TexasCHLforum.com

rm9792 wrote:How would that be different from now? BGs are carrying as we type, laws dont stop them. At least with OC we can see it. I wouldnt open carry but think it should be allowed. Lord, even California allows it.

The first part of your statement is 100% true.

The part about California is more of a half truth. They allowed open carry of handguns, if they were unloaded. Super useful.

Then, the OC advocates decided to organize and OC their unloaded guns around in California. That resulted in the Cali legislators (or overlords, as they prefer to be called) attempting to pass legislation to ban unloaded OC as well. I don't know how that effort turned out.

Cali's experience with OC does seem to lend credence to the idea that OC would lead to more 30.06 postings, which I'm strongly opposed to. I like going to places without anyone knowing I have a gun.

...it turned out like the link in the previous post reported...

...I lived in an OC state growing up... never knew of a problem except for one smart-alecky lawyer...most folks who wanted to just strapped 'em on and went about their business...but that was back when folks minded their own business more...

speedsix wrote:...it turned out like the link ..

Doh. Didn't read it before I posted. Well, that was a big win for OC then!

It irks me when I see the ocdo map, or when people talk about certain states being open carry that are either OC simply because no one does it so no nannystater has banned it, or places like california with unloaded carry.

Sorry, if I can't carry a LOADED gun, then it doesn't really count as carrying to me...more like accessorizing.

...'bout as useful as a tie clip...

74novaman wrote:

speedsix wrote:...it turned out like the link ..

Doh. Didn't read it before I posted. Well, that was a big win for OC then!

It irks me when I see the ocdo map, or when people talk about certain states being open carry that are either OC simply because no one does it so no nannystater has banned it, or places like california with unloaded carry.

Sorry, if I can't carry a LOADED gun, then it doesn't really count as carrying to me...more like accessorizing.

La is an OC state. Try walking in the French Quarter while OCing and see how long it takes before you are face down on the street. Lived in La for 30 years and can't remember seeing a single person OC.

...NOLA's like Kalifornia...it don't count when you're talkin' 'bout Louisiana, USA...wholelotta folks end up face down in the streets there WITHOUT a gun...

...I lived in La only 20 years...but OCed from about 19 on...didn't go much south of Alec unless there was a big reason...it just wasn't a big deal...

speedsix wrote:...NOLA's like Kalifornia...it don't count when you're talkin' 'bout Louisiana, USA...wholelotta folks end up face down in the streets there WITHOUT a gun...

...I lived in La only 20 years...but OCed from about 19 on...didn't go much south of Alec unless there was a big reason...it just wasn't a big deal...

North of Alec? You might as well of been a Yankee.
Yes, NOLA is very different from the rest of the state. I remember many people promoting a US border fence just south of I-10.

rm9792 wrote:How would that be different from now? BGs are carrying as we type, laws dont stop them. At least with OC we can see it. I wouldnt open carry but think it should be allowed. Lord, even California allows it.

I completely agree with you that laws don’t stop the BG’s from carrying. Chances are most of them will conceal as they always have. A few will blatantly carry just because they can. I don’t even disagree that open carry “should” be allowed in theory.

My main issue is more with stereotypes and enforcement especially in large metropolitan areas. We would need a complete buy in from the County/City officials and LEO that everyone is free to carry regardless of what they may look like. I just don’t see that happening. Not right now anyways. Licensed/Concealed is peace of mind for me. No one knows what I’m carrying so no alarm. If the situation arises that I’m ever asked by LEO to produce ID, I give them my DL and CHL and hopefully there will be no further questions. Questions like why I have a gun, is it legal for me to carry (no matter how I’m dressed), what my vehicle looks like, or the color of my….ah hair.

On the flipside, I do believe that there are some people who should not be permitted to carry a firearm. Violent convicted felons, the mentally ill, people with proven addictions to drugs or alcohol, and true domestic violence offenders (I think these laws need much improvement though). I may have left out a few. My point is how would we know? How do you keep these people from open carrying if there is no license that permits proven law abiding citizens to do so, and the assumption is everyone has the right to carry without question? We wouldn’t let them drive a car, but they can open carry down Main St. no problem? I’m all for 2A rights, just with a little common sense behind it to make it safe for all.

I don’t know I could be wrong….hopefully so. But that is my dilemma, two contradictions


Jusster

Jusster wrote:

rm9792 wrote:My point is how would we know? How do you keep these people from open carrying if there is no license that permits proven law abiding citizens to do so, and the assumption is everyone has the right to carry without question? We wouldn’t let them drive a car, but they can open carry down Main St. no problem? I’m all for 2A rights, just with a little common sense behind it to make it safe for all.

I don’t know I could be wrong….hopefully so. But that is my dilemma, two contradictions


Jusster

Well here in the gold star carry state of VA if you can buy a gun you can carry a gun. So the mentally ill (proven), felons, etc are not permitted to buy guns. I bet it is the same in TX. Blood does not run through the streets here too often, and when it does it is usually a thug with his gun in his hoodie, not an OCer with a gun on their hip in a retention holster that does the misdeeds.

You know, no one would say that we should only have licensed religion or licensed speech (other freedoms listed in the bill of rights), but we do this for the 2nd amendment and accept it as just dandy. It comes down to a philosophy thing. Are the citizens in this country to be viewed as "we the people" and thus sovereign, or are we serfs asking permission to be able to exercise those rights God has given us. In truth I think if you are not a violent felon, or mentally ill (a proven danger to society) you should be able to carry any way you darn well please without any license whatsoever.

That is theory and philosophy. We live in the real world where we have to deal with the brady bunch and people whose underpants gets twisted in a knot the moment they think they see a weapon. So like I said before take what you can get and if at this time going for constitutional carry/open carry would tear up everything else you are doing then get what you can. Licensed carry is better than no carry, shall issue is better than may issue.

Jusster wrote:

Jumping Frog wrote:Good guys walking around with holstered handguns are a different story than gangbangers walking around with a "fotay" shoved in their hoodie.

So how does one determine the “good guys” from the “bad guys”? Dress code? I’m not so thrilled about the idea of unlicensed open carry. I see it as a big problem waiting to happen.

If you had ever lived somewhere where open carry was common, you'd realize that it is pretty easy to tell the difference. Gangbangers have typically had multiple "police experiences" already that have taught them they do not want to be caught with a gun. They don't wear holsters, period. You see a guy walking through the grocery store with a handgun openly holstered on his belt, that is not someone I'd assume is a criminal.

Jusster wrote:

Jumping Frog wrote:Good guys walking around with holstered handguns are a different story than gangbangers walking around with a "fotay" shoved in their hoodie.

So how does one determine the “good guys” from the “bad guys”? Dress code? I’m not so thrilled about the idea of unlicensed open carry. I see it as a big problem waiting to happen.


Jusster

Common sense gun laws and reasonable restrictions will resolve the problem of bad guys carrying.

Anygunanywhere

anygunanywhere wrote:
Common sense gun laws and reasonable restrictions will resolve the problem of bad guys carrying.

Anygunanywhere

I could go on.

mamabearcali wrote:

Well here in the gold star carry state of VA if you can buy a gun you can carry a gun. So the mentally ill (proven), felons, etc are not permitted to buy guns. I bet it is the same in TX. Blood does not run through the streets here too often, and when it does it is usually a thug with his gun in his hoodie, not an OCer with a gun on their hip in a retention holster that does the misdeeds.

It has already been proven that laws prohibiting the above mentioned from purchasing guns do not work. That’s one of the primary reasons I have a CHL. As far as who causes blood in the streets, well I think that is debatable. Everything can't be blamed on the thug in a hoodie. If that is the only threat we are looking for then we’ve already lost half the battle. Where I live, in NW Harris County, a lot of the crime is committed by your typical suburbanite.

mamabearcali wrote:

You know, no one would say that we should only have licensed religion or licensed speech (other freedoms listed in the bill of rights), but we do this for the 2nd amendment and accept it as just dandy.

It may not be licensed but it surely is regulated/censored. You can’t tell me you can walk down the street (or TV/radio) and say whatever you want to without repercussions. Privately, yes. Publicly no. But I do agree with you that in theory it should be this way.

mamabearcali wrote:

That is theory and philosophy. We live in the real world where we have to deal with the brady bunch and people whose underpants gets twisted in a knot the moment they think they see a weapon. So like I said before take what you can get and if at this time going for constitutional carry/open carry would tear up everything else you are doing then get what you can. Licensed carry is better than no carry, shall issue is better than may issue.

Completely Agree

Jumping Frog wrote:

If you had ever lived somewhere where open carry was common, you'd realize that it is pretty easy to tell the difference. Gangbangers have typically had multiple "police experiences" already that have taught them they do not want to be caught with a gun. They don't wear holsters, period. You see a guy walking through the grocery store with a handgun openly holstered on his belt, that is not someone I'd assume is a criminal.

Nope, I have never lived anywhere that open carry was common or legal. I will disagree with your assumption that gangbangers who typically have multiple “police experiences” have learned not to carry or be caught with a gun. I'd go as far as say it's a common occurrence that they probably have multiple gun related charges on their record. How hard is it to purchase a holster? You know what they say about assumptions right?

Anygunanywhere wrote:

Common sense gun laws and reasonable restrictions will resolve the problem of bad guys carrying.

Will it? How has that worked so far?

mamabearCali wrote:You know, no one would say that we should only have licensed religion or licensed speech (other freedoms listed in the bill of rights), but we do this for the 2nd amendment and accept it as just dandy. It comes down to a philosophy thing. Are the citizens in this country to be viewed as "we the people" and thus sovereign, or are we serfs asking permission to be able to exercise those rights God has given us. In truth I think if you are not a violent felon, or mentally ill (a proven danger to society) you should be able to carry any way you darn well please without any license whatsoever.

That is theory and philosophy. We live in the real world where we have to deal with the brady bunch and people whose underpants gets twisted in a knot the moment they think they see a weapon. So like I said before take what you can get and if at this time going for constitutional carry/open carry would tear up everything else you are doing then get what you can. Licensed carry is better than no carry, shall issue is better than may issue.

Jusster wrote:
It has already been proven that laws prohibiting the above mentioned from purchasing guns do not work. That’s one of the primary reasons I have a CHL. As far as who causes blood in the streets, well I think that is debatable. Everything can't be blamed on the thug in a hoodie. If that is the only threat we are looking for then we’ve already lost half the battle. Where I live, in NW Harris County, a lot of the crime is committed by your typical suburbanite.

That happens here too, but most violent suburbanite crime seems to be specific (domestic disputes...angry neighbors), most random crime seems to be career criminals and thugs. At this moment in time I have little to fear on the domestic front, and what I worry about most is the career criminal going after me and mine because I am a mom with kids and therefore look like a soft target. So while suburbanites commit crimes, I am not as worried about the financial crimes and domestic disputes because I am not LE, just a mom trying to keep her family safe.

[quote="Jusster]
It may not be licensed but it surely is regulated/censored. You can’t tell me you can walk down the street (or TV/radio) and say whatever you want to without repercussions. Privately, yes. Publicly no. But I do agree with you that in theory it should be this way.[/quote]

I can say pretty much what I wish in most public places. I can't slander someone, threaten someone, be vulagar, or cause public panic (fire in a theater), but outside of that I can say pretty much what I want to. Now is it always advisable to do so, nope. If I want to stand on a corner and say the world is coming to an end on March 28th I can do so. If I want to stand on a street corner and say pink and purple elephants are coming to town most places it is legal to do so. There are some exceptions and places where you may beat the rap but not the ride. As far as relgion goes, well most of the history of this nation religion has been left alone by those in gov't. Now the current admin seems to be having a go at forcing people to do things against their relgion, but I am confident it will be handled in the courts.

Nope, I have never lived anywhere that open carry was common or legal. I will disagree with your assumption that gangbangers who typically have multiple “police experiences” have learned not to carry or be caught with a gun. I'd go as far as say it's a common occurrence that they probably have multiple gun related charges on their record. How hard is it to purchase a holster? You know what they say about assumptions right?

Why do we wear holsters? To keep ourselves and others safe and to facilitate the responsible carry of our firearm. Gangbangers don't care about either thier lives or others or they would not be gangbangers. They live for the moment and have no respect for saftey or responsibility. Open carry attracts attention and whether you like it or not draws people's eyes including the police's eyes. That is why gangbangers won't open carry. They do not want to in any case draw the police's eyes. So while I am certain that gang bangers carry and they might even use holsters on occasion (if they have any sense of self preservation left), they certainly won't do it openly.