Another casualty of Open Carry

[switch]

Any lawyer worth his salt would destroy that suit in five minutes. Mrs. Ruark, did you see the 30.06 sign in the window? Isn't that the reason that your husband disarmed? Didn't he know it was illegal to enter the store with his weapon? Yet, didn't you enter the store anyway, knowing that you were disarmed and that you might be in danger?

I could see the danger? And the store owner could not? Doesn't seem like that would work too well. :)

[VMI77]

Any lawyer worth his salt would destroy that suit in five minutes. Mrs. Ruark, did you see the 30.06 sign in the window? Isn't that the reason that your husband disarmed? Didn't he know it was illegal to enter the store with his weapon? Yet, didn't you enter the store anyway, knowing that you were disarmed and that you might be in danger?

I could see the danger? And the store owner could not? Doesn't seem like that would work too well. :)

I think the point is, you chose to enter and put your convenience over your safety. I'm rabidly pro-gun, but if I was on a jury and someone voluntarily disarmed to enter a posted business, and something bad happened, I'd see it as a consequence of his choice to place his convenience above his safety; or I'd have to think that he didn't really believe he'd be any any danger. Furthermore, to me volunteering to spend money in an anti-gun business is akin to collaborating with the enemy, so such a person probably wouldn't want me on the jury.

[mikebass78]

horrible law, period.

Like i shared in the other forum, after carry my rifle to the car from cabelas, and watching a little girl, freak and run back to her dad.

It's a horrible idea Texas.

[switch]

Mr business owner, why did you put up a 30.06 sign?
Who does it apply to? (HINT: Only LTC)
You realize it does NOT apply to criminals?
What does a LTC have to do before he licensed?
So you disarmed the LTC but did nothing to disarm the criminal? To protect the LTC?

Well, they probably would not want me on the jury either. :)

[SA_Steve]

Just wondering...has a license holder ever served on a jury in TX ? On a high profile case that is.
I imagine the tie-in with the DL means anyone who really wants to know can find out.

[jjmktg]

I began telling my CHL classes back in October that open carry would be instrumental in reducing the legal places to carry. One only has to look at Oklahoma and Arizona to get a history lesson. Yes, we are now legal to open carry. We are legal to be the first one shot in an active shooter situation. We are legal to raise gun fears in those who otherwise would be totally unaware of the presence of guns and safer for them being there. But, the proud and the few have rallied to push through this debacle that will end up getting more people hurt then helped. You know, there's the old saying that it's better to be silent and have people think of you as a fool than to open your mouth and confirm it for them. The same, I think, is true with firearms. It's better to conceal and not give away your defense than to reveal you carry and be the first one down.

[The Annoyed Man]

Just wondering...has a license holder ever served on a jury in TX ? On a high profile case that is.
I imagine the tie-in with the DL means anyone who really wants to know can find out.

Only law enforcement can find out by checking the DPS database. You are not required to reveal your status to anyone else, and nobody else has access the the CHL database kept by DPS.

[SA_Steve]

yet you have to show it to LEO's along with your DL (or ID)
weird

I believe there was a post on here a while back where someone was at the intake desk for a military installation and they (non-LEO desk clerk) were running the DL and asking about the associated CHL.

I've no doubt that private investigators have their sources, and they work for lawyers all the time.

I like TX lots better than GA. But GA had a good system for LTC: all weapons, it was a weapons carry lic (GWCL) // no central database (file cabinet in each county probate judges office) // signs carry no weight

those GA folks are paranoid about a central data repository

[switch]

We are legal to be the first one shot in an active shooter situation. We are legal to raise gun fears in those who otherwise would be totally unaware of the presence of guns and safer for them being there. But, the proud and the few have rallied to push through this debacle that will end up getting more people hurt then helped. You know, there's the old saying that it's better to be silent and have people think of you as a fool than to open your mouth and confirm it for them. The same, I think, is true with firearms. It's better to conceal and not give away your defense than to reveal you carry and be the first one down.

The proud, the few? You mean the right and the just? LOL Where's your evidence? OC is the law in 45 states. How many OC have been assaulted? had their guns taken? been shot 'first'? been the first one 'down'?

Maybe you should take your own advice about no opening your mouth. :)

How many incidents have been avoided because someone OC'd? (Unfortunately, we'll never know. However, if you interview criminals, the main thing they fear is armed 'victims'.

The best thing about OC is those w/irrational 'gun fears' we be forced to deal with them. If they see more regular citizens carrying, they'll soon decide maybe guns are not so bad. (Or they will hole up in their house and get Kroger to deliver groceries. Either way, it's win/win. :) )

[oljames3]

I began telling my CHL classes back in October that open carry would be instrumental in reducing the legal places to carry. One only has to look at Oklahoma and Arizona to get a history lesson. Yes, we are now legal to open carry. We are legal to be the first one shot in an active shooter situation. We are legal to raise gun fears in those who otherwise would be totally unaware of the presence of guns and safer for them being there. But, the proud and the few have rallied to push through this debacle that will end up getting more people hurt then helped. You know, there's the old saying that it's better to be silent and have people think of you as a fool than to open your mouth and confirm it for them. The same, I think, is true with firearms. It's better to conceal and not give away your defense than to reveal you carry and be the first one down.

You carry your way and I will carry mine. No muss, no fuss. You and I have very different views of the world and that is fine.

I have carried openly in AZ, CO, NM, and OK. Before carrying outside of Texas I did review the state gun forums, the state public safety web site, the carry laws, read news reports, and I talked with citizens I knew. The history lesson I learned is that other states have done the open carry thing much better than Texans have. For example, when I carried openly for 10 days in Colorado Springs and Pueblo, CO, in encountered no stares, no incidents, no signs. Last summer, my then 18 year old son and I carried openly in Tucson, AZ, for 10 days. No stares, no incidents, one sign.

What I learned is that in AZ, CO, NM, and OK, carrying openly is rare, but accepted and uneventful.

How we carry should not be a topic for divisive debate. Texas CHL/LTC holders are the most law abiding Texans https://www.txdps.state.tx.us/rsd/chl/r ... vrates.htm. Starting from that point of commonality, we should be able to build meaningful, supportive, and enlightening discussions rather than attack each other's personal decisions.

I will continue to carry as I have since receiving my CHL: openly where I can, concealed as the situation dictates, disarming only if I must.

I have done my due diligence, performed my risk analysis, considered the strategic and tactical situations, and I am keenly aware of my capabilities and my limits. I feel sure that you have gone through a similar process. Our conclusions differ. My opinions are as valid to me as yours are to you. I am reasonably certain that your opinion of my choices matters less to me than my opinion of your choices matters to you.

You carry, your way and I will carry mine.

[VMI77]

horrible law, period.

Like i shared in the other forum, after carry my rifle to the car from cabelas, and watching a little girl, freak and run back to her dad.

It's a horrible idea Texas.

Do you think that kind of reaction is good for your long term gun rights prospects? Why do you think it happened....because she'd seen a lot of guns or had never seen a gun in public? The media hypes guns as evil objects to sow hysteria and produce exactly that kind of reaction. It is highly unlikely you would have seen that kind of reaction 40 years ago when people carrying rifles and shotguns were a fairly common sight.

IOW, the reason for that reaction is ignorance. Do you think that ignorance will be cured by everyone hiding their guns? Or will hiding guns facilitate ignorance? When I was in high school any number of kids had rifles and shotguns visibly displayed in gun racks in the pickups they parked in the school parking lot. I used to walk out of my house and down the street to a place where I could go shooting with a gun slung over my shoulder. No one freaked out. People weren't apoplectic seeing a bunch of high school kids with shotguns or rifles in front of the local mom and pop store after their morning hunt.

Over the long term we're not going to diffuse public reaction and perception by keeping guns hidden away. If we want to retain our rights guns need to be demystified and seen for what they are...self-defense tools...rather than instruments of evil with their own free will as the media and the left would have people believe. I'm not advocating in your face open carry tactics and don't plan to open carry much myself, but gradually and considerately exposing more of the public to guns may help more people adjust to be less afraid of them...and that's a good thing.

[Bullitt]

My employer just announced 30.07 signage and also 30.06 signage since all this open carry crap brought it to their attention. To those of you living in the "conceptual" world instead of the "practical" world, THANKS FOR NOTHING!

[Bullitt]

My employer just announced 30.07 signage and also 30.06 signage since all this open carry crap brought it to their attention. To those of you living in the "conceptual" world instead of the "practical" world, THANKS FOR NOTHING!

Oh! And I forgot to mention we are having layoffs because oil prices are in the _______, now more than ever is when CHL is needed. Thanks Bozos!

[CoffeeNut]

My employer just announced 30.07 signage and also 30.06 signage since all this open carry crap brought it to their attention. To those of you living in the "conceptual" world instead of the "practical" world, THANKS FOR NOTHING!

Oh! And I forgot to mention we are having layoffs because oil prices are in the _______, now more than ever is when CHL is needed. Thanks Bozos!

How is it the fault of those that support open carry that your place of employment is now posted not only 30.07 but 30.06 as well? When a business takes advantage of something like open carry in order to fully express their anti-gun views I don't necessarily blame those that are for open carry, rather I blame the business that decided they could get away with finally expressing their views. When I can go to a liberal place like Trader Joes and see a 30.07 sign right next to a sign saying CC is good to go it really makes me think that those now posting both were just anxiously waiting for an opportunity to post without backlash. Can we blame OC for this? Sure, but I'd rather redirect the blame onto the businesses that would rather see patrons die in their store than have someone defend themselves, otherwise the pro-gun movement in Texas is just going to tear itself apart.

If you feel your place of employment is now at greater risk of a shooting from a disgruntled employee maybe you should voice your complaints to management. What's the harm in doing so especially when they've already got legal signs up?

[mojo84]

My employer just announced 30.07 signage and also 30.06 signage since all this open carry crap brought it to their attention. To those of you living in the "conceptual" world instead of the "practical" world, THANKS FOR NOTHING!

I understand your frustration. Other than just because carrying of weapons was brought to light, why did your company decide 30.06 signs were needed at this point? There is a pretty good 20 year track record that shows they are not needed for improved safety.

The passage of open carry has brought the signs to the forefront and the open carry goons did public relations damage. However, it seems your employer is making an irrational decision by deciding now to put up 30.06 signs. Shouldn't you be more frustrated with your employer instead?