"

Big thanks to those updating and posting links, it's been very helpful.

Ruark wrote:

mojo84 wrote:
Are you OK with them detaining you long enough to call it in or run it through their computer system to make sure it's still valid?

This is exactly what's going to happen in some cases. You're walking down a sidewalk enjoying a Saturday shopping with your wife, then some huffy-puffy cop pulls up in his cruiser, lights flashing, steps in front of you and demands to see your CHL, after taking your gun ("for your and my protection"), then steps over to his car to run it for warrants, etc. Meanwhile another cruiser or two pulls up, just in case, all of them with lights flashing, while a crowd grows nearby. Then he comes back and starts asking you 20 questions about where you're from, where you work, where you're going, etc. etc. then eventually returns your gun with the clip out and a handful of loose bullets. Sure, some cops will be decent about it all, but others will have a power trip field day, especially those who have been instructed by their chiefs (e.g. Acevedo) to "make those idiots miserable."

Removing the Dutton amendment is a horrible, horrible idea.

I don't support removing the Dutton amendment for those very reasons.

However, you are under no obligation to speak to police. Most people don't know this.

If the bill passes without the Dutton amendment, I will reluctantly display my CHL but probably won't answer any questions if stopped. I will politely ask if I am free to go. I'm no law expert, so probably wouldn't be able to refuse showing my CHL. Not only that, I do want Open Carry to be perceived as a non-event or as a positive change.

HB910 is up in committee now.

Chas.

And here we go....

HB910 currently being described by Estes.

Also, I'm willing to trade the Dutton amendment for changing the 30.06 penalty reduction.

Can't win them all, not all at once.

OH MY! That's a stack of cards!

Estes just said that he doesn't think police have the right to stop and ID those openly carrying due to the constitutionality of it. Otherwise, police would be able to stop anyone driving without reasonable suspicion.

The above is exactly what will happen all over the state. The 'if you have nothing to hide' argument is not a solid argument based on fact. Also, the 'I served, have you?' argument is a distraction.

Licensed open carriers will be hassled all over the state by power tripped LEO's who like to do that kind of thing.

It didn't happen to me, (yet) but in my town, LEO's routinely disarm CHL's (For your protection and mine) all the time and refuse to return their weapons, saying -- you can come get it at the station.

An internal affairs investigation was done, and never made public, and nothing has changed. Having the Dutton amendment removed will encourage more of this sort of behavior.