Page 2 of 2
Re: A practical approach to OC
Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 7:24 pm
by bizarrenormality
RPB wrote:As I said, Texas already has open carry and no license or fees or shootin' test or written test are even required. Just open carry a longer gun, rifle or shotgun.
I know ... size matters to some people. But still, on a balancing scale ... more places we can be armed, or rather reducing the number of places we are forced to be totally defenseless, is more of a priority in my mind than the size of a gun we open carry so everyone can see it, and if the only benefit of open carry is to be sure everyone sees it, then bigger is better anyway, and we already have that.. no license/tests/fees required and a 30.06 sign doesn't even keep out the people who can open carry a rifle/shotgun now, because it doesn't even apply.
By that logic we also have unlicensed concealed carry. Just put the rifle or shotgun in a duffel bag.
Re: A practical approach to OC
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 7:47 pm
by MikeHoncho
Wow. Thanks for the update. I honestly did think my approach was the simplest.
If licensed OC has a better chance of passage, is there any chance TSRA or any other organization will pick it up this coming session?
I understand there are more pressing issues like finally getting campus carry done but if it really is just a simple small bill...thats doable right?
Re: A practical approach to OC
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 9:02 pm
by Charles L. Cotton
MikeHoncho wrote:I understand there are more pressing issues like finally getting campus carry done but if it really is just a simple small bill...thats doable right?
Perhaps my comments were misleading. Passing open-carry will not be simple by any means. An open-carry bill can be written in a short and simple format that does not open massive sections of the Penal Code to anti-gun amendments, unlike the absurd thing that was introduced in 2011.
Chas.
Re: A practical approach to OC
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 1:24 am
by Originalist
Charles L. Cotton wrote:MikeHoncho wrote:I understand there are more pressing issues like finally getting campus carry done but if it really is just a simple small bill...thats doable right?
Perhaps my comments were misleading. Passing open-carry will not be simple by any means. An open-carry bill can be written in a short and simple format that does not open massive sections of the Penal Code to anti-gun amendments, unlike the absurd thing that was introduced in 2011.
Chas.
Sir,
How would you suggest going about that, what sections would you open to amendment? TIA.
Re: A practical approach to OC
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 11:44 am
by Charles L. Cotton
AFCop wrote:Charles L. Cotton wrote:MikeHoncho wrote:I understand there are more pressing issues like finally getting campus carry done but if it really is just a simple small bill...thats doable right?
Perhaps my comments were misleading. Passing open-carry will not be simple by any means. An open-carry bill can be written in a short and simple format that does not open massive sections of the Penal Code to anti-gun amendments, unlike the absurd thing that was introduced in 2011.
Chas.
Sir,
How would you suggest going about that, what sections would you open to amendment? TIA.
In phase 1 I'd simply repeal the TPC §46.035(a) requirement to conceal the handgun. I would do other things in phase 2 (2015) to address the appearance of the word "concealed" in various code provisions, but I can't give details in an open forum. (I know anti-gunners monitor the Forum.) There are ways to deal with phase 2 that lessen the risk of anti-gun amendments.
I realize some open-carry supporters won't like this approach because it takes longer, but it's safer. Sorry I can't explain in greater detail.
Chas.
Re: A practical approach to OC
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 12:02 pm
by speedsix
...I'm kinda like that li'l monkey with his hand stuck in the jar...I ain't lettin' go of the marble I have...CHL...and I won't knowingly endanger that to get OC...I've had both and CHL has many more benefits to me ...and none of the problems...
Re: A practical approach to OC
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 12:44 pm
by couzin
speedsix wrote:...I'm kinda like that li'l monkey with his hand stuck in the jar...I ain't lettin' go of the marble I have...CHL...and I won't knowingly endanger that to get OC...I've had both and CHL has many more benefits to me ...and none of the problems...
Re: A practical approach to OC
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 2:05 pm
by RPB
couzin wrote:speedsix wrote:...I'm kinda like that li'l monkey with his hand stuck in the jar...I ain't lettin' go of the marble I have...CHL...and I won't knowingly endanger that to get OC...I've had both and CHL has many more benefits to me ...and none of the problems...
it takes longer, but it's safer
Children (a/k/a Liberal Female Democrat Representatives/Senators a/k/a they of little understanding who think all inanimate objects such as guns are inherently evil) can take small spoonfuls of mashed potato easier than when you try to put the entire potato down their throat at once, though it might be tempting, it's the only way it actually works, because too much to digest at once, comes back up later in ways that aren't desired.
Re: A practical approach to OC
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 3:52 pm
by Originalist
Charles L. Cotton wrote:AFCop wrote:Charles L. Cotton wrote:MikeHoncho wrote:I understand there are more pressing issues like finally getting campus carry done but if it really is just a simple small bill...thats doable right?
Perhaps my comments were misleading. Passing open-carry will not be simple by any means. An open-carry bill can be written in a short and simple format that does not open massive sections of the Penal Code to anti-gun amendments, unlike the absurd thing that was introduced in 2011.
Chas.
Sir,
How would you suggest going about that, what sections would you open to amendment? TIA.
In phase 1 I'd simply repeal the TPC §46.035(a) requirement to conceal the handgun. I would do other things in phase 2 (2015) to address the appearance of the word "concealed" in various code provisions, but I can't give details in an open forum. (I know anti-gunners monitor the Forum.) There are ways to deal with phase 2 that lessen the risk of anti-gun amendments.
I realize some open-carry supporters won't like this approach because it takes longer, but it's safer. Sorry I can't explain in greater detail.
Chas.
Perhaps a PM, or when I get back from Kuwait and am in Houston, a meet? perhaps a shooting range... lol.... I'd be interested in doing some of the leg work.
Re: A practical approach to OC
Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2012 6:01 pm
by MikeHoncho
AFCop wrote:Charles L. Cotton wrote:AFCop wrote:Charles L. Cotton wrote:MikeHoncho wrote:I understand there are more pressing issues like finally getting campus carry done but if it really is just a simple small bill...thats doable right?
Perhaps my comments were misleading. Passing open-carry will not be simple by any means. An open-carry bill can be written in a short and simple format that does not open massive sections of the Penal Code to anti-gun amendments, unlike the absurd thing that was introduced in 2011.
Chas.
Sir,
How would you suggest going about that, what sections would you open to amendment? TIA.
In phase 1 I'd simply repeal the TPC §46.035(a) requirement to conceal the handgun. I would do other things in phase 2 (2015) to address the appearance of the word "concealed" in various code provisions, but I can't give details in an open forum. (I know anti-gunners monitor the Forum.) There are ways to deal with phase 2 that lessen the risk of anti-gun amendments.
I realize some open-carry supporters won't like this approach because it takes longer, but it's safer. Sorry I can't explain in greater detail.
Chas.
Perhaps a PM, or when I get back from Kuwait and am in Houston, a meet? perhaps a shooting range... lol.... I'd be interested in doing some of the leg work.
I agree. There are probably some of us that would put in some effort. Is there really any chance of this getting off the ground though? Even as an back burner item to campus carry?
Re: A practical approach to OC
Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2012 6:52 pm
by smoothoperator
speedsix wrote:...I'm kinda like that li'l monkey with his hand stuck in the jar...I ain't lettin' go of the marble I have...CHL...and I won't knowingly endanger that to get OC...I've had both and CHL has many more benefits to me ...and none of the problems...
I feel the same way about loosening the standards. I see a lot more benefit to OC than making it easier for people with criminal records to get a CHL, and that includes deferred adjudication, home burglars, wife beaters, etc.