TexasCHLforum.com

Glockster wrote:If you don't mind me asking -- and I'm asking a real question, motivated by nothing but curiosity -- but why do you stay there?

No I don't mind your asking at all. It's a reasonable question. There are 3 main reasons why I am staying there for now.

First, I own my home free and clear, and I live in a very pleasant quiet neighborhood, without an HOA breathing down my neck, and I like my neighbors. So, other than the above described political climate, I don't have much incentive to go though the fairly significant costs and hassle of selling my home, buying another one somewhere else, and moving, unless it is for a significant upgrade in quality of life. After paying realtor/escrow fees and other associated expenses with selling/buying a home and moving costs, even if I bought a home of equal value in another area, it's a net loss financially with those costs taken into account; so at this point in our lives, it doesn't make economic sense.

Secondly, we have a granddaughter in whose upbringing and care we actively participate, and another grandchild due in April. My son and daughter-in-law live in nearby North Richland Hills. It has been decreed by She who Shall be Obeyed that, for now, any town we might move to right now would have to be no further from them than we are now. My wife is a natural redhead, and that's the law. So we could move, but we're likely to encounter some of the same attitude almost anywhere we go.

And lastly, we are looking to buy a home on some rural land in the next few years, with the ultimate goal (for me, anyway) of moving there — full time if we can convince my son and his family to move with us; or part time if we have to divide our time between city and country. Again, The Redhead must be obeyed in this regard, and Her Perfect Will (and my marital happiness) depend upon it. Either way, I can dispense with the opinions of Grapevine's town fathers while I am on the farm.

So I would like to move, and eventually I probably will; but the stars all have to line up a certain way for it to work out and make financial sense. On top of all of that, while I approved of the passage of Open Carry, I will likely not OC myself very often, so the city's intransigence in that regard won't have that much impact on my day to day existence, anymore than its intransigence with regard to CC does. I can't stand most malls or big crowds. So even though I think it is wrong for the city to enforce improper signs on private property, and wrong to post unlawful signs on public property, I am not personally impacted by it. And other than the gun-rights issue, Grapevine is a fairly nice place to live. And, being perfectly impartial, it's not that the city is hostile to gun rights, it's just that it places a higher value on keeping businesses happy than it does on those rights. If the two were not sometimes in conflict, the city would not likely act that way. It is after all a mostly conservative town.

So that's why I don't get the heck out right away.

oljames3 wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:I know that your handle says you like to teach, but I believe that it is almost always better to let sleeping dogs lie rather than giving them a swift kick......particularly when those dogs have gummint titles.

We'll have to agree to disagree in this instance, TAM. The concept you expressed has merit, but I feel it does not apply here. The OP is not kicking or being confrontational. Rather, he is asking for information in a polite and respectful manner. Neither is this dog sleeping.

I have read reports of several presentations of the type the OP requests. I have seen some on line. I view this interaction as a good thing.

For my part, I'm engaging my city's police department. I'm attending the Elgin PD Citizens' Police Academy (CPA). Tonight, the Assistant Chief's presentation will be about traffic stops and building search (http://www.elgintx.com/Calendar.aspx?EID=324). I'll be asking about how best to interact with LE while carrying openly, concealed, and under MPA.

After graduation, I'll be a member of the alumni association, supporting the PD and the CPA. Being proactive and involved generally works better for me.

James, I understand your point, and in most things I would agree with it. Perhaps my opinion is colored by my experience with Grapevine, where I live. And let me state right up front that, as a local business owner, what follows is NOT an anti-capitalist rant; it is just a statement of how it is in Grapevine, and why.

I know that at the level of the street cop, GVPD officers tend to be pretty libertarian and favor 2nd Amendment rights....at least the ones I have interacted with appear to be that way. But at the level of GVPD command, particularly the chief (whom I know), and at the level of city gov't, the attitude is "whatever business wants, business gets, and the heck with your rights", and they will bend/stretch the meaning of the law to that end. For instance, the Main Street Fest and Grapefest, which are public events hosted by the city in which the entire length of Main St through the business district is closed to vehicle traffic and used for vendor booths and other displays, were still being posted 30.06 AFTER the recent passage of SB 273 (cities may not inappropriately post 30.06 and creates a vehicle for citizen protest of bad postings). Similarly, it was GVPD's written policy to enforce the old non-compliant 30.06 signs which used to exist at the Grapevine Mills Mall. Etc., etc. Post SB 273, the gunshows at the city-owned convention center continue to be posted 30.06 and enforced. The GVPD chief serves very much at the pleasure of Mayor William D. Tate, who was first elected to City Council 1972, was elected Mayor from 1973-1985, and from 1988 to the present, and whose current term expires in 2018. Think about that..... by the time his current term expires, our mayor will have been in office for 42 years. He rules this city like a king..... and I personally know of instances where his family members have used his clout to their favor. If ever there was an argument for term limits, our mayor is a shining example. And it's not so much that he has done a terrible job of it....he hasn't.....it's that whenever someone controls an office for that long, they will tend to accrue more power to that office than was originally intended for it, and that is not healthy. In Grapevine's case, that means a mayor who forgets who voted for him because he regards his true constituency to be local businesses.

According to THIS ARTICLE, the average length of service for a member of the GV city council is TWO DECADES!! Now, let me say that I know some of these people, and I count two of them as friends. But over 40 years as a mayor, and 20 years or more as a city councilman is way. too. long. I know these people because of the years I spent as a member of the Grapevine Chamber of Commerce, and as a local business owner. Everything that happens here by way of public policy happens for the benefit of business first, and everyone else after. Now, in some ways, I'd say that's great. We are a reasonably affluent town in part because of locally based businesses, which include some very large corporations (Game Stop, for example). If we enjoy clean and safe streets and courteous public servants, it is in large part because that's the way businesses, whose ample taxes support the quality of life here, want it to be. Now, clean and safe streets are just two of the benefits of living in Grapevine, and I DO like it here. But the downside is that whenever the collective will of individual residents bumps up against the collective will of local businesses, the individuals lose. They lose because its about customer retention, with the businesses being the city's customers. The city wants those businesses which are here to remain, and it wants to attract new ones.

Under most circumstances, that would all be fine. But..... if that means that raising the question with local government will lead to an almost reflexive enforcement of law the way businesses want it enforced, while giving a lower priority to the way residents want it enforced, then I would call that a sleeping dog I'd rather let lie.

And that's my long-winded explanation for why I said what I said.

I know that your handle says you like to teach, but I believe that it is almost always better to let sleeping dogs lie rather than giving them a swift kick......particularly when those dogs have gummint titles.