TexasCHLforum.com

Keith B wrote:OK guys, play nice or the thread gets locked.

Don't tempt me like that!

HGWC wrote:

NcongruNt wrote: Did you just equate your inability to openly carry your handgun to the suffering and injustice endured by people of color in this nation prior to the civil rights movements? Really?

Here we go with the strawmen. No, I didn't. I equated the means of achieving change on civil rights not the suffering and injustice. It's certainly a legitimate argument to look at our history for what has been effective at achieving change on hotly contested political issues. The civil rights movement of the 60s is a good example of that. War triggered by gun confiscation would be another, especially for Texas. For example, would it be better to only seek incremental change for CHL in order to minimize public backlash, or would it be better to organize a march of 30,000 people openly carrying handguns on the state capital to go along with the introduction of this bill? Would that help all gun rights issues around the country or hurt it? Would it matter if the bill ever got passed or even introduced?

You're suggesting that the issues are even near the same caliber and require such drastic measures. Equating action required to ensure the rights of millions of people of color to have a chance to vote and enjoy all the other freedoms and protections of the law... to a fight for open carry of handguns.

Secondly, this is not a "hotly contested issue". Maybe it is for you, but the vast majority of the state doesn't care at this point. We don't have threats of lynching, burning churches, assassinations and the like over Open Carry. And I sincerely doubt you'd get more than a handful of folks willing to blatantly violate the law by openly carrying handguns in a march to the Capitol, let alone 30.000. And then you'd all go to jail for either UCW or IFC. You seem to be living in a fantasy here.

HGWC wrote:

NcongruNt wrote:As it is, you're pushing people away from your cause.

I don't have a cause. I have a point of view in one OC thread on one Internet forum.

NcongruNt wrote:You've essentially invoked Godwin's Law (EDIT: actually, it's Dodd's Corollary) on this argument with me.

Nazis? Who said anything about Nazis?

From what I've read above, it certainly seems to be a cause for you.

As far as Dodds Corollary is concerned, the entire idea behind it and Godwin's Law is the tendency of people on the internet, out of desperation, will make a comparison or parallel in a relatively minor disagreement to the Nazi regime and its actions. Someone making that ridiculous of an argument has essentially conceded their argument (according to Dodds Corollary). Just because you're not talking about the Nazis doesn't mean your comparison of the fight for OC to the fight for Civil Rights isn't equally ridiculous.

Just because an action works on a bigger issue, doesn't mean it is appropriate for a more minor one.

HGWC wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:As for public reaction, there was tremendous media coverage in 1995 and there was a huge negative backlash against people carrying "hidden guns" even after an extensive background check and a training course.

I hear Rosa Parks caused quite a ruckus in 1955 when she refused to give up her seat in the front of the bus. You might even say there was a huge backlash for that act and the events that followed for the next decade. A lot of people didn't think that was such a good idea either. In fact where would we be on concealed carry if avoiding media coverage and a huge backlash were a priority?

Are you serious?

Did you just equate your inability to openly carry your handgun to the suffering and injustice endured by people of color in this nation prior to the civil rights movements? Really?

Dude, you need to get some perspective. As it is, you're pushing people away from your cause. Count me among them. You've essentially invoked Godwin's Law (EDIT: actually, it's Dodd's Corollary) on this argument with me.

mr.72 wrote:

HGWC wrote:Just how far can I lean forward before I unintentionally let the grip print through enough for an ordinary person to recognize the bump as a gun? Just how big of a bump would be considered intentional failure to conceal with a Class A misdemeanor, up to a $4000 fine and up to one year in jail as the consequence. I'll worry just enough to at least let my representatives know that I support the provision in this bill that would eliminate that infringement of my rights.

I think this issue is completely different from the OC issue.

OC is the nuclear bomb method of fixing the current issues, and of course it has virtually zero chances of passing right now as we have discussed for 10 pages on this very thread.

However, I think there is absolutely merit to a change in the law which de-criminalizes unintentional failure to conceal, and makes it absolutely crystal clear what constitutes a failure to conceal, so we are not all so concerned about it. This seems to be the most common reason people cite for their desire to see open-carry passed in TX... kind of goes like this, "it would be nice if I didn't have to worry about unintentionally failing to conceal, but I wouldn't open-carry and don't really support the idea of unlicensed (i.e. legitimate) open-carry". Really what many of these people seem to be saying is, we support less penalty on failure to conceal.

I'd like to remind you that there is no such crime as unintentional failure to conceal. The law says quite clearly that there must be an intent coupled with failure to conceal in order for there to be a crime committed, thus the name intentional failure to conceal. The law has already been quoted numerous times in this thread, but here it is again:

PC 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE
HOLDER. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license
holder carries a handgun on or about the license holdets person
under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,
and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun.

Intent is difficult to prove unless one openly admits to intentionally failing to conceal, or makes an overt effort to display the gun. I don't see how the law can be less clear here.