Open Carry.Org Targets Texas

[boomerang]

Please allow me to rephrase...I think anyone who feels compelled to carry open is making a statement or showing off.

I feel the same way about people who openly wear religious jewelry or clothing.

[iratollah]

Like I said in another thread, OC proponents should start carrying their long guns around to condition the general public to be comfortable when law abiding citizens go about their daily business openly carrying weapons. Perhaps you can be one of the first to walk into Walmart with a shotgun slung over your shoulder. I'm not aware of any laws that will violate and you can be the one to take the Wally Walk to the next level. Wearing a pistol will be very unintimidating to John Q. Public once they are used to seeing riot guns and EBRs openly carried, and the latter are legal to open carry today.

Uniformed individual wearing a gun is far different from civilians carrying in the presence of uninformed individuals. Why don't plainclothes police open carry? But please address the first paragraph here before you move onto this one.

[HGWC]

This is the part that bothers me--"it's presence cannot be discernible through ordinary observation." An unintentional "flash" at a gas pump could be considered by some: "I saw it through ordinary observation of this person filling up his car, the wind blew his shirt open and there it was...."Brvroom in plain sight!... a GUN!"

It doesn't even have to be a flash. It could be a suspicious bump under your shirt. What does "ordinary observation" mean?

[HGWC]

I think Charles made a (good) point about this (I didn't feel like searching the post for it though) about how many people have been prosecued about "intentionally failing to conceal".

That was very informative, but Charles didn't answer the question completely. The question I asked was how is the law being interpreted by law enforcement, DAs, and the courts. Charles said he knew of two cases where someone was convicted. That was informative, but it left me wondering how many other people have been questioned, warned, harassed, arrested, charged, or tried.

I don't think I would lose too much sleep about it.

I'm not going to lose any sleep over it, but now that I've just received my CHL, it's definitely going to cross my mind as I tuck my .45 with holster under a shirt. Just how far can I lean forward before I unintentionally let the grip print through enough for an ordinary person to recognize the bump as a gun? Just how big of a bump would be considered intentional failure to conceal with a Class A misdemeanor, up to a $4000 fine and up to one year in jail as the consequence. I'll worry just enough to at least let my representatives know that I support the provision in this bill that would eliminate that infringement of my rights.

[flintknapper]

Like I said in another thread, OC proponents should start carrying their long guns around to condition the general public to be comfortable when law abiding citizens go about their daily business openly carrying weapons. Perhaps you can be one of the first to walk into Walmart with a shotgun slung over your shoulder. I'm not aware of any laws that will violate and you can be the one to take the Wally Walk to the next level. Wearing a pistol will be very unintimidating to John Q. Public once they are used to seeing riot guns and EBRs openly carried, and the latter are legal to open carry today.

Uniformed individual wearing a gun is far different from civilians carrying in the presence of uninformed individuals. Why don't plainclothes police open carry? But please address the first paragraph here before you move onto this one.

I think something that many folks are overlooking is the setting in which Open Carry would occur. It is important to make the distinction between what exists NOW vs. what an INFORMED public's reaction would be.

IF/WHEN open carry legislation is introduced, it WILL receive considerable press coverage. IF open carry becomes law...you may be certain that everyone except certain hermits WILL have heard about it.

The general public (having been informed) will not react in shock and horror IMO. Instead...I think you will see varying degrees of acceptance or objection, but certainly not the "panic" that so many seem to think is imminent.

If the entire CHL populace (not a large group) suddenly uncovered (and most won't), it would still be fairly rare to see a person with a gun most places you would go. With open carry...this number may be even less. I honestly think that most folks are not going to pay much attention to it, after the "new wears off".

I'd love to NOT have to dress around my weapon, and it would be a welcome relief in the heat of the year (about 8 months in Texas) to be able to dress comfortably and still remain armed.

Personally, I am not ashamed to show that I am person who accepts responsibility for my own safety. I make no apologies for my support of the 2nd ammendment...and will happily have a conversation with those who hold an opposing view.

I think the time is long over due...for gun owners and supporters of RKBA to show (in a demonstrable way) that we are not the bad guys! Now, I want to be careful to say....that I think it would be a mistake to wear your weapon openly if the sole purpose is intimidate. If your demeanor is aggressive, condescending, and "in your face"...then you will do us all a disservice.

I think that those who would choose to open carry, should recognize that they represent gun owners everywhere...and that they indirectly act as ambassadors for us all.

Their conduct should be exemplary. This applies to CHL's as far as I am concerned.......but honestly, if folks just think "He's a nice guy" but never know you are a gun owner or CHL....what does that do to change public opinion? NOTHING

[HGWC]

As you yourself said, Sun Tzu wrote, "The wise general will not engage in battle unless and until the battle is already won."

If thousands of people contact their representatives supporting open carry, I don't see where we lose the battle even if the bill never even gets introduced.

[mr.72]

Just how far can I lean forward before I unintentionally let the grip print through enough for an ordinary person to recognize the bump as a gun? Just how big of a bump would be considered intentional failure to conceal with a Class A misdemeanor, up to a $4000 fine and up to one year in jail as the consequence. I'll worry just enough to at least let my representatives know that I support the provision in this bill that would eliminate that infringement of my rights.

I think this issue is completely different from the OC issue.

OC is the nuclear bomb method of fixing the current issues, and of course it has virtually zero chances of passing right now as we have discussed for 10 pages on this very thread.

However, I think there is absolutely merit to a change in the law which de-criminalizes unintentional failure to conceal, and makes it absolutely crystal clear what constitutes a failure to conceal, so we are not all so concerned about it. This seems to be the most common reason people cite for their desire to see open-carry passed in TX... kind of goes like this, "it would be nice if I didn't have to worry about unintentionally failing to conceal, but I wouldn't open-carry and don't really support the idea of unlicensed (i.e. legitimate) open-carry". Really what many of these people seem to be saying is, we support less penalty on failure to conceal.

[NcongruNt]

Just how far can I lean forward before I unintentionally let the grip print through enough for an ordinary person to recognize the bump as a gun? Just how big of a bump would be considered intentional failure to conceal with a Class A misdemeanor, up to a $4000 fine and up to one year in jail as the consequence. I'll worry just enough to at least let my representatives know that I support the provision in this bill that would eliminate that infringement of my rights.

I think this issue is completely different from the OC issue.

OC is the nuclear bomb method of fixing the current issues, and of course it has virtually zero chances of passing right now as we have discussed for 10 pages on this very thread.

However, I think there is absolutely merit to a change in the law which de-criminalizes unintentional failure to conceal, and makes it absolutely crystal clear what constitutes a failure to conceal, so we are not all so concerned about it. This seems to be the most common reason people cite for their desire to see open-carry passed in TX... kind of goes like this, "it would be nice if I didn't have to worry about unintentionally failing to conceal, but I wouldn't open-carry and don't really support the idea of unlicensed (i.e. legitimate) open-carry". Really what many of these people seem to be saying is, we support less penalty on failure to conceal.

I'd like to remind you that there is no such crime as unintentional failure to conceal. The law says quite clearly that there must be an intent coupled with failure to conceal in order for there to be a crime committed, thus the name intentional failure to conceal. The law has already been quoted numerous times in this thread, but here it is again:

PC 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE
HOLDER. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license
holder carries a handgun on or about the license holdets person
under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,
and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun.

Intent is difficult to prove unless one openly admits to intentionally failing to conceal, or makes an overt effort to display the gun. I don't see how the law can be less clear here.

[Charles L. Cotton]

This is the part that bothers me--"it's presence cannot be discernible through ordinary observation." An unintentional "flash" at a gas pump could be considered by some: "I saw it through ordinary observation of this person filling up his car, the wind blew his shirt open and there it was...."Brvroom in plain sight!... a GUN!"

It doesn't even have to be a flash. It could be a suspicious bump under your shirt. What does "ordinary observation" mean?

No it can't. "Ordinary observation" means a normal person must be able to look at you and say "there is a gun;" not "there is a bulge that could be a gun;" or "I think he has a gun."

The CHL must intentionally fail to conceal. Intentional conduct is very hard to prove, that's why I could only find two cases where a CHL was convicted for violating 46.035(a). If it were as gray an area as many seem to fear, there would be a lot of convictions folks. If you support open-carry fine, but don't let unintentional failure to conceal be the reason.

Chas.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I think we need to remember two things from the recent past, when deciding what chances open-carry has of passing, and the potential negative response from the general public. First, unlicensed car-carry only passed last session and it was a radical idea to many. For the first time since 1871, Texans could carry a handgun in their car without a license. It took eleven years from the time CHL passed until unlicensed car-carry was achieveable and that was largely because the Legislature was really ticked off at Rosenthal and his ilk who thumbed there nose at the "traveling presumption." Going to unlicensed open-carry is another very large step whose timing probably isn't good.

As for public reaction, there was tremendous media coverage in 1995 and there was a huge negative backlash against people carrying "hidden guns" even after an extensive background check and a training course. It was so bad, we had to create TPC 30.06 in 1997 to stem the spread of the ghostbuster "no gun" decals. This isn't theoretical, it happened! If unlicensed open-carry were to pass (and it won't), then the media would have a field day pointing out that CHLs have a background check done and they attend a training course, but people "walking around openly packing heat" don't. I can hear it now, "you won't know if the man packing heat next to you in the grocery store is a child molester or not, because he doesn't have to have a license to carry that gun." That approach will be intellectually dishonest and alarmist in nature, but the media won't pass up the opportunity to take a shot at us (no pun intended). They did it in 1995 and I haven't noticed in improvement in accuracy in the media's reporting of gun-related stories.

Chas.

[HGWC]

No it can't. "Ordinary observation" means a normal person must be able to look at you and say "there is a gun;" not "there is a bulge that could be a gun;" or "I think he has a gun."

The CHL must intentionally fail to conceal. Intentional conduct is very hard to prove, that's why I could only find two cases where a CHL was convicted for violating 46.035(a). If it were as gray an area as many seem to fear, there would be a lot of convictions folks. If you support open-carry fine, but don't let unintentional failure to conceal be the reason.

Chas.

Perhaps if I were a lawyer, and I had an intricate understanding of what the legal term intentional meant, I'd feel better about it. Your explanation is reassuring, but I'm not sure that beating the rap saves me from the ride. Do you have any stats on the number of arrests that have been made for failure to conceal?

Just to clarify, you're assuring me that if I go out wearing a T-shirt where standing normally the gun is perfectly concealed, but leaning forward and stretching it prints like the devil, there's no chance of me getting arrested or hassled? I was in a restaurant the other day wearing a cotton dress shirt. I spent a bunch of the meal leaning forward, and I was looking at that spot on my hip thinking about how that big gun was going to look there. I suspected it wasn't going to leave much to the imagination. I'm still feeling that "intentional" doesn't entirely cover up that vulnerability.

In any event, it's a significant infringement of my rights that potentially puts me in jeopardy of a Class A misdemeanor just for exercising a fundamental right. Even if you're completely right that it's nothing to worry about, it's perfectly legitimate reason for supporting open carry. I support open carry, any political movement for open carry, and even the less than ideal bill for open carry. I see any representation I can get in the legislature on the issue as a good thing.

[Skiprr]

As you yourself said, Sun Tzu wrote, "The wise general will not engage in battle unless and until the battle is already won."

If thousands of people contact their representatives supporting open carry, I don't see where we lose the battle even if the bill never even gets introduced.

The answer, in my opinion, is because it is not the correct battle. Such a groundswell would be (as nitrogen so eloquently put it) better focused on where and when we can carry, not how. It would be better directed in support of bills that can be won and that would make important differences to the 260,000 or so CHL holders in Texas, as well as thousands of future CHL holders.

Conversely, if thousands of people contact their representatives requesting support of an RKBA-related concept that will be, let's face it, a political hot-potato for any senator or member of congress, we're flooding the aisles with noise and running the risk of desensitizing our legislators to RKBA-related measures that have a realistic chance of passing, that would improve our lives and the state of RKBA in Texas, and that have been in the works for months and years.

It is my humble opinion only, but I think those are the battles we need to be fighting come January 13.

[GrillKing]

[subsonic]

Like I said in another thread, OC proponents should start carrying their long guns around to condition the general public to be comfortable when law abiding citizens go about their daily business openly carrying weapons.

I open carry my rifle when I go hunting. It's too heavy to carry to work every day, so I carry a handgun instead.

[iratollah]

I open carry my rifle when I go hunting.

And this is relevant to my post or unique because...? Do you sling your rifle when you go into the feed store to buy your deer corn? You carry the rifle into the restaurant with you in the evening to avoid the risk of it being stolen from your car? The OC long gun will certainly offer you the same or better protection than a concealed handgun and you can start right away.

Let me know when you're willing to take the OC Wally Walk I suggested. I'll be pleased to meet you and document your experience so that others willing to take up the cause can see how well it went for you.