TexasCHLforum.com

74novaman wrote: And as a caveat, I will grant you that this is a rare occasion, most people OCing don't get robbed, the guy should have had much better situational awareness (whether carrying concealed or openly), etc etc....

But you can't say that no one has ever been targeted for a crime because they were OCing. At least one guy would disagree with ya.

03Lightningrocks wrote: Zero... I realized that. One of the drawbacks to the interweb is misunderstandings in written responses. we can't observe facial expressions or body movements which help us as humans to communicate. It is real easy to misread a response and react in the wrong way. I am an extreme type A personality with strong emotions. this creates a problem at times. my apologies if I acted offensive. I am also for OC... I just want it done in a way that does not create a problem for me to conceal carry in places that currently have no idea I am packing heat. I am one of the folks who looks at OC as a tactical advantage. When the bad guy walks up and blows off the head of the OC guy, I can skip all the formalities of trying to figure out if I should kill him. I will immediately know the BG's intentions.

I must admit, I am somewhat amused by the great concern shown by some of the carpet baggers, wanting to tell us how to do things in Texas.

I sometimes get that impression also. It's kinda' like, "...we play by MY rules or I take MY ball and go home...". [/

pcgizzmo wrote:

zero4o3 wrote:
my suggestion is a perfectly good way, and if its not point out the flaws.

Your suggestion if I'm not mistaken was to let any sign be good enough. That means even the currently invalid signs would be enough to keep even CHL holders out. That's a huge flaw.

03Lightningrocks wrote:

74novaman wrote:

redlin67 wrote:It seems that a lot have the fear of "signs" that may appear because of open carry. When will you not be afraid? 2 years, 4 years, ever?

If gunbusters applied to OC and 30.06 to concealed carry only, then I would stop worrying about signs at all.

EXACTLY..... as would most of us. The voices of reason are repeatedly saying, NO connections between OC and CC. But that is not good enough for them. Maybe others are right and it was done from ignorance but I believe the connection is deliberate.

pcgizzmo wrote:

zero4o3 wrote:

pcgizzmo wrote:I have yet to see anyone post what an open carry bill would look like that would make everyone happy.

I see it as a no win situation in that CHL's are going to continue to be concerned about postings that keep them out with Open Carry.

I don't want my current rights to change but I do want open carry. I can't think of a way to get that w/out possibly taking a chance on a few things changing. I haven't seen anyone post a good solution on how to change w/out causing some issues. So, I'm curious if those CHL'ers that say they are for Open Carry really are for it or are they just saying that because there for 2nd Amendment rights but would prefer not to rock the boat because we have it pretty good right now as is.

I think a good solution would be to make OC not require a licenses and let any form of gunbuster sign give notice not to carry.

That's what I'm saying. There is no good way to have OC and not at least have some possibility of changing the current CHL laws or at least the possibility that there would be less access to places CHL's can go now. So, my best guess is that some who say they are for full 2nd amendment rights even though deep down that may be half true secretly they don't want to change anything because that would mean changing our current CHL access and possibly more 30.06 signs going up and or having to do away with them all together and allowing any "not allowed sign" to take it's place.

I'm not sure you can make the OC omelet w/out breaking some eggs.

If the State required continuing education and a $70 fee in order to vote, or to be a journalist, or to argue your legal case before a jury, you'd be screaming to anyone who'll listen about infringement of rights. Yet because it's guns, you say pay the money, hide your gun and be thankful. In Texas, no less; stereotypically regarded as the most gun-friendly state in the Union. The state that, historically, is REALLY the most unrestrictive is up in New England; Vermont, which is and always has been so unrestrictive about modes of carry that it doesn't even offer a concealed carry license for reciprocity with other states.

pcgizzmo wrote:

zero4o3 wrote:

pcgizzmo wrote:I have yet to see anyone post what an open carry bill would look like that would make everyone happy.

I see it as a no win situation in that CHL's are going to continue to be concerned about postings that keep them out with Open Carry.

I don't want my current rights to change but I do want open carry. I can't think of a way to get that w/out possibly taking a chance on a few things changing. I haven't seen anyone post a good solution on how to change w/out causing some issues. So, I'm curious if those CHL'ers that say they are for Open Carry really are for it or are they just saying that because there for 2nd Amendment rights but would prefer not to rock the boat because we have it pretty good right now as is.

I think a good solution would be to make OC not require a licenses and let any form of gunbuster sign give notice not to carry.

That's what I'm saying. There is no good way to have OC and not at least have some possibility of changing the current CHL laws or at least the possibility that there would be less access to places CHL's can go now. So, my best guess is that some who say they are for full 2nd amendment rights even though deep down that may be half true secretly they don't want to change anything because that would mean changing our current CHL access and possibly more 30.06 signs going up and or having to do away with them all together and allowing any "not allowed sign" to take it's place.

I'm not sure you can make the OC omelet w/out breaking some eggs.

Oldgringo wrote:

zero4o3 wrote:

pcgizzmo wrote:I have yet to see anyone post what an open carry bill would look like that would make everyone happy.

I see it as a no win situation in that CHL's are going to continue to be concerned about postings that keep them out with Open Carry.

I don't want my current rights to change but I do want open carry. I can't think of a way to get that w/out possibly taking a chance on a few things changing. I haven't seen anyone post a good solution on how to change w/out causing some issues. So, I'm curious if those CHL'ers that say they are for Open Carry really are for it or are they just saying that because there for 2nd Amendment rights but would prefer not to rock the boat because we have it pretty good right now as is.

I think a good solution would be to make OC not require a licenses and let any form of gunbuster sign give notice not to carry.

Whatever are you proposing?

"any form of gunbuster sign" is all it takes in many, if not most other, states to provide notice that I'm not welcome. Surely, this is not what you're suggesting for Texas? Think about it, look here and get back with us.

Legalized OC would be nice to have but it's not necessary and it dang sure isn't needed at the expense of our current CC laws and Texas' unique 30.06 sign.

pcgizzmo wrote:I have yet to see anyone post what an open carry bill would look like that would make everyone happy.

I see it as a no win situation in that CHL's are going to continue to be concerned about postings that keep them out with Open Carry.

I don't want my current rights to change but I do want open carry. I can't think of a way to get that w/out possibly taking a chance on a few things changing. I haven't seen anyone post a good solution on how to change w/out causing some issues. So, I'm curious if those CHL'ers that say they are for Open Carry really are for it or are they just saying that because there for 2nd Amendment rights but would prefer not to rock the boat because we have it pretty good right now as is.