TexasCHLforum.com

HerbM wrote:Why a flame shield? There is a giant difference between arguing for gun control and prioritizing your own desires for what should be fixed.

Two people have recently been banned because of their incessant argumentative, condescending and inflammatory statements towards other members. In fact, you sound so much like one of them, I suspect you are. I'm sick of you labeling any position you disagree with as "gun control." Knock it off.

Chas.

135boomer wrote:

HerbM wrote:Don't you just love it when friends and supporters tell you that failure is inevitable even before any evidence is available?

Some are worried about a drop in personal income.

Oh really. Every opposing opinion must have a monetary motive? If I was concerned about money, I wouldn't spend a minute away from my office where I can bill clients. You have no clue what my support of the Second Amendment and gun owners has cost my firm in lost billings since 1980.

On a more practical note, there won't be any unlicensed open-carry, so every CHL Instructor will still have classes to teach.

Chas.

HerbM wrote:Of course the arguments against open carry are tired old arguments -- they are tired and old because they are the same ones the gun banners use against the CHL/CCW and even defensive guns in the home.

Do a Google search and find me an anti-gun organization, spokesman, or representative that has ever said "I support or oppose open-carry because it will cause people to demand that businesses post no-gun signs and/or demand that the Legislature increase the number of statutorily off-limits for CHLs." Your comment doesn't make any sense.

HerbM wrote:Opinions are fine when they sound reasonable unless they just don't correspond to the reality of the evidence.

Does this standard apply to your position? If so, where is your "evidence?" What about 1995 - 1997 in Texas? What about the epidemic of "ghostbuster" signs and decals that were effective against CHL's until TPC §30.06 was passed in 1997? We have a very recent track record of strong anti-CHL sentiment and action in response to SB60 when it passed. In spite of that, you expect me to accept your position that another state's 100 year old tradition of open-carry is more indicative of what we can expect in Texas. Your argument not only is devoid of any evidence, it flies in the face of reason. The sad truth is, you want open-carry so bad that you are incapable of acknowledging that there is a risk.

HerbM wrote:People doing it everyday prove that all of this works. Home defense, concealed carry, and open carry.

Don't try to combine "home defense" or "concealed carry" with open-carry. Relatively few people carry openly anywhere in the country and there is no evidence to the contrary. Yes, it is more common in rural areas than in urban areas, but even there it is the exception rather than the rule. But again, what is acceptable in Wyoming has no bearing on what will happen in Texas.

Chas.

jlangton wrote:

drw wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:To me the question comes down to this, "are you willing to risk a drastic increase in 30.06 signs that will impact 280,000 CHLs to obtain open-carry that will be exercised by a relative handful of CHLs?" My answer is "no."

Why must open carry impact CHL holders? If the businesses want to stop open carry, then it seems to me the solution is simple: create a new 30.XX sign that they can post, that only applies to open carry. Then concealed carry is left alone. They wouldn't think to bar concealed carry if there was a simple and convenient "no open carrying" sign they could post.

Just like I mentioned a few posts back. Leave the "Ghostbuster" signs alone as as a legal "stop sign" to people that choose to Open Carry. It's not like they can hide the fact that there's a gun on their hip.
JL

Again, this simply won't happen. The only way to get open-carry passed would be to modify the current CHL statute to delete the requirement to conceal; rename the licence, and modify TPC §30.06 to remove references to concealment. Thus, "ghostbuster" signs won't impact people carrying openly since they will be doing so pursuant to their HCL (Handgun Carry License). Thus, businesses will have to use 30.06 signs to bar open-carry and in so doing, they will also bar concealed-carry.

Chas.

drw wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:To me the question comes down to this, "are you willing to risk a drastic increase in 30.06 signs that will impact 280,000 CHLs to obtain open-carry that will be exercised by a relative handful of CHLs?" My answer is "no."

Why must open carry impact CHL holders? If the businesses want to stop open carry, then it seems to me the solution is simple: create a new 30.XX sign that they can post, that only applies to open carry. Then concealed carry is left alone. They wouldn't think to bar concealed carry if there was a simple and convenient "no open carrying" sign they could post.

The Legislature isn't going to create yet another Penal Code Section dealing with trespass. Everyone will come under TPC 30.06. It's very easy to say "just do this or that," but the political reality is it won't happen. Also, there isn't the slightest chance that open-carry without a license will pass, so we are talking about simply repealing TPC §46.035(a) "intentional failure to conceal" and renaming the CHL.

If my fears come true, businesses are going to post 30.06 signs thus impacting CHLs.

Chas.

HerbM wrote:Again and again, the behavior we see is that people who either don't want, or don't understand open carry retread the tried old arguments we hear from the gun banners.

"Tired old arguments we hear from the gun banners[?]" "Inventing reasons . . .[?]" I have admitted that my opposition to open-carry is in the minority, but my opposition is not based upon "inventing reasons . . ." it is based upon a very rational and well-reasoned concern about the backlash we likely would see from the Texas business community and, to a lesser degree, from the Legislature. Nor have I ever heard "gun banners" argue that they should allow open-carry because it will help them (anti-gunners) achieve our goal of limiting or abolishing civilian-carry in any forum. That's not something they would admit publicly. Counting those who disagree with you among the anti-gunners simply because they do not share your view on this issue would be tantamount to me accusing you of trying to sabotage concealed-carry by supporting open-carry.

HerbM wrote:If you are one of the ones inventing reasons not to do this, ask yourself why you are having an emotion reaction and not going over the OpenCarry.org and discussing the technical and tactical details with expert and experienced people?

". . . with expert and experienced people?" Experts on Texas? Experts on the Texas Legislature? I don't think I have to go to a national organization to seek expertise on Texas or the Texas Legislature. I don't post my opposition to open-carry in Texas on OpenCarry.org out of respect for the forum's founder and their mission and because it is working for open-carry in all states and I only care about Texas. If the NRA takes on this issue, then I will be concerned about other states. Additionally, my opposition to open-carry would be as well received at OpenCarry.org as would be an anti-gunner's opinions here on TexasCHLforum and I don't start any discussion solely to create an argument. Well, not outside of a lawsuit that is.

I have read OpenCarry.org in an attempt to get a feeling for the frequency with which handguns are openly carried in various states, but I found a lot of generalizations but no hard evidence that could be used. I'm not critical of OpenCarry.org for this, as I am quite certain that the evidence simply doesn't exist. I would also point out that I have a link to OpenCarry.org here on the TexasCHLforum, so I have no bias against it or their mission.

As for emotional responses, I haven't seen anything from the loyal opposition other than well-reasoned discussions why they oppose open-carry. For the most part, I've seen equally well-reasoned opinions from people who support open-carry. However, phrases like "Why would anyone with a CHL or who even owns a firearm at home favor gun control[,]" are high on emotion and insult and low on facts.

A good many of the TexasCHLforum members either weren't in Texas in the 1995 to 1997 time frame, or they were too young to care about the then-new CHL law. As soon as SB60 passed in 1995, small ghostbusters "no gun" decals started appearing on the doors of businesses all over the State. It was nothing short of an anti-CHL epidemic! Had it not been for the BOMA meeting in Houston in the later part of 1995 and the famous "BOMA Letter" that was issued as a result of that meeting, the vast majority of commercial buildings would have been posted against concealed-carry. That letter stemmed the growing tide of anti-CHL postings and bought us time to create a statutory impediment to barring armed CHLs. (The problem was so bad, it resulted in the creation of TPC 30.06.) So when people from other states that have always allowed open-carry argue that their state's experience for the last 100 years is relevant to how Texans would respond, I can't help be think back 13 years and wonder if they have any idea what we went through just a little over a decade ago.

I want to point out that I have stated my concerns about the potential backlash to open-carry in Texas. I have also acknowledged that it is not a certainty. I can no more guarantee my fears would come true than proponents of open-carry can guarantee they won't come true. To me the question comes down to this, "are you willing to risk a drastic increase in 30.06 signs that will impact 280,000 CHLs to obtain open-carry that will be exercised by a relative handful of CHLs?" My answer is "no."

Chas.

jlangton wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:If open carry was an issue at all in the 44 states where it is legal then it would be made illegal faster than a democrat changing his position based on a poll in an election year.


Anygunanywhere

Well put and the hard,cold truth.
JL

Not if no one is open-carrying.

Chas.

jlangton wrote:To answer the first question.
It is a fact that it is MUCH easier and safer to draw from an openly carried holster than it is to draw from concealment. I'm not talking about one person that can draw their particular gun from concealment faster than I could from an openly carried holster-I'm talking about the same person...draw with the gun concealed,and then draw from an openly carried holster. The openly carried gun will be produced to a defensive ready much faster than from proper concealment.

My draw times are less than one second slower when I'm drawing from concealment v. open-carry. Typically, it's closer to .5 to .7 seconds. Yes it takes some practice, but not am much as many people may believe.

Open-carry isn't about safety, it's about choice. I personally believe the cost will be far too high in terms of drastic increases in the number of places that are off-limits either statutorily, or by way of 30.06 signs.

Chas.

jlangton wrote:The second question..
It is very possible that the number of businesses that prohibit firearms may rise,but that's where you teach them via their bottom line. No gun carry by law abiding citizens, no money. It's just that simple. Business follows the money-period. The biggest problem I see with that tactic.....nobody in this country sticks together on anything anymore.
JL

It won't happen. Roughly 2% of the Texas population are CHLs; 98% are not. A business owner concerned about profits, or a manager whose compensation or continued employment depends upon profits, will have an easy economic decision to make. They can ignore customer complaints about people wearing guns and risk alienating 98% of the of the population, or they can post 30.06 signs and risk alienating 2%. We will not win that economic battle, especially when dealing with large chain stores.

I wish we had the economic muscle to change company policy, but the sad truth is we do not. We see very few 30.06 signs for one reason only -- our guns are out of sight, so they are out of other people's minds.

Chas.

KC5AV wrote:I didn't realize that the other 44 states allowed open carry.

Don't be too surprised; there aren't 44 states where people actually to this to any extent. What is technically "legal" and what is done in everyday life is markedly different. As others have said, it's legal for me to throw an AR-15 over my shoulder and walk into my downtown Houston office building. But I've never seen it done; not once in 58 years of living and working in and around Houston.

I have traveled all over this country for more than 30 years and I can count on both hands the number of times I've seen non-LEOs openly carrying in anything but a sporting setting (hunting, shooting range, etc.) When open-carry started becoming a big issue in Texas 2 or 3 years ago, I started asking people who travel about their experience. I have never had anyone tell me that open-carry is common in any state. Admittedly, most, but not all, of my travel and the travel of others with whom I have spoken about this issue is to larger cities, so open-carry may be more common in rural areas of those states. But what happens in rural areas has little political impact as large cities equal large voting blocks.

So don't believe that open-carry is a common, everyday occurrence by large portions of the public in these 44 states. The anecdotal information we get from the Internet doesn't form a basis to say open-carry is commonplace and that it doesn't generate problems with people's response. I'm sure the stories told by supporters of open-carry are accurate, but they are limited in number and scope.

Chas.