TexasCHLforum.com

Elvis wrote:Just because you have a right to do something, doesn’t necessarily make it the right thing to do.

Like praying in public? Or reading a Matt Bracken book in public? Or a gay couple holding hands in public? Or voting for McCain? Or watching reality TV? Or carrying a firearm?

casingpoint wrote:

Sounds nuts.

Seems fine to me. Only problem is the police occasionally overreact, but that just means that sometimes the police need to be educated as well as the general public.

casingpoint wrote:

A group of people sitting around a Houston park with shotguns and AR's while having burgers and barbeque...to "educate" the general public that good, law-abiding people can openly gather with long-guns and have fun without harming anyone

Sounds nuts.

That's precisely what many people say about concealed carry of handguns, or gun ownership in general.

...not that I'm an advocate of carrying long guns in the open.

mr.72 wrote:

casingpoint wrote:

A group of people sitting around a Houston park with shotguns and AR's while having burgers and barbeque...to "educate" the general public that good, law-abiding people can openly gather with long-guns and have fun without harming anyone

Sounds nuts.

That's precisely what many people say about concealed carry of handguns, or gun ownership in general. . .

And these people don't know when they are standing or sitting next to an armed CHL, but they will know when they see a handgun carried openly.

Chas.

Frost wrote:

casingpoint wrote:

Sounds nuts.

Seems fine to me. Only problem is the police occasionally overreact, but that just means that sometimes the police need to be educated as well as the general public.

I'm not sure how relevant Virginia's experience with open-carry of handguns at a picnic is when compared to open carry of rifles and shotguns. Having a handgun in a holster on your belt is visually much different from having people with AR-15s and tactical shotguns slung over their shoulders. You can be sure there will be some people with their short AR-15s festooned with every imaginable accessory on Picatinny rails, vertical fore-grips, "tacktical" slings and collapsible stocks. There is nothing wrong with any of these accessories or these guns, but to a large segment of the population, it's going to scare the snot out of them! The media will have a field day condemning the "easy access to assault weapons!"

The irony in this is the stated purpose of long-gun picnics is to get Texans used to seeing good people carry guns openly, so this can be used to promote open-carry of handguns. But open-carry of long guns will probably be far more intimidating to the general public than handguns, so this could backfire not only in terms of restrictions on long guns, but in hurting the effort for open-carry of handguns.

When we set out to educate people, we must remember that all we can control is the material presented, not the lesson learned by those in attendance. We should also remember that first impressions are often the lasting ones.

As I mentioned, Texas law was changed as a direct result of the legal carrying of rifles and shotguns at the Republican Convention in Houston. It was quite a fight to keep the bill that passed from doing more than allowing cities to ban firearms at parades and political gatherings. I'd hate to see a concerted effort to bring this issue up in the legislature again, perhaps with an "assault" weapons ban in tow. I'm not saying it would pass, but the old saying about gun battles is equally true of political battles; the best ones are the ones you don't have to fight.

Chas.

Just to update folks:

This billboard has gone up on I-35 northbound from San Antonio toward Austin:



The model is Lori Townsend from Houston, featured on page 20 of this magazine:

http://www.canadianfirearmsjournal.com/ ... 008-03.pdf

Very interesting. Thanks for the link KB.

That's impressive; billboards aren't cheap!

Chas.

I just don't understand the fascination with open carry. I am not against it per se, but I can't see how we really gain anything, or how it helps us in the fight to preserve our gun related rights.

We all know that Joe Q. Public has a very short memory. This short memory helps us with concealed carry. As far as most of the non-carrying public is concerned, it's out of site, out of mind. In our current politically correct obsessed society open carry would risk turning a great number of people against us. We certainly aren't going to gain any more supporters of gun rights due to the ability to open carry, so why take that risk? Why rub thier nose in it, and awaken the sleeping unsympathetic masses?

It's not a tactical advantage against the bad guys to have your weapon in plain site. In fact, in some cases the worst type of criminals may take it as a challenge and a way to get their hands on additional weapons. Just because you have a pistol on your hip doesn't mean you are going to strike fear into BG's and will be immune to their evil doings. It doesn't works for LEO's, why would it work for the average untrained individual? I tend to think that open carry would decrease your odds of prevailing in a multiple BG situation. It would certainly move you to the top of their target list. I for one have no interest in being the person they concentrate their efforts on.

The advantage we have is concealed carry. BG's don't know you are carrying, and the element of surprise is your greatest edge, if you practice and train. I just can’t see what we gain except for a right that in most cases is better left unexercised.


I might be missing something, but it's just my .02.

ScubaSigGuy wrote:I just don't understand the fascination with open carry. I am not against it per se, but I can't see how we really gain anything, or how it helps us in the fight to preserve our gun related rights.

We all know that Joe Q. Public has a very short memory. This short memory helps us with concealed carry. As far as most of the non-carrying public is concerned, it's out of site, out of mind. In our current politically correct obsessed society open carry would risk turning a great number of people against us. We certainly aren't going to gain any more supporters of gun rights due to the ability to open carry, so why take that risk? Why rub thier nose in it, and awaken the sleeping unsympathetic masses?

It's not a tactical advantage against the bad guys to have your weapon in plain site. In fact, in some cases the worst type of criminals may take it as a challenge and a way to get their hands on additional weapons. Just because you have a pistol on your hip doesn't mean you are going to strike fear into BG's and will be immune to their evil doings. It doesn't works for LEO's, why would it work for the average untrained individual? I tend to think that open carry would decrease your odds of prevailing in a multiple BG situation. It would certainly move you to the top of their target list. I for one have no interest in being the person they concentrate their efforts on.

The advantage we have is concealed carry. BG's don't know you are carrying, and the element of surprise is your greatest edge, if you practice and train. I just can’t see what we gain except for a right that in most cases is better left unexercised.


I might be missing something, but it's just my .02.

I couldn't have said it better myself! Not enough to benefit, and the element of surprise is integral... to me. I refuse to give the crook any advantage over me, of course i'm not speaking for all chl's, I choose to be the quiet insignificant guy in the back until I decide it is time.

I agree too. I thought about this thread:

http://texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_Forum ... it=walmart

Concealed you kind of have an option to not act and not get 2nd guessed as opposed to "hey dude you had a gun and you didn't do anything, what's wrong with you?"

-Cain

The argument is not whether OC is superior to CC; it is irrelevant. The argument for legalization is that there is no valid reason why OC should be illegal.

For me, it's a matter of restricting freedom of choice. I believe in having less laws that restrict personal freedom, rather than more. Just because I might not choose to OC, for whatever reason, it is not a valid reason to prevent others from doing so.

For me it's like mandatory motorcycle helmet laws. I would normally wear a helmet, but I don't like being told that I have to. And, occasionally I might want to hop on the bike for a quick ride to the store and decide to not to wear a helmet. I believe the decision should be mine, not the government or some lobby.

Ditto on ScubaSigGuy...

ScubaSigGuy wrote:I just don't understand the fascination with open carry. I am not against it per se, but I can't see how we really gain anything, or how it helps us in the fight to preserve our gun related rights.

For me, it all comes down to rights and licensing. We should be able to carry without getting permission from the government, just like the 2A says. The open carry movement will die a complete death on the day that unlicensed concealed carry becomes legal.

Until then, if unlicensed carry is only going to be allowed through open carry, then I'll continue to support the movement.