I'm posting this as a separate thread so I can add a poll and so I won't hijack the other thread.
My opposition to open-carry is based solely on my belief that the sight of people carrying guns is going to prompt a backlash by soccer moms and others who are not currently motivated to oppose CHL. As a result, I think we would see 30.06 signs sprouting up on businesses like weeds.
So, here’s a purely hypothetical question only for those who currently support open-carry in Texas. If open-carry in Texas would result in numerous businesses posting 30.06 signs, would you still support open-carry, or would the cost to be high?
Chas.
Open-Carry Poll
Moderator: carlson1
-
Charles L. Cotton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17788
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
- Location: Friendswood, TX
- Contact:
-
jbirds1210
- Senior Member
- Posts: 3368
- Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 5:36 pm
- Location: Texas City, Texas
I would never support giving up the "privilege" to exercise our concealed carry rights so that those who choose can carry openly.
I would never launch opposition to people who want to open carry, but I would not support it either. I have had the opportunity and found that it just isn't for me.
It is really sad that it could come down to this!
Jason
I would never launch opposition to people who want to open carry, but I would not support it either. I have had the opportunity and found that it just isn't for me.
It is really sad that it could come down to this!
Jason
Last edited by jbirds1210 on Wed Jan 24, 2007 1:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
NRA Life Member
TSRA Life Member
"No man stands so tall as when he stoops to help a child."
TSRA Life Member
"No man stands so tall as when he stoops to help a child."
It's not that I WANT to open carry so badly; it's that I want to do away with the 'printing' issue, and accidental flash issue being seen as intentionally failing to conceal.
Yes, I think that this is that important.
Because, I don't see places in New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada that have had the issues about extra signs posted, just the contrary: places that have put up signs were boycotted enough that they had to take their signs down. Granted that this is 'hearsay' knowledge, but it comes from people who was there and that I trust explicity, i.e.: my daughter and my son-in-law. The example being a grocery store in Az who put up the sign and was boycotted and therefore was forced to remove the sign.
Russ
Yes, I think that this is that important.
Because, I don't see places in New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada that have had the issues about extra signs posted, just the contrary: places that have put up signs were boycotted enough that they had to take their signs down. Granted that this is 'hearsay' knowledge, but it comes from people who was there and that I trust explicity, i.e.: my daughter and my son-in-law. The example being a grocery store in Az who put up the sign and was boycotted and therefore was forced to remove the sign.
Russ
Russ
kw5kw
Retired DPS Communications Operator PCO III January 2014.
kw5kw
Retired DPS Communications Operator PCO III January 2014.
Charles,
Your argument that this is what would be likely to happen is (in my opinion) highly valid, but the effect would be likely to be a short-term issue. Just as with concealed carry & various efforts that were made initially to stop us from entering businesses, I believe that the short term would see an increase followed by the removal of the postings in the longer term as people get accustomed to the sight of openly carried firearms.
Part of the reason people panic at the sight of a gun is because we've been conditioned to believe that all firearm carry is illegal by definition. If we reverted back to the older laws on firearms, people would gradually become accustomed to seeing them again, and the furor would die back down as people's comfort level returned when there are no bloodbaths in the streets and no live-fire re-enactments of the gunfight at the OK Corral.
The initial furor would be the same as with any significant change (people really don't like things changed on them). I agree that your plan for incremental reinstatement is a good plan, because it is a method that will allow the return of our rights without it hitting most of Mr. & Ms. Texas' radar.
Your argument that this is what would be likely to happen is (in my opinion) highly valid, but the effect would be likely to be a short-term issue. Just as with concealed carry & various efforts that were made initially to stop us from entering businesses, I believe that the short term would see an increase followed by the removal of the postings in the longer term as people get accustomed to the sight of openly carried firearms.
Part of the reason people panic at the sight of a gun is because we've been conditioned to believe that all firearm carry is illegal by definition. If we reverted back to the older laws on firearms, people would gradually become accustomed to seeing them again, and the furor would die back down as people's comfort level returned when there are no bloodbaths in the streets and no live-fire re-enactments of the gunfight at the OK Corral.
The initial furor would be the same as with any significant change (people really don't like things changed on them). I agree that your plan for incremental reinstatement is a good plan, because it is a method that will allow the return of our rights without it hitting most of Mr. & Ms. Texas' radar.
-
kauboy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 846
- Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:15 pm
- Location: Burleson, Lone Star State (of course)
Doesn't the 30.06 sign only disallow carrying of a "concealed" handgun. They can put all the signs up they want to. 
The 30.06 won't affect open carry patrons unless it is changed, and I surely hope it never gets touched unless its abolished.
Anyways, aside from the sign debate, I have the right to keep and bear arms. The bearing of arms means that I should be able to have my firearm completely visible to the public. They can judge my character any way they wish, but they should not have the ability to limit my rights.
I am very pro open carry. If the Constitution says it, thats it, end of story. And no State should be allowed to overrule it either. (I know they can't, but some sure do try, and sometimes get away with it.)
The 30.06 won't affect open carry patrons unless it is changed, and I surely hope it never gets touched unless its abolished.Anyways, aside from the sign debate, I have the right to keep and bear arms. The bearing of arms means that I should be able to have my firearm completely visible to the public. They can judge my character any way they wish, but they should not have the ability to limit my rights.
I am very pro open carry. If the Constitution says it, thats it, end of story. And no State should be allowed to overrule it either. (I know they can't, but some sure do try, and sometimes get away with it.)
"People should not be afraid of their Governments.
Governments should be afraid of their people." - V
Governments should be afraid of their people." - V
You beat me to the point I intended to make. Upon encountering a 30.06 notice, a CHL could legally uncover and carry openly.kauboy wrote:Doesn't the 30.06 sign only disallow carrying of a "concealed" handgun. They can put all the signs up they want to.
Of course, they'd surely get "verbal notice" in short order, with which they'd be obliged to comply.
Kevin
-
stevie_d_64
- Senior Member
- Posts: 7590
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 11:17 pm
- Location: 77504
I agree, how can anyone assume that if open carry were to become "allowable" in Texas, that the 30.06 statute would be applicable or altered to include those who "open carry"...KBCraig wrote:You beat me to the point I intended to make. Upon encountering a 30.06 notice, a CHL could legally uncover and carry openly.kauboy wrote:Doesn't the 30.06 sign only disallow carrying of a "concealed" handgun. They can put all the signs up they want to.
Of course, they'd surely get "verbal notice" in short order, with which they'd be obliged to comply.
Kevin
That would mean that the gun-control lobby would have to take 4-5 steps forward, just to "counter" the baby step forward with "open carry", right???
The burn would be on them to counter our forward progress...And considering how relatively gun-friendly Texas politics are...I don't see an effective opposition in the legislative body in this state...
Guys...The fight is really not in this forum...There is a "for" side, and a "nay" side...And I see that it is very balanced on all points...
If we never get it, the world will not come to an end...Same would go if we did...
Charles brings up a good point, but "kauboy" hit a good counter to that...
But the neat part about all of this, is that a bill has not been filed in regards to this issue...Or I have not heard of any push to "attach" or "amend" an existing bill to allow this to be considered...
Keep your eyes peeled though...
"Perseverance and Preparedness triumph over Procrastination and Paranoia every time.” -- Steve
NRA - Life Member
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Μολών λαβέ!
NRA - Life Member
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Μολών λαβέ!
I'm sure if legislation were passed to "allow" open carry, that there would be rider clauses which would create new signage laws.
I would be for open carry, but my own instincts say there should be some stipulations. It would be a new environment and a good deal of people would be very nervous about seeing people walking around with guns, some amount of hysteria would break out until it became commonplace. I wouldn't want to OC anywhere in the city, and I wouldn't want to see anybody OC in the city. Rural areas or on private property, OK. Otherwise, I would say CC is the best mode.
I would be for open carry, but my own instincts say there should be some stipulations. It would be a new environment and a good deal of people would be very nervous about seeing people walking around with guns, some amount of hysteria would break out until it became commonplace. I wouldn't want to OC anywhere in the city, and I wouldn't want to see anybody OC in the city. Rural areas or on private property, OK. Otherwise, I would say CC is the best mode.
-
Doug.38PR
- Senior Member
- Posts: 644
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:36 pm
- Location: Northeast, Louisiana C.S.A.
My thoughts:
Yes Open Carry is important. It is a right of citizens to keep and bear arms. Open Carry is another step in going back to this. Ultimately, it would be ideal for all to be able to carry as they please (yes even EX-convicts who have done their time...if they truly aren't suitable to carry a gun, then they probably shouldn't even be out of prison anyway)
BUT, to Mr. Cotton question, would I still be in favor of if it mean't the possibility of 30.06 signs going up all over the place?
My answer to that is YES, I would still be in favor of it as a matter of principle.
I don't think the result would be as he fears. For one thing, there are a lot of open carry states out there. Arizona, for instance, has open carry. I don't know of any great trouble they have with it over there.
For another, I think that if gun carry became common enough, people would lose this fear of guns. People carry pocket or jackknives all the time. People drive cars all the time. These things, like many other things in life, can be potentially dangerous yet nobody expresses any great fear of them. Over 100 years ago, carry of guns openly and concealed was a common thing to do, nobody thought anything of it.
Granted there is a level of fear out there about guns, and minds do need to be changed. Like I said, if carrying of guns were common enough, people would get used to the idea.
Also, I think restricting to concealed carry only is too much trouble. Most of the time I would, as I do now, carry concealed. In certain situations (like crowds), I wouldn't want people to know I am carrying. BUT, if for some reason my coat blows open or the gun is exposed for some reason, I shouldn't have to worry about being confronted by the police. If I have to or want to take my coat off I shouldn't have to worry about being confronted by the police. It's too much of a hassel for a harmless thing.
Yes Open Carry is important. It is a right of citizens to keep and bear arms. Open Carry is another step in going back to this. Ultimately, it would be ideal for all to be able to carry as they please (yes even EX-convicts who have done their time...if they truly aren't suitable to carry a gun, then they probably shouldn't even be out of prison anyway)
BUT, to Mr. Cotton question, would I still be in favor of if it mean't the possibility of 30.06 signs going up all over the place?
My answer to that is YES, I would still be in favor of it as a matter of principle.
I don't think the result would be as he fears. For one thing, there are a lot of open carry states out there. Arizona, for instance, has open carry. I don't know of any great trouble they have with it over there.
For another, I think that if gun carry became common enough, people would lose this fear of guns. People carry pocket or jackknives all the time. People drive cars all the time. These things, like many other things in life, can be potentially dangerous yet nobody expresses any great fear of them. Over 100 years ago, carry of guns openly and concealed was a common thing to do, nobody thought anything of it.
Granted there is a level of fear out there about guns, and minds do need to be changed. Like I said, if carrying of guns were common enough, people would get used to the idea.
Also, I think restricting to concealed carry only is too much trouble. Most of the time I would, as I do now, carry concealed. In certain situations (like crowds), I wouldn't want people to know I am carrying. BUT, if for some reason my coat blows open or the gun is exposed for some reason, I shouldn't have to worry about being confronted by the police. If I have to or want to take my coat off I shouldn't have to worry about being confronted by the police. It's too much of a hassel for a harmless thing.
-
Charles L. Cotton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17788
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
- Location: Friendswood, TX
- Contact:
Texas population: Approx. 22,000,000
Number over 21: Approx. 14,000,000
Number of CHL's: 258,165
Ratio of eligible population to CHL's: 54 to 1.
Ratio of total population to CHL's: 85 to 1.
We're grossly outnumbered and a minuscule number of us, relatively speaking, open-carrying aren't going to force a huge majority to accept anything. What we'll do is wake a sleeping giant.
Remember folks, this is a hypothetical question asking you to presume open-carry would result in widespread posting of 30.06 signs. The goal is to see how many people would be willing to sacrifice our ability to carry in vast numbers of businesses that currently don't post 30.06 signs.
Chas.
Number over 21: Approx. 14,000,000
Number of CHL's: 258,165
Ratio of eligible population to CHL's: 54 to 1.
Ratio of total population to CHL's: 85 to 1.
We're grossly outnumbered and a minuscule number of us, relatively speaking, open-carrying aren't going to force a huge majority to accept anything. What we'll do is wake a sleeping giant.
Remember folks, this is a hypothetical question asking you to presume open-carry would result in widespread posting of 30.06 signs. The goal is to see how many people would be willing to sacrifice our ability to carry in vast numbers of businesses that currently don't post 30.06 signs.
Chas.
-
age_ranger
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1167
- Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 4:11 pm
- Location: Plano, Tx
I voted YES to open carry. I would most likely not do it often or possibly not at all, but the option to do it would be nice to have. It miay help open up gun laws and help make people more comfortable around them??
http://www.berettaforum.net" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Just remember: Your very best thinking got you where you are now!!!
Just remember: Your very best thinking got you where you are now!!!
-
srothstein
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5319
- Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:27 pm
- Location: Luling, TX
I have to point out something that is being missed in most of this debate. As I have said, I support opne carry and no need for a license at all.
BUT, and this is important, the first step towards open carry would probably not be allowing the general public to carry but, instead, would be to remove the concealment requirement of a license. In other words, consider what would happen if we said the 285,000 of you with CHL's could carry openly or concealed. I think most would still keep it concealed for tactical reasons but there are some who would take advantage of the open carry laws. In this case, we would see more 30.06 signs and they would apply. Consider that scenario when you think of this question.
Given that, I would still support the open carry and expansion. I think that it would be the first step towards restoration of our rights and after a while with no bloodbaths, the signs would come back down and the people would become more acclimated to those of us who choose to carry.
I did not vote on the poll though since I would pay no price. In this, I am much more willing to discuss the issue with those more directly affected and see how we can work together on things.
BUT, and this is important, the first step towards open carry would probably not be allowing the general public to carry but, instead, would be to remove the concealment requirement of a license. In other words, consider what would happen if we said the 285,000 of you with CHL's could carry openly or concealed. I think most would still keep it concealed for tactical reasons but there are some who would take advantage of the open carry laws. In this case, we would see more 30.06 signs and they would apply. Consider that scenario when you think of this question.
Given that, I would still support the open carry and expansion. I think that it would be the first step towards restoration of our rights and after a while with no bloodbaths, the signs would come back down and the people would become more acclimated to those of us who choose to carry.
I did not vote on the poll though since I would pay no price. In this, I am much more willing to discuss the issue with those more directly affected and see how we can work together on things.
Steve Rothstein