SB17 OC Bill On Intent Calendar for 3-16-2015.

[TexasCajun]

And so it begins. A pretty good oc bill is 2/3 of the way to becoming law (passed in the Senate with the governor on board to sign it), ending a restriction that's been in place for 125 years. But rather than see it for the victory that it is, some are going to myopicly bash it because of a few minor concessions. I hope it's not the case, but I suppose this will be the drum beat for the next 2yrs.

[AJSully421]

So when the new 30.06 & 30.07 laws take effect, will all the old signs be invalid? What if businesses don't post new signs?

30.06 will not change. 30.07 will cover open carry. If the law passes as written at this point, it would become effective January 1, 2016

You are right, the "rules" of 30.06 will not change, but if you read the current language of SB17, the required wording on the sign / document does change. This makes every single current 30.06 sign non-compliant and unenforceable on 1/1/16. The property owner who wishes to exclude the most law abiding adult group in Texas will have to rub two brain cells together, and get a compliant sign installed for both CC and OC. This will take up lots of space. Most will only pick one sign. My bet is that it will be 30.07. Or, I am wrong and they will post 30.06 and will verbally notify OCers.

By the way, I have run in to a few of the old signs that reference the old section before it was 30.06... maybe section 29ee? I love seeing those old, unenforceable, signs as I walk right past them.

I would not want to try and convince a jury that 3 or 4 word changes on a sign meant that I had not received notice.

You won't have to. The State has to prove that you did receive proper notice... and the law itself states that you did not due to the wording. Any competent defense attorney would get it tossed long before any trial. Besides... what were you doing to get made while carrying?

[RPBrown]

My two cents. Saving lives? A guy is OC in the bank line and is a threat to the robber, so the robber waits until the room clears or he goes across the street to another bank to rob, or being high on drugs he freaks and shoots the OC. No life saved. Perhaps worse. Faster draw? In my view you are going to spend more time contemplating what you are going to do than actually doing it. A second isn't going to save your life unless you draw before the threat presents itself. The benefit for me is that I can wear an OWB holster under my oversized and long shirt. I might be able to do it right now, but with OC there is just no issue of printing at all or fear of open exposure. I doubt, and I hope, that few people in congested cities choose to habitually OC. Snake hunting in Big Spring, sure. Shopping for longerie at Neiman's, well, not so much.

I agree with what you have said but want to add my .02.

It doesnt matter if you are carrying concealed or open, if you are not willing to use it to protect yourself, or if you hesitate in drawing but decide to draw anyway, you most likely will be the first target. When I decided to get my CHL, it was due to being robbed twice at gunpoint. I decided that I was not going to be a victim again. I have had my CHL since 97 and thank God every day that I have not had to use it. However, I train often in case the time arises that I have to pull my weapon. I will most likely not OC in most cases but I do ride a motorcycle and from time to time, my shirt comes up and exposes my weapon. This would eliminate any chance of prosecution, even if I failed to cover it back up. Also would allow me the option to OC while hunting in the case I needed to run to the store and forget to cover.

Again, just my .02

[Jason K]

I see absolutely no utility to open-carry whatsoever. Some people want it for various reasons, none of which I've heard have anything to do with utility. The testimony today that open-carry reduces crime is utterly without any support or evidence. The testimony that someone carrying concealed would not have time to respond to a deadly attach whereas one carrying openly would be able to respond was laughable! My cover garment adds less than 1/2 second to my draw, if that.

I'm supporting it because I'm a good soldier and the decision was made to promote open-carry.
Chas.

Despite your lack of enthusiasm, I appreciate your efforts (as well as those of TSRA and NRA) to get this change in the law. I only wish that TSRA and NRA had supported OC earlier....that way, we may not have had to put up with the likes of CJ Grisham, Kory Watkins, and the various OCT-types.

That said, I will still CC 99% of the time. I can see some utility to OC under limited circumstances, but those times will be quite rare. And the amendments to SB17 aren't really that onerous...esp. the delayed date of implementation. DPS will need that time for new instructor curriculum. Overall, I think Texas gun owners and CHL holders will be better for it.

Keep up the good work, Charles. 2017 isn't that far away....

[mojo84]

It doesn't matter what is passed, there will always be some that would find something to complain about.

There are very few that have the ability to quick draw at the speed necessary to make a significant difference in the outcome of a situation. I think all this quick draw talk stems from childhood memories of watching old westerns with the main street duels.

Now, IF we ever get to the point where there are ten to fifteen+ people in a bank or store carrying their guns in open view, that may serve as a deterrent and cause a bad guy to have a second thought. One person carrying won't have much, if any, impact. I just don't think a regular person is going to have the same deterrent effect as a visible uniformed cop that is carry his weapon.

I like OC for the occasional time that I need or want to remove my cover garment or not have to worry about tucking my shirt over my gun. In other words, convenience and comfort, is why I like it.


Just my opinion.

[Tracker]

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I see absolutely no utility to open-carry whatsoever. Some people want it for various reasons, none of which I've heard have anything to do with utility. The testimony today that open-carry reduces crime is utterly without any support or evidence. The testimony that someone carrying concealed would not have time to respond to a deadly attach whereas one carrying openly would be able to respond was laughable! My cover garment adds less than 1/2 second to my draw, if that.

I'm supporting it because I'm a good soldier and the decision was made to promote open-carry.
Chas.

I'm sure you'd be in favor of reducing the charge for display from a Class A to a Class C but I don't understand why that has never been brought to the legislature. That Class A would still apply at universities if campus carry passes.

[RHenriksen]

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I see absolutely no utility to open-carry whatsoever. Some people want it for various reasons, none of which I've heard have anything to do with utility. The testimony today that open-carry reduces crime is utterly without any support or evidence. The testimony that someone carrying concealed would not have time to respond to a deadly attach whereas one carrying openly would be able to respond was laughable! My cover garment adds less than 1/2 second to my draw, if that.

I'm supporting it because I'm a good soldier and the decision was made to promote open-carry.
Chas.

I'm sure you'd be in favor of reducing the charge for display from a Class A to a Class C but I don't understand why that has never been brought to the legislature. That Class A would still apply at universities if campus carry passes.

Political capital is finite, you have to budget it each session on what your priorities are. If you spread it too thinly across too many different goals, you get... nothing (or a lot less than you could have if you'd prioritized).

[Charles L. Cotton]

By the way, you guessed wrong.

Bad guy with knife would have either left, picked another store, or not killed anyone on that particular day, or got shot for his troubles.

Your logic assumes bad guy with knife, in full view of an armed police officer, would still maim, injure and kill.

Your logic, is more of a lack thereof.

Whether it's a law-enforcement officer, or someone licensed and OC'ing, the effect is the same.

And even if the bad guy goes ahead with his plan, the OC law didn't hurt anyone, and logically, would have probably helped.

If arguments aren't logical, they are useless.

Is this directed to me? If so, I'll respond, otherwise not.

Chas.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I. . . Ultimately, what it boils down to for me is that unless there's a good reason to prohibit something it should not be prohibited. And there's no good reason why Open Carry should be prohibited.

That is precisely how you pass some bills when quantifiable impact is not likely or possible. Once you warn of a nonexistent threat or claim a benefit that either does not exist or is speculative, your credibility in Austin is gone.

Chas.

[txglock21]

It doesn't matter what is passed, there will always be some that would find something to complain about.

There are very few that have the ability to quick draw at the speed necessary to make a significant difference in the outcome of a situation. I think all this quick draw talk stems from childhood memories of watching old westerns with the main street duels.

Now, IF we ever get to the point where there are ten to fifteen+ people in a bank or store carrying their guns in open view, that may serve as a deterrent and cause a bad guy to have a second thought. One person carrying won't have much, if any, impact. I just don't think a regular person is going to have the same deterrent effect as a visible uniformed cop that is carry his weapon.

I like OC for the occasional time that I need or want to remove my cover garment or not have to worry about tucking my shirt over my gun. In other words, convenience and comfort, is why I like it.


Just my opinion.

This question has nothing to do with your post. I quoted it just because it made me think of something I want to ask. My bank has a "gun buster" sign on the door, no 30.06. I have always just walked past it and smiled because of C/C. I'm just wondering if/when open carry passes and they just leave this one silly sign up, would somebody still open carry pass this sign? I know I would still C/C just not to be hassled or told to leave because of it. I'm not an in your face kind of guy. I very rarely go inside anyway, but....
Curious on y'alls thoughts.

[TexasCajun]

It doesn't matter what is passed, there will always be some that would find something to complain about.

There are very few that have the ability to quick draw at the speed necessary to make a significant difference in the outcome of a situation. I think all this quick draw talk stems from childhood memories of watching old westerns with the main street duels.

Now, IF we ever get to the point where there are ten to fifteen+ people in a bank or store carrying their guns in open view, that may serve as a deterrent and cause a bad guy to have a second thought. One person carrying won't have much, if any, impact. I just don't think a regular person is going to have the same deterrent effect as a visible uniformed cop that is carry his weapon.

I like OC for the occasional time that I need or want to remove my cover garment or not have to worry about tucking my shirt over my gun. In other words, convenience and comfort, is why I like it.


Just my opinion.

This question has nothing to do with your post. I quoted it just because it made me think of something I want to ask. My bank has a "gun buster" sign on the door, no 30.06. I have always just walked past it and smiled because of C/C. I'm just wondering if/when open carry passes and they just leave this one silly sign up, would somebody still open carry pass this sign? I know I would still C/C just not to be hassled or told to leave because of it. I'm not an in your face kind of guy. I very rarely go inside anyway, but....
Curious on y'alls thoughts.

Based on reaction from some to the senate's passage of licensed oc with additional provisions, I imagine there will be quite a few who will open carry past the gun buster signs and then point out how those signs cannot be enforced. I hope that the fallout will be limited to the appearance of 30.07 signs, but I won't be surprised if there's an increase in 30.06 in addition to 30.07s.

[mojo84]

By the way, you guessed wrong.

Bad guy with knife would have either left, picked another store, or not killed anyone on that particular day, or got shot for his troubles.

Your logic assumes bad guy with knife, in full view of an armed police officer, would still maim, injure and kill.

Your logic, is more of a lack thereof.

Whether it's a law-enforcement officer, or someone licensed and OC'ing, the effect is the same.

And even if the bad guy goes ahead with his plan, the OC law didn't hurt anyone, and logically, would have probably helped.

If arguments aren't logical, they are useless.

Is this directed to me? If so, I'll respond, otherwise not.

Chas.

I suspect it's directed at me. I chose not to respond.

[Ruark]

I like OC for the occasional time that I need or want to remove my cover garment or not have to worry about tucking my shirt over my gun. In other words, convenience and comfort, is why I like it.

Same here. I'm not an OC fanatic, but I do want the freedom to OC when I need or want to. As the guy said back during the early hearings, "sometimes I want to tuck in my shirt, or give my jacket to my wife because it's cold." Maybe I'm working on our place out here, driving the tractor or whatever, in the regulation jeans and t-shirt, and I want to take a break and run to the cafe for lunch, without having to go inside and put on a tropical shirt to cover up my firearm, or run down to the HEB to pick up something. Lots of reasons. I just don't want to have to constantly think about it.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I hope that a lot of OCT/OCTC/CATI folks are watching this debate. If anyone watching thinks that unlicensed open-carry had any chance of passage, then they are unwilling to to fact political reality.

Chas.

Mr. Cotton,
Can you enlighten me what the useful purpose of "licensed" open carry is supposed to achieve? It is my concern that each and every LEO will feel obligated to enforce "licensed" open carry by approaching every open carry individual to check that person's compliance with said law and asking for proof of approval to open carry. Why would I subject myself to this forced interaction by each LEO, maybe even several times just on one particular outing. In addition, I think these LEO's are going to on very heightened alert. At this time I can carry concealed standing shoulder to should with an LEO and he/she never knows I'm carrying and has no concern with me. Now, I do understand if I encounter a bad guy and need my firearm, I do have to draw from concealment.
Thanks,
Mike

I see absolutely no utility to open-carry whatsoever. Some people want it for various reasons, none of which I've heard have anything to do with utility. The testimony today that open-carry reduces crime is utterly without any support or evidence. The testimony that someone carrying concealed would not have time to respond to a deadly attach whereas one carrying openly would be able to respond was laughable! My cover garment adds less than 1/2 second to my draw, if that.

I'm supporting it because I'm a good soldier and the decision was made to promote open-carry.
Chas.

Open carry is easier and you just admitted it's faster, and it is.

I don't care if I have an INFIDEL cap on, and a shoot me first shirt on as well. If I decide to open carry because though it SHOULD be constitutionally allowed, but because it's finally at least legally allowed, I should be able to do it, and not have to wait around if I'm not required to take more training, just because others WILL be required to take modified training to become licensed and that training has not been prepared yet. Frankly, that's not my problem.

You need to read my response again; I did not say open-carry was faster. I said the testimony was laughable. I heard that bogus claim for the first time today during the hearing.

Chas.

With all due respect you stated your cover garment added about a half a second. I would say that implies open carry is faster.

Since you and Strat9mm insist in taking my comment out of context, I guess I'll expound it it.

On a stop watch, it's about 1/2 second faster for ME to draw the same gun from the same holster without a cover garment. Note, I said the same gun and same holster and I said me, not you, not someone else, and certainly not everyone else.

More importantly, the topic isn't IDPA competitive shooting; it's self-defense. Drawing form concealment is not slower even by 1/2 second when you never get the chance to draw from an open holster because the bad guy shot you on sight, or disarmed you.

Chas.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I don't see trading strategic advantage for tactical speed to be and even trade tho...

This is the voice of experience. Theory is great, right up to the point one learns the theory was wrong.

Chas.