Open Carry poll by your county population

[tbrown]

Or is Texas really that much more property/business owner friendly than some of these other states?

If that was true we wouldn't have the parking lot law... and 30.06 would also apply to LEO if they don't have a warrant.

I don't like to think that Arizona and even Oklahoma are more gun friendly than Texas, but maybe it's true.

[Right2Carry]

Or is Texas really that much more property/business owner friendly than some of these other states?

If that was true we wouldn't have the parking lot law... and 30.06 would also apply to LEO if they don't have a warrant.

I don't like to think that Arizona and even Oklahoma are more gun friendly than Texas, but maybe it's true.

I am sorry to say it is true and the proof is in the gun carry laws.

[RoyGBiv]

I am FOR OC.
I would not OC myself. But OC would make it easier to carry concealed OWB without worry about unintentionally unconcealing.

[RoyGBiv]

I don't like to think that Arizona and even Oklahoma are more gun friendly than Texas, but maybe it's true.

Not maybe...

[flintknapper]

I just believe that the legialature would feel the sign needed to be more visible than a gun buster sign and would say 'We already have a sign, so just modify it to prevent any carry.' Then those businesses who today don't really know people are carrying would then post signs to prevent open carry and the single sign would prevent concealed carry too. It's the old adage, out of sight, out of mind. When people started open carrying I can garuntee you would see a new crop of signs go up.

Well the newest state to go open carry is Oklahoma. We'll see how much pandemonium ensues.

"Pandemonium?" You asked Keith about two signs and he explained (quite well) why the Texas Legislature won't require property owners to post two signs. How does his position suggest "pandemonium" in Texas?

Chas.

It doesn't.

He was speaking of pandemonium in Oklahoma (which isn't going to happen) and it was clearly meant as sarcasm...not a challenge to Keith's post.

[DEB]

I am FOR OC.
I would not OC myself. But OC would make it easier to carry concealed OWB without worry about unintentionally unconcealing.

This is exactly the reason I am for OC. Before anyone states that it isn't a problem, tell that to that young soldier arrested in Metroplex in Killeen, where L.E. first stated that the reason he was arrested was due to the bulge he saw.

[Heartland Patriot]

I am FOR OC.
I would not OC myself. But OC would make it easier to carry concealed OWB without worry about unintentionally unconcealing.

This is exactly the reason I am for OC. Before anyone states that it isn't a problem, tell that to that young soldier arrested in Metroplex in Killeen, where L.E. first stated that the reason he was arrested was due to the bulge he saw.

And this is what I meant by the law doesn't seem clear enough, though I guess my way of explaining was lacking. It might be perfectly, crystal, clear to US on this forum...but I'm certain that the law is NOT as clear to others who are NOT part of this forum. The odds are certainly on our side considering how few cases have come up like this...but when it comes to matters of the law, I don't like playing odds. I want it to be a standard that I know and follow...and so do others.

[Charles L. Cotton]

So when discussing open-carry, understand that in terms of signage, TPC §30.06 must remain applicable only to concealed-carry, or it's a deal-breaker.

That's the way it reads already, AFAICT. A generic "NO GUNS" sign is sufficient to prohibit rifles, shotguns, unlicensed handgun carry by travelers, MPA in non-employer parking lots, commissioned security guards with handguns, and many other combinations of guns and people. The only gun exceptions I see in 30.05 are for concealed handguns carried by licensed people, and for handguns or other weapons carried by LEO.

That's correct, but the bill Shane McCrary, President of LoneStarCDL, claims to have drafted and provided to Rep. Lavender in 2011 amended TPC §30.06 and removed the word "concealed" everywhere it appeared. When it was pointed out that the amendment would make one sign applicable for both concealed and open carry, Mr. McCrary argued that LoneStarCDL would never accept a different standard for open-carry and concealed-carry. (Not that LoneStarCDL has any influence whatsoever.) He flatly refused to amend the bill to leave TPC §30.06 as it currently reads.

This is why I'm trying to head off this potential problem before it occurs again. I cannot stress it too much; amending TPC §30.06 to apply to open-carry as well as concealed-carry is a deal breaker and it will generate opposition.

Chas.

[PArrow]

I'm for open carry, while I doubt I would open carry very often I would like the option. I would also like to see the laws changed to put the burden on 30.06 put on the store/office owner, you don't want a weapon in your store you provide a safe and secure place to store the weapon while I'm there. I remember a club in Alabama that had a "Check your gun here" sign at the coat and hat check by the door. And it was common to see someone pull out a handgun and check it.

[Oldgringo]

I just believe that the legialature would feel the sign needed to be more visible than a gun buster sign and would say 'We already have a sign, so just modify it to prevent any carry.' Then those businesses who today don't really know people are carrying would then post signs to prevent open carry and the single sign would prevent concealed carry too. It's the old adage, out of sight, out of mind. When people started open carrying I can garuntee you would see a new crop of signs go up.

Well the newest state to go open carry is Oklahoma. We'll see how much pandemonium ensues.

"Pandemonium?" You asked Keith about two signs and he explained (quite well) why the Texas Legislature won't require property owners to post two signs. How does his position suggest "pandemonium" in Texas?

Chas.

It doesn't.

He was speaking of pandemonium in Oklahoma (which isn't going to happen) and it was clearly meant as sarcasm...not a challenge to Keith's post.

Yepper, it's kinda' like the lawless pandemonium that's predicted when a legal precinct in Texas decides to have a wet/dry election. It never happens after the wets prevail and life goes on as usual. The outcome would be much the same after an OC victory at the polls and/or in the courts. FWIW, I wouldn't OC but I would like to see it legalized.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I am FOR OC.
I would not OC myself. But OC would make it easier to carry concealed OWB without worry about unintentionally unconcealing.

This is exactly the reason I am for OC. Before anyone states that it isn't a problem, tell that to that young soldier arrested in Metroplex in Killeen, where L.E. first stated that the reason he was arrested was due to the bulge he saw.

It's not a problem! You point to an arrest that was allegedly made for something that was not illegal. If a LEO is going to do that, then they will arrest someone for open-carrying when that's not illegal either. Don't say that won't happen; just read OpenCarry.org (if you can stomach it) and you'll see countless examples. All an officer would have to do is claim the person "display[ed] a firearm or other deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm" in violation of TPC §42.01(a)(8). Simply putting one's hand on their openly-carried pistol would support such an arrest.

Open-carry does not solve any problems. OC supporters do not help their cause by trying to create a problem to solve. TPC §46.035(a) could not be more clear, one must "intentionally" fail to conceal their handgun before they have created a violation. Arguing otherwise will put people in the position of having to testify in public hearings that this is not a problem under current law and this hurts the open-carry cause.

Sell open-carry for what it is, an option that does not negatively impact public safety.

Chas.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I just believe that the legialature would feel the sign needed to be more visible than a gun buster sign and would say 'We already have a sign, so just modify it to prevent any carry.' Then those businesses who today don't really know people are carrying would then post signs to prevent open carry and the single sign would prevent concealed carry too. It's the old adage, out of sight, out of mind. When people started open carrying I can garuntee you would see a new crop of signs go up.

Well the newest state to go open carry is Oklahoma. We'll see how much pandemonium ensues.

"Pandemonium?" You asked Keith about two signs and he explained (quite well) why the Texas Legislature won't require property owners to post two signs. How does his position suggest "pandemonium" in Texas?

Chas.

It doesn't.

He was speaking of pandemonium in Oklahoma (which isn't going to happen) and it was clearly meant as sarcasm...not a challenge to Keith's post.

Yepper, it's kinda' like the lawless pandemonium that's predicted when a legal precinct in Texas decides to have a wet/dry election. It never happens after the wets prevail and life goes on as usual. The outcome would be much the same after an OC victory at the polls and/or in the courts. FWIW, I wouldn't OC but I would like to see it legalized.

Yep, just like the argument that in 1995 negative reaction to concealed-carry was so strong that it almost killed CHL before it got started. Just like the argument that this was such a severe problem it was necessary to file and pass HB2909 in 1997 to save CHL in Texas.

Oh . . . wait a minute . . . those things did happen! Oh darn, I guess I have to take back my "agree" sign, don't I?

Chas.

[C-dub]

I'm for open carry, while I doubt I would open carry very often I would like the option. I would also like to see the laws changed to put the burden on 30.06 put on the store/office owner, you don't want a weapon in your store you provide a safe and secure place to store the weapon while I'm there. I remember a club in Alabama that had a "Check your gun here" sign at the coat and hat check by the door. And it was common to see someone pull out a handgun and check it.

I'm not checking my gun with a stranger. I'll go somewhere else.

[tommyg]

I think Texas needs to stay concealed carry I'm living in Austin (not by choice my employer forced me to move here from Arlington) I do not share the opinions of the liberal gun hating inhabitants of this city. If open carry were allowed in Austin the signs would go rampent and carry would be hurt bad over it. out of sight is out of mind we need to keep it this way. In some parts of texas open is ok but not in Austin. We need to work on Campus concealed carry and eliminate the gun free zones that are an open invitation for the

United Brotherhood of Burglars and Rapists to practice their profession

[Jumping Frog]

I think Texas needs to stay concealed carry I'm living in Austin (not by choice my employer forced me to move here from Arlington) I do not share the opinions of the liberal gun hating inhabitants of this city. If open carry were allowed in Austin the signs would go rampent and carry would be hurt bad over it.

Austin isn't any more liberal than Cleveland, OH, Columbus, OH or Detroit MI. All three of those cities allow open carry. I've open carried in each of them. Signs aren't "rampant". There are places they exist, but 95% of my day was not affected by signage.