TexasCHLforum.com

chabouk wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:...my year old suggestion that OC be promoted by a Texas-based organization rather than Virginia-based OpenCarry.org.

Charles, I respectfully request that you stop repeating this canard. The only thing "Virginia-based" about opencarry.org is that one of the two owners lives there.

And, once again: OpenCarry.org is not an organization. To the degree that any internet forum can be an "organization" at all, it's much less of one than TexasCHLforum.com (no moderators, etc.)

Everything anyone does related to OCDO is done as an individual. Mike and John speak for themselves and the website; everyone else speaks only for themselves. Just like here: every comment to a news story, letter to a politician, etc., that is made by TexasCHLforum.com members, is made by those people individually. This is not an "organization", it's a community.

I think you better rethink your statement as per the definition they ARE an organization:

Organization
/ˌɔrgənəˈzeɪʃən/ [awr-guh-nuh-zey-shuhn]
–noun
1.the act or process of organizing.
2.the state or manner of being organized.
3.something that is organized.
4.organic structure; composition: The organization of this painting is quite remarkable.
5.a group of persons organized for some end or work; association: a nonprofit organization.
6.the administrative personnel or apparatus of a business.
7.the functionaries of a political party along with the offices, committees, etc., that they fill.
8.an organism.

Unfortunately, opencarry.org is a disorganization, and that is what lead to their demise. Too many individuals trying to go different directions.

As Charles stated, the way to get anything done in the political arena is to win friends and influence enemies. A group working together with a common goal and passing the same message in very organized and business-like manner gets much more attention than individuals all spouting their separate views and versions and muddying up the waters.

As already stated, if Texans want OC, then they need to pull together with a central lead and spokesperson, hold rallies for support, get petitions signed, etc. They need a clear and concise mantra that explains the reason for open carry legislation other than 'It's my 2nd amendment right'. You have to convince those that don't understand it that it will not be blood in the streets, etc. This all has to be done in a clear, concise and non-combative manner. Once the general populace sees that version of OC supporters vs the radicals that were spouting their rhetoric last time, then you may be able to gain some ground.

Bottom line, OC, if it ever passes, will take time. Charles and the TSRA worked for 10 hard years to get CHL passed here. It may take that long or longer to get your voice heard and win enough support from the legislators and other organizations that it stands a chance of surviving a pass through the gauntlet of the house, senate and governor.

I would prefer to send them the email stating:

"I am a TSRA member and I request that TSRA review and evaluate the introduction of an open-carry bill for the 2011 legislative session."

This will show the volume of support for a look at OC. The TSRA legislative team is very savvy and will know the right time to introduce any legislation. If the ingredients are not added to the cake in the right order and at the right time, then you just end up with a big pile of glop.