No, I'm saying that large counties in Texas are preventing citizens from getting a CHL. In that way, they certainly are preventing people from carrying in public places. Even if Galveston county was wiped off the face of the earth, the citizens that escaped from Galveston shouldn't be denied access to self defense with a handgun, especially when they may need it the most. There is definitely a problem with the law when these counties can just say they're not processing the CHLs indefinitely. Harris county is one of the big offenders, and they haven't even had to offer up an explanation. There is no explanation. They are denying their citizens of a fundamental constitutional right, indefinitely.Charles L. Cotton wrote: Okay, I misunderstood your comment. I thought you were saying large counties were preventing CHLs from carrying in public places. Ike caused tremendous damage in Galveston so I'm not surprised the portion of the background checks that must be done "on location" were delayed. The Galveston County Courthouse was not operational for many weeks. I don't know about Brazoria County and Harris County wasn't damaged.
There are unreasonable delays to be sure because of the onerous administrative infringements on our rights that shouldn't be there. I can assure you I have an official letter in my hand from the DPS that states unequivocally that my application has been delayed indefinitely. It uses that word exactly. It has been posted here and on their web site. I have been told unequivocally over the phone by DPS clerks that as a representative of the DPS, their interpretation of Gov Code 411.177 allows just such delays. I had similar sentiments re-iterated by the staff of my senator, Mike Jackson and and the staff of Joe Driver chair of the law enforcement committee. They told me the DPS' hands were tied until the county got good and ready to process the background check.Charles L. Cotton wrote:There are delays to be sure and this has been discussed in detail in several different threads. However, DPS hasn't interpreted the current CHL laws as allowing indefinite delays. In fact, DPS has admitted in meetings with Chairman Driver and a representative of Governor Perry that they are "out of statute" (meaning they are late) by as much as 100 days, due to a shortage of personnel. DPS has acknowledged they are not complying with the law, they are not interpreting current law as allowing indefinite delays.
What you must be talking about is delays due to DPS outside of the background check. There are no laws that govern how long the counties can take to complete the backgound check. Since there is no law that governs the county, the only thing the DPS could do is to issue the CHL prior to the background check being completed, and they claim the law does prevent them from doing that. I'm not privy to the meetings you've attended, but I can only tell you that it hasn't changed their policy one iota. People are posting here about 200+ days of delay. I'm at almost 120, and there's no end in sight. There's no doubt about it. I'm experiencing an indefinite delay of a fundamental civil right. Rather than denying it and making excuses for it, you should recognize just how intolerable it is.
"I want to see an elimination of the student loan and taxes requirement."
Let me know when your bill hits the legislature floor. In the mean time, I look forward to supporting any bill that will accomplish this.I have felt this way for a long time.
"I want to see an end to the $140 charge plus $100+ for the training, . . ."
It will certainly never happen if our representatives in the legislature and elsewhere never even propose it. On the other hand, we have a proposed bill that will end this infringement.It'll never happen, but there is no harm in wanting. For clarity, only the initial license fee is $140 and this is reduced by 50% if you qualify for a fee reduction. Renewals are only $70, unless you qualify for the 50% reduction.
Let me ask you this Charles. When it comes to a fundamental constitutional right, how long does the state have to delay before you will recognize that I'm being denied my rights? Would you tolerate your first amendment rights being delayed 120 days? How about over 200 days, when even these statutes recognize that amount of delay as an implicit denial? How would you feel if Opencarry.org couldn't get a license to advertise on billboards or the radio for 120 days? Plus, despite your denials, it's not a fixed delay. There's nothing fixed about it. The word the DPS is using officially is indefinite. Look it up. There is no other context in which that word means anything different. That's not a grossly inaccurate and purely emotional statement. It's just simply a fact.There are delays, but again there are no indefinite delays in the context you are using the term. Overstating the problem doesn't help the open-carry cause. It's much like the absurd statement in the article, "As Texans realize how restrictive their rights are . . . there will be an awakening. Get ready for a showdown in Austin come January.". Texas does not allow open-carry, but otherwise Texas law on guns is very liberal. Grossly inaccurate and purely emotional statements like the one quoted will not garner support in Austin.
Citizens of Texas can't protect society from massacres unless they're armed. People can't be armed effectively while travelling in their car unless they can at least legally step out of their car with it. Read the thread here in this forum today of the Houston woman that was murdered while she filled up with gas. Without a CHL, she couldn't even step out of her car to fill up with gas. A gun concealed in her car wouldn't have helped her. 4) There definitely are indefinite delays in any context you want to look at it. 5) No bills will pass to eliminate these problems if no one proposes them. I'm willing to put my support behind anyone who will propose it.Because 1) I’m far more concerned about preventing a Virginia Tech in Texas than I am people being able to wear their guns in the open; 2) I am far more interested in people not being disarmed going to and from their places of employment; 3) it affects far more people than those in two or three counties for a limited period of time; 4) there are no “indefinite delays” in the context in which you have repeatedly used the term; 5) because unlicensed open-carry isn’t going to pass and we will not let these two bills that are so important to tens of thousands of CHLs die because OpenCarry.org can’t get their own bill introduced and/or doesn't have the horsepower to get it passed.
Finally, you seem to represent the small percentage of people that already have a CHL and those that will tolerate the current situation, and that's fine. I want the laws changed regardless of who supports them. That's why I think the only solution to the problem is in the courts. From that point of view, it's probably better that we not appease anyone. It's better to have a complete ban in order to drive enough support for challenging in the courts. In the courts, it's more likely that the open carry laws will get hit first.
Despite the recent success in the legislature, I and countless other people are being indefinitely denied the right to defend myself, my family, and my community with the most popular firearm for self defense. You support the legislation that infringes on my rights in such a fundamental way. That's a divisive issue, and if that's the last thing we need, I suggest you stop supporting the infringement of my rights. That doesn't sound very pro gun to me. It sounds a lot more like supporting reasonable gun control.I want to note that although I personally oppose open-carry because of the backlash I believe we would face, I still have a link to OpenCarry.org in the links thread here on TexasCHLforum.com. I have read that board and I must say that open-carry supporters are incredibly vicious in their attacks on opponents of open-carry. I went there to invite some of the members to come to TexasCHLforum.com and discuss their views and plans. But when I saw the way they described pro-gun people who disagreed with their position, I decided not to post. As others have noted in another thread, the last thing pro-gun people need now is a divisive fight over open-carry, or any other firearms issue.
Sorry Charles, but if you were sitting in my shoes, I suspect you'd feel the same way. I'll support any bill you get introduced, but what you're supporting is just not enough. I thought it was in August when I applied for the CHL, but clearly now, it's not. I don't accept that this is a take it or leave it proposition. I seriously believe that this isn't going to get resolved until we get court cases filed. I believe we need to be pursuing this in both the legislature and the courts. The TSRA and opencarry.org don't agree with me, but maybe when the open carry bill fails we'll get the court cases. Maybe that's just what we need is to continue to deny the rights of more people just like me. Eventually, the court cases will come.
