"Almost" 2A Supporters

[G.A. Heath]

I thought the Dutton amendment got tabled because of a wording issue. I get what your saying but it could honestly go either way. I don't think there's anyway for us to know for sure how many people got pushed one way or another. I have seen other videos, not just theirs, and not just in texas and numerous people come up asking questions, asking for a card or a website, because they had no idea it was legal to open carry. That's a good reason why people panic because they don't know the law. They see someone with a gun an immediately think they must be a criminal if they have a gun. Same reason I assume the media/ PD's are much more involved this go around getting the word out so that hopefully people will not panic. Some people cannot be pushed to either side though. I think those on the fence are the minority. I've had some heated conversations with stringent anti gun folks on facebook, and you can talk to them until your blue in the face and they just can't comprehend that a 30.06 sign isn't going to stop a criminal from coming in with a gun. It's only gonna stop a licensed person that means no harm.

The Dutton Amendment was stripped from HB910 by the senate when they got the bill, it was added back in with slightly different wording and then sent back to the house. Because the two versions were different it had to go to conference committee and it was stripped out again. While all of this was going on the Governor telegraphed on twitter that he would veto the bill if the amendment was in it. How did CJ Grisham contribute to this? Look here:


The way you get people to accept OC is to do it while not presenting yourself as a pain the backside. Don't make a scene, Don't stir the pot. and don't invite chaos. The trick is to be normal while doing it.

[G.A. Heath]

ha, dropped my phone and managed to quote myself, deleted the contents of the quoting post.

[The Annoyed Man]

I believe that the 2nd Amendment right is ought to be unlimited. Balanced against that, I believe that some portion of the time, its full expression isn't wise. That is why I am glad that OC passed, but also why I won't be doing it myself most of the time.

I feel the same way about free speech too.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Is there any evidence that what they did played a role in the bill outside of speculation? I mean did any representative that voted against the bill come out and say, because OCT is running around with AR's we are against open carry? (this isn't sarcasm, I'm curious to know if that is the case). I have seen them blamed for issues in numerous threads but haven't seen any actual info that they somehow played a part, outside of assuming that because they open carried and got news attention that it surely must have played a factor.

There's a mountain of evidence of the damage OCT/Grisham/OCTC/Watkins did to the open-carry issue. You are new to the Forum and I don't know how closely you have followed the open-carry issue and the negative impact OCT, et al had on it. If you haven't, then brew a pot of coffee and start reading the hundreds of posts on the topic, including the information I provided. If you still don't see a problem, then you don't want to acknowledge the truth.

Chas.

[Richbirdhunter]

What was the anxiety level like 20 years ago when CC became legal in Texas? Did people think we should be able to keep guns but not carry them at church or kids birthday parties?

Is this just part of growing pains?

[cyphertext]

What was the anxiety level like 20 years ago when CC became legal in Texas? Did people think we should be able to keep guns but not carry them at church or kids birthday parties?

Is this just part of growing pains?

You had the same argument from the antis that blood would flow in the street, but we didn't have so much publicity about the issue. We didn't have scores of businesses coming forward saying that they were going to post before the law went into effect. There were no images of people with guns in local businesses constantly being shown in the media to get the soccer moms upset.

And again, most of us here are for open carry, we just do not agree with the tactics taken by the OC activist groups. Could they not have gotten their same message across with empty holsters, or bananas in the holster? Who looks more menacing to a soccer mom, a guy with a banana on his hip, or a guy with an "assault rifle"?

[Glockster]

What was the anxiety level like 20 years ago when CC became legal in Texas? Did people think we should be able to keep guns but not carry them at church or kids birthday parties?

Is this just part of growing pains?

You had the same argument from the antis that blood would flow in the street, but we didn't have so much publicity about the issue. We didn't have scores of businesses coming forward saying that they were going to post before the law went into effect. There were no images of people with guns in local businesses constantly being shown in the media to get the soccer moms upset.

And again, most of us here are for open carry, we just do not agree with the tactics taken by the OC activist groups. Could they not have gotten their same message across with empty holsters, or bananas in the holster? Who looks more menacing to a soccer mom, a guy with a banana on his hip, or a guy with an "assault rifle"?

I wasn't here then but would also have to assume that the ability to quickly and easily capture events and post on the Internet, and the ability to spread your version of the word to more people than you may ever even know read it, all have impacts today that affect the public's reactions on this that were never imagined 20 years ago.

[LSUTiger]

So, if one agrees with CC, but not OC....is it possible to be a partial 2A supporter?

In other words....can someone support 2A rights....but only to a certain extent...i.e. not exercising 2A rights that might make others "uncomfortable"?

I'm curious, because I think you're either all in, or you're not.

No flames wanted, just honest discourse.

Happy 2016!

To answer the OP's question is an unequivocal yes! It's possible to be an almost 2A supporter.

Imagine for a second if you said I'll only allow light skinned black Americans in my store but not dark skinned black Americans because they are too scary.

Well that's the logic some apply to gun ownership and the 2A.

What about FUDDS? It's ok to have my Grand Pappy's old bolt action 30.06 but you don't need those scary black rifles for hunting.

Well guess what, the 2A wasn't about hunting, it was about giving the citizenry a means to fight tyranny and oppression from our own government. the other reason was to defend your life. the whole defense of life and liberty concept.

so when you start to pick and choose what you part to support you are an almost 2A supporter.

And whatever mode of carry you choose CC or OC you should support both.

In my view the 2A guarantees the right of the citizenry constitutional carry of the same firearms technology available to our government including all the necessary magazines, ammo and accessories to make it possible to defend against tyranny without restrictions. That's part of what freedom is. Until this becomes the way it is again we must continue to fight to regain rights taken away over time.

To me it's an all or nothing deal.

There's too many willing to compromise as long as it doesn't affect them. The problem with that is it just doesn't work that way. Any compromise on the 2A affects us all by compromising our freedom.

And before the anti-OCT/OC crowd chimes in I must say that while OCT's cause is righteous I disagree with much of their tactics. But rights not exercised are rights lost.

I am not an in your face type but I'm not AFRAID to stand up for my rights or what is right. If you are afraid to do that I'd call it cowardice.

I feel very uncomfortable that the anti-gunners want strip my rights away because they choose not to exercise theirs. So really I'm not really all that sympathetic to what makes them uncomfortable.

There are lots of things that make me uncomfortable but am forced to accept by law.

It's time for gun owners to come out if the closet and be accepted.

[cyphertext]

As I've said in posts before I'm not a member of OCT, but I honestly don't see why what they did was a big deal. What is the difference between going into whataburger with a holstered handgun (hypothetically if it was legal before an hour from now), and going into one with an AR-15 slung over the back. Both weapons can inflict serious damage. Theres plenty of pistol mags out there with the same capacity as an AR. If it was reversed and rifle open carry was banned, but pistols weren't, and they all went in with pistols , the same people would have freaked out. A gun is a gun. You can pop off a handgun just as fast as a legal AR. There's gonna be just as many people freaking out come 1 more hour when they see people with handguns. It doesn't matter if its a rifle or a pistol, MDA, and the typical anti gun person doesn't want to see a gun. Rifle, pistol, or a shotgun.

It is two parts, what they carried and how they carried them...

First, not all of the OCT folks carried the rifle slung over their back. Many of them had the tactical slings and carried slung across the chest, or at their side. These rifles were basically being carried at the low ready, much like an infantry soldier or a police officer would carry their rifle when patrolling a high threat area. As a gun owner, I am not comfortable around anyone that I do not know carrying a long arm in this manner, especially when their hands are on the firearm. A rifle carried in this manner is meant to be intimidating... a show of force. It has a very different message than a rifle carried across your back or on the shoulder.

The choice of an AR or an AK was also poor, given how the media would portray the carrying of an "assault rifle". The media rarely spoke to the person with granpappy's duck hunting shotgun on their back... no, they focused on the tacticool guys with the AR or AK.

While you may think a gun is a gun, the general public does not. I've spoken to many folks who tell me that assault rifles should be banned. I show them a picture of a Ruger Mini 14 with wood stock and a scope, and they say that rifle is fine.. it's a hunting rifle. Yet show them a Mini 14 with a collapsible stock, extended magazine and a flash hider and they say that is the type of firearm that they feel should be banned... same gun, just dressed up differently. I can assure you that a revolver does not invoke the same fears as an AR in these folks either.

[cyphertext]

And before the anti-OCT/OC crowd chimes in I must say that while OCT's cause is righteous I disagree with much of their tactics. But rights not exercised are rights lost.

I think you will find that most agree with you here about the cause vs. tactics. However, I don't believe that the 2A gives you the right to carry your AR 15 into the local Chipotle... As you stated, that right is there to protect against tyranny, and I haven't witnessed an tyrannical oppression at my local Starbuck's. Look at the Battle of Athens... Those men took up their arms when it was necessary to insure their county election was without corruption. Once order had been restored, the arms were put away... not paraded down at the local cafe. Time and place.

[chuckybrown]

I believe that the 2nd Amendment right is ought to be unlimited. Balanced against that, I believe that some portion of the time, its full expression isn't wise. That is why I am glad that OC passed, but also why I won't be doing it myself most of the time.

I feel the same way about free speech too.

.....we have free speech, but "we shouldn't yell FIRE in a movie theater" either.

TAM, you nailed the answer for me. Thank you.

Happy new year!!

[LSUTiger]

And before the anti-OCT/OC crowd chimes in I must say that while OCT's cause is righteous I disagree with much of their tactics. But rights not exercised are rights lost.

I think you will find that most agree with you here about the cause vs. tactics. However, I don't believe that the 2A gives you the right to carry your AR 15 into the local Chipotle... As you stated, that right is there to protect against tyranny, and I haven't witnessed an tyrannical oppression at my local Starbuck's. Look at the Battle of Athens... Those men took up their arms when it was necessary to insure their county election was without corruption. Once order had been restored, the arms were put away... not paraded down at the local cafe. Time and place.

When I'm sitting at the cafe and some terrorist or other crazy wants to have his/her 15 minutes of infamy at decides to shoot the place up I 'd rather have a rifle handy than just a puny handgun.

How's the saying go, "a pistol is just so you can fight your way back to the rifle you should have never left behind "

Rifles meant for defense against tyranny and oppression can also be used against other everyday threats and are what I'd rather have in a defensive situation. That's a true tactical advantage.

A rifle, even a black scary one is a legitimate form of self defense.

Some want to feel safe and some want to be safe, there is a difference.

Your argument is silly.

[jed]

I believe that the 2nd Amendment right is ought to be unlimited. Balanced against that, I believe that some portion of the time, its full expression isn't wise. That is why I am glad that OC passed, but also why I won't be doing it myself most of the time.

I feel the same way about free speech too.

.....we have free speech, but "we shouldn't yell FIRE in a movie theater" either.

TAM, you nailed the answer for me. Thank you.

Happy new year!!

But to some, this may seem like political correctness. It is not PC, it's common sense and good judgment.

So, if one agrees with CC, but not OC....is it possible to be a partial 2A supporter?

In other words....can someone support 2A rights....but only to a certain extent...i.e. not exercising 2A rights that might make others "uncomfortable"?

I'm curious, because I think you're either all in, or you're not.

No flames wanted, just honest discourse.

Happy 2016!
Chuckybrown

If you mean people in general, I take offense. If you mean politicians, I think some are partial supporters.

Just because I most likely will never OC does not mean I am not a full 2A supporter. How can I CC 24/7 and not be a full supporter? Just because I see totally no need for me to OC at wally world, HEB, whataburger or anywhere else, does not mean I do not support OC or 2A. OC is great with a large dose of common sense and good judgment (which OCT has none). OC has caused us to lose more CC locations. The right to OC has infringed on the right to CC. This is not because of OCT, they just expedited the OC info to businesses. If not for OCT, starting today businesses would be freaking out every time they see someone OCing. Then they would have gradually been informed if 30.06/07. OCT just sped the process along.

On a personal note, I am so sick of reading about OC. Charles may need to rename this forum to TexasOCforum.

I'm done ranting.

I hope everyone has a very Happy New Year!!

[cyphertext]

And before the anti-OCT/OC crowd chimes in I must say that while OCT's cause is righteous I disagree with much of their tactics. But rights not exercised are rights lost.

I think you will find that most agree with you here about the cause vs. tactics. However, I don't believe that the 2A gives you the right to carry your AR 15 into the local Chipotle... As you stated, that right is there to protect against tyranny, and I haven't witnessed an tyrannical oppression at my local Starbuck's. Look at the Battle of Athens... Those men took up their arms when it was necessary to insure their county election was without corruption. Once order had been restored, the arms were put away... not paraded down at the local cafe. Time and place.

When I'm sitting at the cafe and some terrorist or other crazy wants to have his/her 15 minutes of infamy at decides to shoot the place up I 'd rather have a rifle handy than just a puny handgun.

How's the saying go, "a pistol is just so you can fight your way back to the rifle you should have never left behind "

Rifles meant for defense against tyranny and oppression can also be used against other everyday threats and are what I'd rather have in a defensive situation. That's a true tactical advantage.

Your argument is silly.

So you carry a rifle everywhere you go? I don't. That isn't practical. We are not at a point in this country where I live in fear and feel the need to carry an AR 15 and a 210 round load out everywhere I go. That day hopefully will never come. Today, I am quite comfortable with my Sig P290 and 7 round capacity. And I don't believe that the 2A trumps property rights.

[Richbirdhunter]

What was the anxiety level like 20 years ago when CC became legal in Texas? Did people think we should be able to keep guns but not carry them at church or kids birthday parties?

Is this just part of growing pains?

You had the same argument from the antis that blood would flow in the street, but we didn't have so much publicity about the issue. We didn't have scores of businesses coming forward saying that they were going to post before the law went into effect. There were no images of people with guns in local businesses constantly being shown in the media to get the soccer moms upset.

And again, most of us here are for open carry, we just do not agree with the tactics taken by the OC activist groups. Could they not have gotten their same message across with empty holsters, or bananas in the holster? Who looks more menacing to a soccer mom, a guy with a banana on his hip, or a guy with an "assault rifle"?

I wasn't here then but would also have to assume that the ability to quickly and easily capture events and post on the Internet, and the ability to spread your version of the word to more people than you may ever even know read it, all have impacts today that affect the public's reactions on this that were never imagined 20 years ago.

I know we're late to the OC party in Texas being the 45th state to allow some form of OC, but are we #1 in distress over it ? Did the other 44 states that already allow OC go through these same pains?