TexasCHLforum.com

terryg wrote:

If one group, by pushing for OC that will probably only benefit a small portion of the carrying public manages to, yet again, dis-rail progress on campus carry and parking lot language that will benefit a much larger portion of the carrying public, then the net effect is a negative one.

Do you know something the rest of don't?

I am curious to know how any attempts to advance the idea of OC had any effect on campus carry or the parking lot issue? Are you suggesting that both bills failed (or were disrailed/derailed) because of the folks who want to see OC in Texas?

flintknapper wrote:terryg wrote:

If one group, by pushing for OC that will probably only benefit a small portion of the carrying public manages to, yet again, dis-rail progress on campus carry and parking lot language that will benefit a much larger portion of the carrying public, then the net effect is a negative one.

Do you know something the rest of don't?

I am curious to know how any attempts to advance the idea of OC had any effect on campus carry or the parking lot issue? Are you suggesting that both bills failed (or were disrailed/derailed) because of the folks who want to see OC in Texas?

I am sorry - I was confusing the issues. It was the Voter ID bill that impacted the Campus Carry bill - not OC. Sorry again for spreading mis-information.

terryg wrote:progress on campus carry and parking lot language that .... benefit a much larger portion of the carrying public,......

And campus carry has the potential to derive much longer term benefits. Having young minds gaining knowledge and acceptance of the safe exercise of the RKBA right on the bastions of the liberal propaganda institutions could be huge for 2A reforms 10 to 20 years down the road.

Your point still stands, though. Parking lot, and campus carry both have immediate perceived societal gains. Those gains of course a long way in deflatingg Brady Bunch style anti-self-defense claims.
I also, heartily agree about the long term affects of campus carry. As a keystone event, I would prefer campus carry over employer parking lots if I had to choose which event comes first, in a timeline. With campus carry first, employee parking is a given down the line.

terryg wrote:

flintknapper wrote:terryg wrote:

If one group, by pushing for OC that will probably only benefit a small portion of the carrying public manages to, yet again, dis-rail progress on campus carry and parking lot language that will benefit a much larger portion of the carrying public, then the net effect is a negative one.

Do you know something the rest of don't?

I am curious to know how any attempts to advance the idea of OC had any effect on campus carry or the parking lot issue? Are you suggesting that both bills failed (or were disrailed/derailed) because of the folks who want to see OC in Texas?

I am sorry - I was confusing the issues. It was the Voter ID bill that impacted the Campus Carry bill - not OC. Sorry again for spreading mis-information.

O.K. now I'm with you.

Honest mistake, no worry.

I don't know abojut that stuff about derailing other bills. Maybe I missed something. I guess I'm not politician enough to 'get it'.

All I know about working with people from cub scouts to FFA to 4H to church board and union steward, is leave personalities at the door. Its all about goals and issues. I work with people when I cant stand their guts if we agree on an issue. I fight my best friend when we disagree. Secret deals and klicks are wrong. Shine the light of day on everything.

Nobody pushing a gun rights bill is my enemy unless he tries to sneak in some back door deal that says "you can vote against that other guy's gun bill and I won't complain if you just vote for my bill instead". That's dirty backdoor politics, I don't care what party youu're in or what side you're on and I don't care if its parking lots or campus or open carry.

Be honest and open. None of that backroom stuff.

AND ...If they go hide in NEW MEXICO or OKLAHOMA or 'CHUBBING', They are listed as 'RESIGNED DURING SESSION' AND the business at hand GOES ON WITHOUT THEM! PERIOD.
- ALSO they are BANNED for the rest of the session, as in, not ALLOWED IN THE DOOR.

-Grrrrrr!

-Double Grrrrrr!

whats the deal with crossing state lines? Is that some sort of politician trick? and whatis chubbing?

jecsd1 wrote:whats the deal with crossing state lines? Is that some sort of politician trick? and whatis chubbing?

Chubbing is a delay tactic used to keep a bill from coming to the floor for a vote.

delay and blocking tactics which also block legit bills.

Disgraceful.

But why do they cross state lines? Is there some rule that says you won't be penalized if you're "out of the state?"

The reason they crossed state line is because then no Texas law enforcement agency could force them to attend the sessions.

@G.A. Heath:

Yes, those of us on THIS forum generally understand what the text of the laws means...and tend to agree with each other...however, tell that to the gentleman from Round Rock who accidentally exposed and then got himself a ride to jail along with an arrest record EVEN THOUGH the judge threw it out...I'm not worried about a CONVICTION if I'm doing things right, but I do worry about a nervous nelly type who calls in MWG, and the cops of course not wanting to lose their lives while "on the job" arrest first and let the courts sort later...but I don't have the kind of cash required just to throw around getting a bull arrest expunged from my record...and I have NEVER been arrested for ANYTHING. In fact, I've only ever had one speeding ticket, and that was one of those "country club" speed zones way outside where the city limits SHOULD have been. THAT is why I would like to see OC, just so that I never have to worry about accidental exposure, not so I can go swaggering around with a hog-leg on.

and if it saves just one innocent from a unjust police record....

Cost a fortune to return to a clean record, when innocent to start with.
----Totally wrong!

During the last session, one thing that the OCDO folks made an issue of was claiming that Accidental Failure To Conceal was a crime. For the most part they did not claim that innocent people were being arrested for accidental FTC, just that FTC in general was a crime. As a matter of personal policy I do not let half truths, Misinformation, or lies, go unchallenged if I can.

Heartland Patriot wrote:@G.A. Heath:

Yes, those of us on THIS forum generally understand what the text of the laws means...and tend to agree with each other...however, tell that to the gentleman from Round Rock who accidentally exposed and then got himself a ride to jail along with an arrest record EVEN THOUGH the judge threw it out...I'm not worried about a CONVICTION if I'm doing things right, but I do worry about a nervous nelly type who calls in MWG, and the cops of course not wanting to lose their lives while "on the job" arrest first and let the courts sort later...but I don't have the kind of cash required just to throw around getting a bull arrest expunged from my record...and I have NEVER been arrested for ANYTHING. In fact, I've only ever had one speeding ticket, and that was one of those "country club" speed zones way outside where the city limits SHOULD have been. THAT is why I would like to see OC, just so that I never have to worry about accidental exposure, not so I can go swaggering around with a hog-leg on.

Taking the number of CHL's each year from 1996 through 2010 (2010 is estimated), there have been 3,770,107 CHL-man-years. I think I can recall hearing of three alleged arrests for unintentional failure to conceal. Let's be overly cautious in our calculation and we'll use ten arrests in our formula: 10/3,770,107 = 2.652444612314717e-6 (I don't even know what that is! I think it's equates to 0.00000265.)

Do OC supporters really want to use the smoke screen of arrests for unintentional failure to conceal as a reason to pass open-carry? If so, credibility is at risk and I can promise that some Senator or Representative on a committee is going to inquire about the number and ratio of arrests for unintentional failure to conceal. Over-selling your case can be costly.

Chas.