CHL and Open Carry Question

[gmfitter]

" I can see that is perfectly reasonable for a LEO to see a man with a gun as worthy of investigation especially in this day and age. "

I don't agree with that at all.

You don't see police routinely pulling people out of cars to prove they have a driver license. Absent other evidence of criminal behavior, I do not regard simple law-abiding carry of an openly holstered handgun to meet constitutional standards of reasonable articulable suspicion.

I don't agree with it either! We should live in a society where a man can carry a firearm openly and it be as natural as carrying groceries. We should live in a society where hoodlums with guns don't use them to rob banks and kill people and use them as an instrument to facilitate a crime. We should live in a society where the moral upbringing of right and wrong is taught in the home by loving and nurturing parents whose primary mission as a parent is to raise upstanding, law abiding and respectful young men and women. We should live in a society where the police do not feel they are targets of random violence as they try to fulfill their mission to protect us.

In a world where the showing of a gun is statistically associated with something bad going to happen, and where the police are trained to look for bad things that are going to happen we can't expect to insist that the police do not take notice of someone carrying a gun. And that has nothing to do with your constitutional rights.

You can constitutionally carry a gun. You can constitutionally carry a sign around town stating that you do not like this race or another race. You can constitutionally do alot of things. We have to be careful that we CHLers don't turn into a bunch of tough guys with something to prove like has been the case with many of the long gun demonstrations of late. I'm all for standing up for one's rights but we also need to remember that we are supposed to represent the law abiding, community welfare oriented citizens of the state.

I don't have to prove anything. I KNOW I have a right to be on the street with a gun on my belt. And I am happy to remind any officer of that fact by showing him my license. When it becomes harassment then I will have a problem with the harassment not with them asking me for the license. And I will pursue legal steps against the harassment not against them asking me for my license.

This will take a while for law enforcement and CHLers to settle into a routine, possibly years. In the meantime I will go about arming myself,(probably in a concealed manner; and not because I'm afraid of being stopped) and I will expect and even insist that law enforcement continue their work of stopping anyone who fits the profile of being suspicious in their pursuit of protecting all of us.

The equilibrium will not happen overnight and everyone would do well to lighten up a little especially in the beginning until we see how this is going to play out. We and law enforcement are on the same side in the respect that we all want a safer community and each in our own way, CHLers in carrying a weapon and LEOs in patrolling and watching out for us all which will inevitably involve some stops.

That being said, as I stated earlier, when asked I will produce my license. I have no problem with that. But that had better be the end of it. Once I have shown that I can carry I expect to be quickly on my way. If it goes beyond that then I will be at the head of the parade to get something done about the harassment.

tex

insist that law enforcement continue their work of stopping anyone who fits the profile of being suspicious
Does this mean that anyone that doesn't "look like" the LEO is deemed suspicious?

[Abraham]

Yes, Yes it does - You have to look like an LEO from now on, even your pajamas should be blue, have a star on the front and a single stripe down each leg. Psssst, having handcuffs is optional.

Makes sense?

I thought so.

Next question please.

[gmfitter]

Yes, Yes it does - You have to look like an LEO from now on, even your pajamas should be blue, have a star on the front and a single stripe down each leg. Psssst, having handcuffs is optional.

Makes sense?

I thought so.

Next question please.

Very clever way of evading the issue. Somehow, I think you know the real meaning of the question.

[C-dub]

So, recently I heard that several places of business have stated they do not want firearms carried openly in their stores. They include, 1.) Target 2.) Whataburger 3.) Chili's 4.) Chipotle 5.) Panera Bread 6.) Sonic 7.) Starbucks. I've also heard that, under the new laws provisions, they can merely ask that firearms not be open carried in their places of business and that is enough. They don't need either a 30.06 or a 30.07 sign. Is that true? That would suck if it is true. Out of all those listed above, I've never been and don't plan on going to the Panera Bread place. I go to the others all the time.

I guess what I'd really like is if a lawyer read the actual law and translated it from Lawyerese to plain English that would be great. Anyone do that yet?

This is true, but they have to ask or tell each person if they don't put up the sign. Putting it out as a news story or a commercial isn't sufficient, but telling a person that is OCing in their business is effective oral notification.

[ScottDLS]

This is why I don't really think we'll see that many 30.07 signs pop up after 1/1/16. I'm guessing most places will just tell you to leave if they don't like it. Really, this would likely be more common with concealed carry, if it weren't for that "concealed" part.

I'm looking forward to having the option to open carry, though I likely will rarely do it.

[thetexan]

Suspicion is in the eye of the beholder. Some of those beholders will be patrons of restaurants, some will be patrons of movie theaters, some will be people on the street, some will be law enforcement officers.

You look suspicious if you look suspicious. It's not up to you to decide if you are suspicious. It's up to the person deciding if you look suspicious to decide what looks suspicious.

This has nothing to do with rights either. You will have the right to open carry and everyone else on the planet has the right to decide if you look suspicious to them or if they are alarmed and they have to right to act on that by calling 911. And LEO has a right to investigate and you have the right to explain yourself.

Everyone has lots of rights. Plenty to go around. January 1 should be interesting.

tex

[mr surveyor]

for one, I hope that January 1 is NOT interesting ;)


jd

[o b juan]

OH there are some on this site right here who want to make it interesting; and they will succeed.

[docbrazos]

Just guessing here but open carry inside businesses is going to cause problems right and left. No way are you going to change 140 years of people not seeing OC in public. You can site all the state laws that you want but that pesky Unlawful to open carry law is still on the books here in Texas. If folks think they are going to walk the down town streets in all the big city's without being ID'd they had better rethink open carry and the possibility of entering businesses is going to be slim to none.

[locke_n_load]

Just guessing here but open carry inside businesses is going to cause problems right and left. No way are you going to change 140 years of people not seeing OC in public. You can site all the state laws that you want but that pesky Unlawful to open carry law is still on the books here in Texas. If folks think they are going to walk the down town streets in all the big city's without being ID'd they had better rethink open carry and the possibility of entering businesses is going to be slim to none.

It's going to be a non-issue almost every time. OC of pistols just became legal in the past couple of years in a few other states, and they haven't had mass arrests and shootings. Same thing will happen in Texas.

[mojo84]

Just guessing here but open carry inside businesses is going to cause problems right and left. No way are you going to change 140 years of people not seeing OC in public. You can site all the state laws that you want but that pesky Unlawful to open carry law is still on the books here in Texas. If folks think they are going to walk the down town streets in all the big city's without being ID'd they had better rethink open carry and the possibility of entering businesses is going to be slim to none.

How in the world has so many other states accomplished open carry with all the negative backlash you mention? Texas isn't the first state to do this.

[Mel]

Just guessing here but open carry inside businesses is going to cause problems right and left. No way are you going to change 140 years of people not seeing OC in public. You can site all the state laws that you want but that pesky Unlawful to open carry law is still on the books here in Texas. If folks think they are going to walk the down town streets in all the big city's without being ID'd they had better rethink open carry and the possibility of entering businesses is going to be slim to none.

How in the world has so many other states accomplished open carry with all the negative backlash you mention? Texas isn't the first state to do this.

Because other states don't have the benefits of "OCT".

[C-dub]

Just guessing here but open carry inside businesses is going to cause problems right and left. No way are you going to change 140 years of people not seeing OC in public. You can site all the state laws that you want but that pesky Unlawful to open carry law is still on the books here in Texas. If folks think they are going to walk the down town streets in all the big city's without being ID'd they had better rethink open carry and the possibility of entering businesses is going to be slim to none.

How in the world has so many other states accomplished open carry with all the negative backlash you mention? Texas isn't the first state to do this.

Because other states don't have the benefits of "OCT".

That's also what I was thinking. Bigger state = more bigger yahoos.

[mojo84]

It's naive to think Texas is the only state cursed with folks such as OCT and OCTC.

[JALLEN]

Just guessing here but open carry inside businesses is going to cause problems right and left. No way are you going to change 140 years of people not seeing OC in public. You can site all the state laws that you want but that pesky Unlawful to open carry law is still on the books here in Texas. If folks think they are going to walk the down town streets in all the big city's without being ID'd they had better rethink open carry and the possibility of entering businesses is going to be slim to none.

I don't think it has been 140 years. In my youth, a long time ago but not 140 years, the sight of someone driving a pick up with his lever action (usually) or several sometimes, hanging on the rear window was as common as a Lone Star Flag. We had them in the high school parking lot, students, teachers alike. Never a problem, never even a raised eyebrow.

When Charles Whitman opened up from the UT Tower, dozens of students grabbed their rifles from the car and returned fire, impotently unfortunately, but it must have distracted Whitman enough to let the guys who snuck up there have a chance. That may have been close to the end of that era, though.