Open Carry.Org Targets Texas

CHL discussions that do not fit into more specific topics

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

Post Reply

jlangton
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 252
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 8:40 am
Location: SE Texas

Re: Open Carry.Org Targets Texas

#76

Post by jlangton »

O6nop wrote:
Still trying to decide. I posted in another forum, but my questions are:

1) Is open carry intended to be an unlicensed ?
Yes,Licensing it would be a nightmare for everybody involved.
2) If so, can anyone carry? (mental patients, felons, children)
Anybody that can legally purchase a handgun in this State
3) If not, how do we weed out those that shouldn't?
NICS check is supposed to do that with purchase restrictions
4) If a licensing method is used, how is it enforced?
No licensing is being proposed
5) Can an officer stop anyone carrying open to verify they are licensed?
See above
6) If not, will a crime have to be commited (gun related or not) in order for a policeman to check for your license?
Again,see above
My replies are in blue.
JL
"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
-Thomas Jefferson.

6/14/08-CHL Class
10/15/08-Plastic in Hand

ralewis
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 300
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:37 pm

Re: Open Carry.Org Targets Texas

#77

Post by ralewis »

My concern with the Open Carry issue is that increasing the awareness that folks carry may result in more placeing being legally posted. I've been carrying for 4 years now, and I'm quite happy to not highlight the fact that folks like me are carrying. I fear that as folks (even in small numbers) begin to carry openly, places like Target, Best Buy, Applebees will respond to 'panicked' patrons by posting a lawful 30.06 sign.

I'd rather put the emphasis on allowing CHL holders to carry anywhere LEOs can carry, and perhaps completely de-criminalize failing to conceal (which is different than open carry much in the way decriminalizing marajuana possession (vs distribution) has been decriminalized in some places-- make it at most the equivalent of a speeding ticket) .

Making a big deal about unintentially failing ot conceal as a justification for Open Carry to me is silly. As CHL folks, we're far more observent than most folks when it comes to guns (how many of us have 'made' other CHL folks and chuckled about it.), and I would be shocked if anyone would notice/care if they were witness any of us 'unintentionally failing to conceal."

I wouldn't vote against it certainly, but I definitely am NOT a passionate supporter of this issue. Let's think of some of the potential side effects though such as I suggested above.

mr.72
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 8
Posts: 1619
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 10:14 am

Re: Open Carry.Org Targets Texas

#78

Post by mr.72 »

ralewis wrote: fear that as folks (even in small numbers) begin to carry openly, places like Target, Best Buy, Applebees will respond to 'panicked' patrons by posting a lawful 30.06 sign.
Well, OTOH, this is partly the argument in favor of OC. I think the theory is that since guns being carried by regular citizens are hidden, then many people are oversensitized to the presence of guns, thus helping to perpetuate the idea among many people that only nuts and criminals are carrying guns. Now, if a large number of people do in fact think that only nuts and criminals are carrying guns, then suddenly they begin to see people carrying openly then they will naturally respond by thinking these must be nuts or criminals. However after some time, it is likely that society at large would become desensitized to the presence of guns in plain view and would not immediately assume that anyone openly carrying a handgun is either a criminal or a nut.

Of course, during the transition time, it very well may result in more lawful 30.06 signs. Assuming this theory holds true, and that eventually society will gain acceptance of guns carried in the open, then eventually these signs would likely be taken down as more people carry openly and it becomes clear that merchants are losing business due to their policies.

I am not necessarily endorsing this theory, just pointing out that there are two sides to the coin. I think that we'd all be better off if it was routine for people to see law-abiding citizens carrying guns without irrational reactions, but in the short term it would be foolish to expect this to happen instantly.
non-conformist CHL holder
User avatar

iratollah
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 7
Posts: 488
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:58 am
Location: Notrees, TX
Contact:

Re: Open Carry.Org Targets Texas

#79

Post by iratollah »

I think open carry conveys the same message as wearing a codpiece.
it's socially unacceptable to be ahead of your time.
L'Olam Lo - Never Again
User avatar

anygunanywhere
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 7875
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am
Location: Richmond, Texas

Re: Open Carry.Org Targets Texas

#80

Post by anygunanywhere »

That's really nice. If you are saying what I think you are saying, why don't you define that for the rest of the board.

Anygunanywhere
Last edited by anygunanywhere on Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"When democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizen still gets to vote." Mike Vanderboegh

"The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." – Ayn Rand

ralewis
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 300
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:37 pm

Re: Open Carry.Org Targets Texas

#81

Post by ralewis »

mr.72 wrote:
ralewis wrote: fear that as folks (even in small numbers) begin to carry openly, places like Target, Best Buy, Applebees will respond to 'panicked' patrons by posting a lawful 30.06 sign.
Well, OTOH, this is partly the argument in favor of OC. I think the theory is that since guns being carried by regular citizens are hidden, then many people are oversensitized to the presence of guns, thus helping to perpetuate the idea among many people that only nuts and criminals are carrying guns. Now, if a large number of people do in fact think that only nuts and criminals are carrying guns, then suddenly they begin to see people carrying openly then they will naturally respond by thinking these must be nuts or criminals. However after some time, it is likely that society at large would become desensitized to the presence of guns in plain view and would not immediately assume that anyone openly carrying a handgun is either a criminal or a nut.

Of course, during the transition time, it very well may result in more lawful 30.06 signs. Assuming this theory holds true, and that eventually society will gain acceptance of guns carried in the open, then eventually these signs would likely be taken down as more people carry openly and it becomes clear that merchants are losing business due to their policies.

I am not necessarily endorsing this theory, just pointing out that there are two sides to the coin. I think that we'd all be better off if it was routine for people to see law-abiding citizens carrying guns without irrational reactions, but in the short term it would be foolish to expect this to happen instantly.

So, you are saying that an increase in the number of guns gun-fobic people see will increase their acceptance of guns? I get the logic of what you are saying, and I fundamentally believe that increasing your exposure to things you fear makes you fear them less, BUT we're not talking about folks that think through this issue. I mean the base issue we're fighting is that law abiding folks abide by the law and are the MOST impacted by gun control laws while criminals could care less about the laws that are passed. It's mathematically provable that folks are safer with more guns in the hands of law abiding folks, but that proof does not discourage gun control efforts. Normally reasonable people continue to believe they are safer by excluding law abiding citizens from carrying guns, and these are the folks you are counting on to accept guns by exposing them to more guns?..... Maybe you are right given a suitably long time frame, but I'm not sure I want this to become North Carolina where you can get a license but end up not being able to carry anywhere that most normal folks frequent.

mr.72
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 8
Posts: 1619
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 10:14 am

Re: Open Carry.Org Targets Texas

#82

Post by mr.72 »

So, you are saying that an increase in the number of guns gun-fobic people see will increase their acceptance of guns?
Well, no not exactly.

What I am saying is that right now, if someone walks into a Target store with a gun being carried openly, they are either a cop, or they are committing a crime. So the natural response of most people, including CHL holders, when you see someone carrying a gun openly is "whoah, that guy must be about to commit a crime!!". I think this fosters the general opinion that if you have a gun, either you are a cop or you are a criminal/nutcase. However, if it becomes rather routine for there to be people around that are obviously regular folks and carrying guns, after some short time certainly people will stop over-reacting and thinking that everyone carrying openly MUST be a bad guy.

For example, take my church. There are probably 20+ people carrying in church in every service. There may be two or three of us up on the stage! Obviously, everyone there knows we are not criminals. So if all of the sudden we all started to carry openly at church, then over the course of a week some 5,000+ people would find themselves amongst open-carrying people who they already know and trust. You can't exactly rationally freak out and scream "NUTCASE WITH GUN!!" when it's a member of the choir up on stage, or an usher who you've known for 5 years, can you?

Anyway, that's the theory. I am not sure it will work. It's risky, but the payoff may be worth the risk. Who knows. But as I see it, the law is so screwed up as it is, the odds of any clean open-carry legislation passing in TX are virtually zero. Either it won't pass, or it will be swiss cheese by the time it passes.
non-conformist CHL holder
User avatar

anygunanywhere
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 7875
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am
Location: Richmond, Texas

Re: Open Carry.Org Targets Texas

#83

Post by anygunanywhere »

:willynilly: :willynilly: :willynilly:

Anygunanywhere
"When democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizen still gets to vote." Mike Vanderboegh

"The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." – Ayn Rand
User avatar

Oldgringo
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 11203
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 10:15 pm
Location: Pineywoods of east Texas

Re: Open Carry.Org Targets Texas

#84

Post by Oldgringo »

iratollah wrote:I think open carry conveys the same message as wearing a codpiece.
That's what Mrs. Oldgringo said...sorta'. "rlol"
User avatar

flintknapper
Banned
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 4962
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 8:40 pm
Location: Deep East Texas

Re: Open Carry.Org Targets Texas

#85

Post by flintknapper »

mr.72 wrote:
So, you are saying that an increase in the number of guns gun-fobic people see will increase their acceptance of guns?
Well, no not exactly.

What I am saying is that right now, if someone walks into a Target store with a gun being carried openly, they are either a cop, or they are committing a crime. So the natural response of most people, including CHL holders, when you see someone carrying a gun openly is "whoah, that guy must be about to commit a crime!!". I think this fosters the general opinion that if you have a gun, either you are a cop or you are a criminal/nutcase. However, if it becomes rather routine for there to be people around that are obviously regular folks and carrying guns, after some short time certainly people will stop over-reacting and thinking that everyone carrying openly MUST be a bad guy.
This may be THE response but I don't think it should be the "natural" one. I agree with your position/assessment....but would hasten to add that much of the public has been "conditioned" to think Gun= bad!

We need to show people that a firearm is just a tool, nothing else. It is an inanimate object that does nothing of it's own volition.

Image


So, the proper response to seeing someone with a gun, is to simply note what (or what not) they are doing with it. In the same way LEO walk all about our cities (firearms holstered, no panic by the public), so too should law abiding citizens be regarded. I honestly think that all the fervor would be short lived...and that folks would quickly realize... normal everyday people sometimes carry a weapon.

IMO, those that shy away from open carry either buy into the idea that "guns=bad" themselves, or are not willing to fight enough to change the perception. We will only lose more gun rights if we are ever "just happy to have what we've got"!

If we are not constantly working to incrementally regain/recover/advance our gun rights...then we will surely lose them one by one. You can bet the anti's are not resting, we should not be either!

Yes, these changes need to happen slowly and must be presented smartly, but we can not afford to be idle or complacent.
Spartans ask not how many, but where!

ralewis
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 300
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:37 pm

Re: Open Carry.Org Targets Texas

#86

Post by ralewis »

My point is -- in the process of legislating us new rights (which if we're purists here we'd accept that the whole concept of licensing in the first place is unconstitutional) we may cause some initial alarm that results in businesses responding to their customer base who may object to that by posting lawful 30.06 signs. I'm also doubtful that folks will be convinced that guns aren't inherently dangerous as a result of this anymore than you can have/win the abortion argument (whatever side you are on) with someone with deeply convicted views to the contrary. I'm in the Austin area, and I could definitely see this happening in Travis County. I'd expect to see a lot more 30.06 signs. And I'm not sure what will have been gained by all this.

The only way I could see this working is if we eliminated the 30.06 notification and went with a verbal notification (like PA where I used to live) only, which I doubt would ever happen here -- and I'm not sure I'd support anyway since I'm a property rights guy, and folks ought to have the right to post private property to exclude folks with guns, dogs, tophats, etc.

I'm with a few other posters here who'd rather see the employer parking lot, same restrictions as LEOs, etc. be the priorities. I may or may not carry openly if this passes, and it would be nice to have the ability to do so. However, I'm concerned about a few secondary effects.

To me, this is an issue for the courts, not leglislation. Until/unless we have a firm and comprehensive judicial review of the intentions of the 2A, we're going to be stuck with this silly patchwork of state laws and rules that clearly infringe. Until then, I'm content to carry quietly and within the law here in Texas, and I try not to make too many waves. ;-)
User avatar

flintknapper
Banned
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 4962
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 8:40 pm
Location: Deep East Texas

Re: Open Carry.Org Targets Texas

#87

Post by flintknapper »

ralewis wrote: My point is -- in the process of legislating us new rights (which if we're purists here we'd accept that the whole concept of licensing in the first place is unconstitutional) we may cause some initial alarm that results in businesses responding to their customer base who may object to that by posting lawful 30.06 signs.
Possible some places, likely others... (such as Austin). Austin, (where I grew up) is quite the liberal bastion..so I would expect some degree of "reaction" based on liberals perceptions.
I'm also doubtful that folks will be convinced that guns aren't inherently dangerous as a result of this anymore than you can have/win the abortion argument (whatever side you are on) with someone with deeply convicted views to the contrary.

Here...I disagree. While some folks will never be swayed....most will eventually apply a smidgen of intellectual honesty and admit they were wrong. Clearly, guns are NOT "inherently" dangerous. People sometimes misuse them...but I have yet to see a gun get up and go around shooting people.

No doubt...many people believe that the mere presence of a gun means they are in danger. Well, if we never prove it any different, then they will continue to have that notion.

Consider this, (just as ludicrous as the fear of guns):
North Americans believed tomatoes were poisonous until 1820, when Colonel Robert Gibbon Johnson disproved that myth during a public demonstration on the courthouse steps in Salem, NJ

Same thing with firearms, some people just have to be shown. I mean really....after the tenth time you witness ordinary people eating lunch, going to work, traveling, etc...without incident, you should be questioning your prior beliefs. But this will never happen if a certain segment of gun owners are not bold enough to "take it out there".
I'm in the Austin area, and I could definitely see this happening in Travis County. I'd expect to see a lot more 30.06 signs. And I'm not sure what will have been gained by all this.
I agree.... but only because of location and the liberal element in Austin. I would expect the same 30.06 signs to come down eventually...unless the owner is just trying to make a personal/political statement.

Until then, I'm content to carry quietly and within the law here in Texas, and I try not to make too many waves.
As were many thousands of folks before Concealed Carry. In years past many, many... folks kept a handgun in their vehicles, and just kept a low profile. In years past, LEO (unless you were doing something criminal) pretty much looked the other way.

It took a group of people who were NOT "content" with this to get Concealed Carry passed. We should NEVER be "content" when it comes to advancing our gun rights. We have to be smart about it, we have to be persistent and patient, but we must not be afraid to make small "waves". Small waves can erode away the ill-gotten ideas and perceptions some folks harbor.

But make no mistake, inaction, fear and complacency is a recipe for gun rights loss. No broken eggs, NO OMELET!
Spartans ask not how many, but where!
User avatar

iratollah
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 7
Posts: 488
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:58 am
Location: Notrees, TX
Contact:

Re: Open Carry.Org Targets Texas

#88

Post by iratollah »

anygunanywhere wrote:why don't you define that for the rest of the board.
Because if I have to explain it you wouldn't understand anyway...
it's socially unacceptable to be ahead of your time.
L'Olam Lo - Never Again

jimmy
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2004 10:40 pm

Re: Open Carry.Org Targets Texas

#89

Post by jimmy »

Open carry. I'm still thinking about it. I'm for upgrading our firearms freedoms and so I don't oppose open carry. But it's not a high priority for me and I don't believe I personally would carry openly, given the chance. On the other hand, to put things in perspective, concealed carry is very important to me, including the proposals for college campus and workplace carry.
Last edited by jimmy on Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar

nitrogen
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 8
Posts: 2322
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 1:15 pm
Location: Sachse, TX
Contact:

Re: Open Carry.Org Targets Texas

#90

Post by nitrogen »

Witnessing open carry in AZ was part of me getting over my anti-gun-ness...
.השואה... לעולם לא עוד
Holocaust... Never Again.
Some people create their own storms and get upset when it rains.
--anonymous
Post Reply

Return to “General Texas CHL Discussion”