TexasCHLforum.com

sherlock7 wrote:HB-2756 is a good bill and I hope it passes. Don't count it out just yet! There is still time. I plan to be on the phone tomorrow and will also sent emails. I will at least do my part! Hope everyone else does so too!

As written, it is a terrible bill and I hope it doesn't pass unless there are some changes to the wording. See my post above as it has details on the problems.

Judge wrote:Since I was refrained from opening another thread on this topic....Is there a way to make this subject a POLL ONLY?

Just to get the feeling of how us CHL holders are standing?

Thanks

You can open a separate poll, but please keep discussion in one (this) thread so all members are viewing and discussing on the same topic.

flintknapper wrote:

Keith B wrote:

flintknapper wrote:

Keith B wrote:

johnferg69 wrote:So you believe its a useless law?

I feel right to bare arms it is a constitutional right, but the open carry bill as written is not only useless, but a dangerous one. I feel it will lead to us losing places we enjoy concealed carry in today as I am sure there will be additional 30.06 signs posted. How many? Not sure, but any is too many.

Now, as for open carry as a whole, the problem we have in Texas is it has NEVER been legal, except under certain conditions (in home, your own property, target shooting, etc.) So, while it is not practiced heavily in other states where allowed, there would be those who would purposely open carry in Texas to exercise there newly regained right. And, they would end up carrying where it will raise alarm by some. In other states that never restricted it, it is not the 'new toy' available to play with, so you just don't see it regularly. I think this is partially due to many open carry in rural areas or remote country areas, so they aren't exposed to as many eyes.

So, IF it passed for licensed open carry, even with changes that would leave the 30.06 alone and apply that any no-guns sign was valid, then it might be better. We would still see those that go the extra mile to prohibit concealed carry also due to the media exposure and hype and the visual sightings of open carriers, but I believe it would be far less 30.06 additions to restrict concealed carry.

Me thinks someone does not know their Texas History.

OK, hasn't been legal in any of OUR lifetimes I believe, which is never for us.

Still legal when "traveling" always has been.

OK, now you're nitpicking.

My 'except under certain conditons...etc.' above covers those not mentioned. But you have to agree that 'in general' open carry is illegal in Texas.

flintknapper wrote:

Keith B wrote:

johnferg69 wrote:So you believe its a useless law?

I feel right to bare arms it is a constitutional right, but the open carry bill as written is not only useless, but a dangerous one. I feel it will lead to us losing places we enjoy concealed carry in today as I am sure there will be additional 30.06 signs posted. How many? Not sure, but any is too many.

Now, as for open carry as a whole, the problem we have in Texas is it has NEVER been legal, except under certain conditions (in home, your own property, target shooting, etc.) So, while it is not practiced heavily in other states where allowed, there would be those who would purposely open carry in Texas to exercise there newly regained right. And, they would end up carrying where it will raise alarm by some. In other states that never restricted it, it is not the 'new toy' available to play with, so you just don't see it regularly. I think this is partially due to many open carry in rural areas or remote country areas, so they aren't exposed to as many eyes.

So, IF it passed for licensed open carry, even with changes that would leave the 30.06 alone and apply that any no-guns sign was valid, then it might be better. We would still see those that go the extra mile to prohibit concealed carry also due to the media exposure and hype and the visual sightings of open carriers, but I believe it would be far less 30.06 additions to restrict concealed carry.

Me thinks someone does not know their Texas History.

OK, hasn't been legal in any of OUR lifetimes I believe, which is never for us.

johnferg69 wrote:So you believe its a useless law?

I feel right to bare arms it is a constitutional right, but the open carry bill as written is not only useless, but a dangerous one. I feel it will lead to us losing places we enjoy concealed carry in today as I am sure there will be additional 30.06 signs posted. How many? Not sure, but any is too many.

Now, as for open carry as a whole, the problem we have in Texas is it has NEVER been legal, except under certain conditions (in home, your own property, target shooting, etc.) So, while it is not practiced heavily in other states where allowed, there would be those who would purposely open carry in Texas to exercise there newly regained right. And, they would end up carrying where it will raise alarm by some. In other states that never restricted it, it is not the 'new toy' available to play with, so you just don't see it regularly. I think this is partially due to many open carry in rural areas or remote country areas, so they aren't exposed to as many eyes.

So, IF it passed for licensed open carry, even with changes that would leave the 30.06 alone and apply that any no-guns sign was valid, then it might be better. We would still see those that go the extra mile to prohibit concealed carry also due to the media exposure and hype and the visual sightings of open carriers, but I believe it would be far less 30.06 additions to restrict concealed carry.

johnferg69 wrote:Where in this bill does it say "licensed open carry"? All I've read is "carry a handgun".

It is totally clarified in section 40 quoted below at http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/82 ... 02756I.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HB 2756 wrote: SECTION 40. The change in law made by this Act relating to
the authority of a license holder to openly carry a handgun applies
to the carrying of a handgun on or after the effective date of this
Act by any person who:
(1) holds a license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter
411, Government Code, regardless of whether the person's license
was issued before, on, or after the effective date of this Act; or
(2) applies for the issuance of a license under that
subchapter, regardless of whether the person applied for the
license before, on, or after the effective date of this Act.
SECTION 41. The changes in law made by this Act to Sections
30.05, 30.06, 46.03, 46.035, and 46.15, Penal Code, apply only to an
offense committed on or after the effective date of this Act. An
offense committed before the effective date of this Act is governed
by the law in effect when the offense was committed, and the former
law is continued in effect for that purpose. For purposes of this
section, an offense was committed before the effective date of this
Act if any element of the offense occurred before that date.
SECTION 42. This Act takes effect September 1, 2011.

johnferg69 wrote:Another question from a layman. Is oc a useless law? If every business throws up signs keeping firearms out what's the point? Is this why the NRA and TSRA wouldn't back a oc bill? I don't travel extensively travel outside Texas but why does so many other states have oc if you can't go anywhere? I mean, let's admit it, lots of people carry concealed with no license. Some are law abiding citizens(that think they can't qualify or feel they shouldn't need too), some aren't. If open carry was an option wouldn't more people apply for a carry license if its more visible and not a "concealed" right? The out of sight, out of mind right! Or is this not what we want? If more people apply and any initial shock wears off wouldn't many signs come down? Just asking.

Open carry is NOT as widely practiced in other states as many open carry advocates would like you to believe. I came from an open carry state where I lived for 38 years, and was a LEO part of that time. You may see it when someone is out target practicing, or on their farm property, but VERY rarely in towns of cities. As a matter for fact, many states allow the municipalities to prohibit open carry by local ordinance, so you can't tell where it is legal vs. not unless you research the city code.

I know of two instances where a 'Man with a gun' call was made to the 911 during my time as a LEO as I was the one responding. While both of my instances resulted in the individual being asked to leave the store, and they complied, it was still a call and police responded. Luckily the callers were calm and explained to the dispatcher that they were just walking around with the gun and not threatening anyone, but the store made it clear they wanted the individuals out of there and were afraid to approach the person themselves.

So, bottom line, the calls do happen and you don't see a lot of open carry in other states.

johnferg69 wrote:Help me out here. Unlike most of you I'm not a member of the BAR so I have a question. I read what I think was the HB2756 bill. It was on the legis.state.tx.us website so it may not be the one everyone commiting on. It looks like they just took the CC law and marked out "concealed" so it would read "carry a handgun". How would this possibly ban conceal carry? If it possibly bans conceal carry because its not expressly written wouldn't it possible ban open carry too because open carry is not expressly written?

The problem is the way the bill is written, it would be for LICENSED open carry. Once the word got out that people are going to be able to carry handguns in plain view, then many locations will be looking for how to keep them from doing it. And, the 30.06 would be valid for both concealed and open carry, so when they post the sign, it will prohibit ANY carry in the location. So, as written the bill is not a good option for CHL'ers.

jlangton wrote:

Keith B wrote:

jlangton wrote:I understand that, but the entire point was that these locations prior to all of this "parking lot bill" media attention had absolutely no signage whatsoever,and didn't care. Now that they are more "aware", they're posting 30.06 signs. Since this last legislative session has started, and the associated media coverage-the number of signs I'm encountering on my daily "rounds" is increasing regularly. Prior to this, I had not seen a single new 30.06 posting in several years.
JL

So, what types of places are you seeing this happen at? I haven't seen any, but just curious about where they are cropping up?

And, this goes to prove the theory that IF open carry gets any steam, that the increase in 30.06 postings IS factual.

I don't totally agree with that. Here's why.
The persons that I have asked about the signs specifically said they wanted to keep individuals with CHL's out of their building, and that those with CHL's would be the ones to be carrying in their cars on the parking lots. Before this media attention about the parking lots they either didn't care to know, or ignored that there were those with CHL's that did carry in their building regularly.
I've seen the signs at mostly smaller places that most would not recognize, but one of the big ones is Graybar Electric.
JL

Well, I do think this is proof. Bottom line, the media attention on just the parking lot bill has apparently been enough for these companies to research and find the legitimate way of keeping CHL'ers out. The way the Open Carry bill is currently written, a 30.06 would keep open carry AND CHL'ers out. Now, not only have people been made more aware from the media coverage, but you add those that maybe don't just look at the paper, but suddenly see people walking around with a gun on their hip, and they will also research what it takes to keep people from carrying a gun into their business.

Now, let's assume that open carry got passed where any gun busters sign was valid. The business researches how to keep people with guns out. While they may stop at just the gun busters sign, if management decides they want NO ONE with a gun in their business, then they will go through the process of posting the 30.06 and now even CHL's are not allowed. And you can bet that if Open Carry gets any steam and gets media attention, and it WILL get a LOT of attention, there will be those out there looking at how to keep handguns out of their businesses, just as you are seeing today with only the parking lot bill.

jlangton wrote:I understand that, but the entire point was that these locations prior to all of this "parking lot bill" media attention had absolutely no signage whatsoever,and didn't care. Now that they are more "aware", they're posting 30.06 signs. Since this last legislative session has started, and the associated media coverage-the number of signs I'm encountering on my daily "rounds" is increasing regularly. Prior to this, I had not seen a single new 30.06 posting in several years.
JL

So, what types of places are you seeing this happen at? I haven't seen any, but just curious about where they are cropping up?

And, this goes to prove the theory that IF open carry gets any steam, that the increase in 30.06 postings IS factual.

jlangton wrote:

AggieLCP wrote:I'm afraid if open carry passes we will see a lot more 30.06 postings.
The state needs to hurry up and pass the parking lot bill though.

Something to think about.....With just the thought of parking lot and campus carry passing-I've seen valid 30.06 signs go up at several of my daily visited locations. When I inquired at 2 of those locations as to the nature of those signs, their response was "So people that carry guns in their cars if that new law passes can't bring them inside the building here".
Just something to think about in all of this huffing and puffing about increased 30.06 postings.
IMO, if/when the Parking Lot/Campus Carry bills pass-you'll see a HUGE increase in the number of 30.06 signs posted.
JL

30.06 will not apply to an employee if their gun is left in the car in the parking lot. HOWEVER, it WILL apply to a non-employee with a CHL in the parking lot, but not someone under MPA.

OK folks, keep a civil tongue on this discussion or the topic will be locked.