Open Carry In Texas!

[bauerdj]

This is a tough issue for me. I have no problem whatsoever with adding the right to open carry to CHL holders options. In theory I would support the right to carry openly (and concealed) without the requirement for a permit unde the 2nd ammendment. The problem is that then I start to think of some of the dangerous actions I have seen people take with firearms because they do not know how to properly handle them and I see the need for training before they are allowed to carry. This then requires some kind of proof that they know safe gun handleing proceedures, i.e. a permit which then limits 2nd ammendment rights and I have come in a full circle.

I guess my ideal solution would be that a traing class and an instant NIC check be required for a handgun (or better yet a 'wepons' license). I would have no objection if this license was temporary pending the results of a criminal backround check but this should occur after at least a temporary license has been issued. (Offhand I can see no reason that the temporary license could not be issued by a FFL upon submission of a training certificate. Paperwork for a backround check could then be forwarded to DPS for a criminal backround check.

I also feel it is wrong to tie collection of student loans, taxes, child support or anything else to the issuance of a permit.

Time to get down from the soapbox.

Dave B.

[longtooth]

I also feel it is wrong to tie collection of student loans, taxes, child support or anything else to the issuance of a permit.
yes sir, Yes Sir, YES SIR.

Time to get down from the soapbox.
It aint no soap box rant if it is the truth.
Dave B.

[Cosmo 9]

I'll add this for some of you who are against the idea. I would like the option of wearing a shoulder rig and coat and being able to take off my coat at the local eatery without breaking the law. I think it would be very hard for some one to reach acrossed me and remove my weapon without getting a fork in the eye!

[txinvestigator]

I'll add this for some of you who are against the idea. I would like the option of wearing a shoulder rig and coat and being able to take off my coat at the local eatery without breaking the law. I think it would be very hard for some one to reach acrossed me and remove my weapon without getting a fork in the eye!

Even an IWB or belt holster makes removing the coat pretty much impossible. I agree that fact is a drag.

[flintknapper]

I'll add this for some of you who are against the idea. I would like the option of wearing a shoulder rig and coat and being able to take off my coat at the local eatery without breaking the law. I think it would be very hard for some one to reach acrossed me and remove my weapon without getting a fork in the eye!

And you would be exactly right. Shoulder carry is actually one of the easiest positions from which to defend against a take away (from holster). A few "experts" would have you believe the opposite.

[stevie_d_64]

Yer going to need to get a permit to use that fork in that manner sir!

[Cosmo 9]

I don't need no permit fer "10 yr old daughter rule"

[jnkirk1974]

I like the OPTION to carry open, but I would never do it myself. I think the element of surprise goes a long way.

I'd rather a potential attacker to not know that I have the gun.

The Idea is:

A POTENTIAL attacker sees your gun and goes elsewhere... following a path of least resistance.

When your weapon is concealed, that POTENTIAL attacker has no idea that you're carrying and might--just might get the drop on you.

Your element of surprise has just vanished.

Russ

I understand your point and to a degree, you are correct. However, you will also have those crimes where people take your gun from you when you aren't paying a attention.

Again, I am for the "option" to open carry. However, I prefer to keep it concealed.

[hirundo82]

Lets let this thing evolve a little more. I am a supporter, great outspoken supporter of less govt is better. I to believe carry is a right not a liscensed privilege. There are some problems though that do not have a right answer.
1. We pass unliscensed open carry because it is a right & it becomes common. Citizen guns are regularly visible.
2. There will be the criminal ellement that will seek to open carry as he goes to do his mischief.
3. Fellons should not be allowed to have one.
4. Where is the line that prevents a LEO from stopping me while he checks a record (taking an hour, & he disarms me for his safety, handling gun in public & close proxcimity to other citizens) to see if I am "Joe GoodCitizen" or "Wanted PosterBoy."
5. If it is liscense to carry a weapon then it is instant answer to the above, but still regulation, & felon deterrent. (However so slight)

I grew up in Virginia, where open carry is legal without a permit and is becoming more common.

Regarding your second point, I have heard from LEOs that unlicensed open carry does not bother them--there are no cases of bad guys open carrying to prevent a concealed weapons charge, and then commiting a crime. Criminals will conceal their weapons because it gives them the element of surprise to attack their victims.

In response to point 4, my understanding is that, under Terry v. Ohio, in an unlicensed open carry state openly carrying a weapon is not in and of itself sufficient to justify a stop of the person.

i would never support open carry. by policy, i can carry openly, but you would never catch me doing so. on duty, i have to carry openly. i've had people jump me, and try and take my gun, and it's in a retention holster. people who think blatantly displaying a firearm is protection in and of itself, are only fooling themselves. a visible gun tells you and everyone else that there is a gun on scene. whether you can hang on to it is a whole different story. i'd rather not show my hand until i choose.

i know criminals like to hang around outside and scope out their targets just a few minutes before they hit it. who do you think is going to get shot first? the guy with the concealed weapon who chooses when to react, or the rambo flaunting a firearm?

i'll vote against it if it comes up. sorry. i support concealed carry 110%, but open carry is not a very good idea.

So you support the outlawing of a right because it is a bad idea in your opinion?

I'm going to use what I see as an equivalent example from our First Amendment rights to try to illustrate why I do not think that something should be outlawed simply because many people think it is a bad idea. I have observed from my time on this board that many people on here are devout Christians. I am sure that the majority of Texans characterize themselves as Christians, and as such believe that it is a very bad idea to belong to another religion--after all, nonbelievers will go to hell when they die, if Christianity is correct. However, how many Christians seek to outlaw all other religions simply because they believe it is a bad idea to belong to them?

Many people would characterize most of the people on this forum as "rambo," as you put it, simply because we choose to carry a concealed weapon. Can you show me one instance where a private citizen who was open carrying was shot first during the commission of a crime because the perpetrator saw his weapon? There are 43 states that allow open carry of some sort; if it were as much of a problem as you believe it to be, there should be plenty of cases out there for you to find.

[Charles L. Cotton]

As I've already stated, I'm against open carry for one reason only - the reaction we are likely to see not only from the hard line anti-gunners, but also from those who don't have strong opinions one way or another. The sight of people carrying guns in stores, restaurants, zoos, theaters and everywhere else CHL's go now is going to create an issue where none currently exists. Some argue that people will just get used to it, but even if that is true, at what cost? How many restrictions on carrying will be implemented before they "get used to it?"

Let me ask these rhetorical questions. Would you continue to support open carry if it resulted in large numbers of businesses posting 30.06 signs on their property?

Would you continue to support open carry if it resulted in the Legislature expanding the number of locations that are statutorily off-limits to license-holders, as is the case in many other states?

It's been 11 years since SB60 passed and Texas finally got a CHL statute. Let's not forget how radical the idea of citizens carrying guns was only a little over a decade ago. Don’t underestimate the value of the out-of-sight-out-of-mind effect that concealing our handguns has on the 98% of Texans who haven't chosen to get a CHL.

Chas.

[anygunanywhere]

Many valid points on open carry. Thanks for them all.

The reason I posted this was to inform open carry supporters of the organization. I support open carry and would like those who support open carry to contact the organizer and do what we can do to help.

FWIW, we really should look at it the same way as CHL has progressed in Texas. The antis cried "the streets will run red with blood" and it didn't happen. Look at the current open carry states and the lack of issues. Several scenarios have been discussed on this thread the same as we bounce scenarios regarding CHL. What if.

What if we push back for our 2A RKBA? I really do not care what the antis think, what businesses do, what sheeple are offended.

If open carry in Texas is legalized not much in the overall day to day way of things in Texas will not change. We will have more options. I will open carry at times but will concealed carry the majority of the time. We should not have to have a license to exercise our rights. Open carry is about freedom.

Freedom.

Anygun

[longtooth]

Some argue that people will just get used to it, but even if that is true, at what cost? How many restrictions on carrying will be implemented before they "get used to it?"

Let me ask these rhetorical questions. Would you continue to support open carry if it resulted in large numbers of businesses posting 30.06 signs on their property?

Would you continue to support open carry if it resulted in the Legislature expanding the number of locations that are statutorily off-limits to license-holders, as is the case in many other states?

It's been 11 years since SB60 passed and Texas finally got a CHL statute. Let's not forget how radical the idea of citizens carrying guns was only a little over a decade ago. Don’t underestimate the value of the out-of-sight-out-of-mind effect that concealing our handguns has on the 98% of Texans who haven't chosen to get a CHL.

Chas.

The summary is these Qs on one side. The fact that the states that do have open carry do not have problems w/ blood in the streets on the other side.
This has been a good discussion.

[Cosmo 9]

I'd also like to see the stats, if any, on states that were concealed carry at first then went to open carry. The states I know of were always open carry and they both have fewer restrictions than TX.

[cyphur]

If open carry becomes approved, I think that there should be a distinction between prohibiting concealed carry via 30.06 and prohibiting open carry.

I too think open carry would turn more businesses to investigate banning licensed carry. However, there should also be a provision that if you ban any type of carry, you have to provide secure facilities while in that store/establishment.

[stevie_d_64]

I'd also like to see the stats, if any, on states that were concealed carry at first then went to open carry. The states I know of were always open carry and they both have fewer restrictions than TX.

I guess I have not seen anything jump out at me on this...I stand to be corrected, but Texas may be the first state to modify its law to "allow" this option after the original SB60 was drafted and finally passed into law...

Other states may have always had it, or in the states that drew up their CCW laws (that didn't have them to begin with) wrote the "open carry" option at that time...