TexasCHLforum.com

As I've said more than once, we're blessed that we have spent the past 8 summers in western so-called Gold Star Open Carry states. Even where it's legal, it just isn't done. I suspect that once the 'new' wears off, it won't be done in Texas either......if OC passes.

I, for one, do not need the attention that walking around with a 'big iron on my hip' (ode to Marty Robbins) would bring. Yes, one could color me ambivalent on the subject of OC in Texas.

jmra wrote:I personally believe most businesses will just deal with it verbally as customers complain. One big sign on the door is already ugly. I have to wonder how many will put up 2 big ugly signs. Of course we could get lucky and businesses take down their 30.06 sign and replace it with a 30.07 sign.

I want separate signs for each action type. Then only the ones with enough space for a couple dozen signs would be able to stop us from carrying mare's legs, Dardicks, WFARs, etc.

As far as the signs go, it will not take manufacturers long to come up with a single decal or piece of signage that contains both 30.06 and 30.07, just like the posters that combine all labor and safety law requirements for posting. Businesses will not take the time to decide they are OK with CC but not OC, or vice versa -- they have more important priorities. When somebody OCs into the store and a customer complains to the manager, the business will simply order the one sign that covers both, post it, and be done with it.

IMHO, if OC passes here my biggest fear is that it will be much like Colorado after they legalized recreational marijuana. It has been illegal for so long that there will be so many people, relatively speaking, doing it that it will draw a lot of unwanted attention and backlash possibly even to the point of regret. It is true that in other states OC has mostly been a non-issue, but it has also been legal in most of those states for quite some time or it was never illegal. And given that Texas is such a great state and has attracted so many libs here for various reasons over the past decade or more it has changed the culture a little.

ELB wrote:As far as the signs go, it will not take manufacturers long to come up with a single decal or piece of signage that contains both 30.06 and 30.07, just like the posters that combine all labor and safety law requirements for posting. Businesses will not take the time to decide they are OK with CC but not OC, or vice versa -- they have more important priorities. When somebody OCs into the store and a customer complains to the manager, the business will simply order the one sign that covers both, post it, and be done with it.

Combining the two will make one big sign and I suspect many business owners will not want that plastered in their front window. Also, the labor law signs are usually in areas only accessible to employees.

TVGuy wrote:

txcharvel wrote:Something I get really tired of hearing is that if a business puts up a 30.06 sign then we'll know not to support them. This makes sense if you only want to go from your house to Wal Mart and back. Maybe HEB if you're lucky enough to have one close you.

I want to be able to go about my business without being hindered. If I want to buy a cheap bottle of wine and dessert at Whole Foods to take home to my wife, I want to do it without having to disarm. I carry to protect myself and my family if needed. I don't want to be bothered by a 30.06 sign any more than I want to be robbed in their parking lot. I don't want them in my business anymore than I want to be in their business other than to purchase their fairly priced prodcuts on occasion.

I get the argument, I just don't see the logic in resigning myself to that line of thought.

The simple fact that we'll have to wait to see proven is that open carry will result in more 30.06 signs. Even if it's one, it's one too many.

Seriously - I would say there are plenty of options to visit that are CHL friendly other than Wal-Mart. I carry every day and haven't been in a Wal-Mart in years.

This is true if you live in a big city, but not for millions of Texans living in small towns with just one Brookshire Brothers or a small Wal-Mart. I agree with txcharvel that simply walking to the store next door may not be an option for many people and if an alternative exists, then it may be a distant second choice.

"Just go somewhere else" may not be a realistic option. It also assumes that other merchants won't follow suit. Remember, most of these folks are part of their local Chamber of Commerce and they talk among themselves frequently. As many others have said, I suspect open-carry will be a non-issue for folks in rural Texas, but a major one in big cities, at least for a while. Police and sheriff's departments are going to be getting man-with-a-gun calls and they are going to respond. How long this goes on will depend on several factors, including public education. Unfortunately, the education the public has received on open-carry has been overwhelmingly negative.

I don't know what will happen in response to open-carry, but the experience of other states is not nearly as relevant as what happened in Texas from 1995 until Sept. 1, 1997 when TPC §30.06 came into effect. Those who were in Texas during that period and had a CHL know it wasn't pretty.

Chas.

C-dub wrote:IMHO, if OC passes here my biggest fear is that it will be much like Colorado after they legalized recreational marijuana. It has been illegal for so long that there will be so many people, relatively speaking, doing it that it will draw a lot of unwanted attention and backlash possibly even to the point of regret. It is true that in other states OC has mostly been a non-issue, but it has also been legal in most of those states for quite some time or it was never illegal. And given that Texas is such a great state and has attracted so many libs here for various reasons over the past decade or more it has changed the culture a little.

I share your concern. The people most likely to carry openly are those who have been participating in long gun demonstrations and the gentleman who was arrested at the Capitol yesterday. As we have seen, it doesn't take thousands of people to get the attention of the media; it just take a few when they are willing to use in-your-face tactics.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

TVGuy wrote:

txcharvel wrote:Something I get really tired of hearing is that if a business puts up a 30.06 sign then we'll know not to support them. This makes sense if you only want to go from your house to Wal Mart and back. Maybe HEB if you're lucky enough to have one close you.

I want to be able to go about my business without being hindered. If I want to buy a cheap bottle of wine and dessert at Whole Foods to take home to my wife, I want to do it without having to disarm. I carry to protect myself and my family if needed. I don't want to be bothered by a 30.06 sign any more than I want to be robbed in their parking lot. I don't want them in my business anymore than I want to be in their business other than to purchase their fairly priced prodcuts on occasion.

I get the argument, I just don't see the logic in resigning myself to that line of thought.

The simple fact that we'll have to wait to see proven is that open carry will result in more 30.06 signs. Even if it's one, it's one too many.

Seriously - I would say there are plenty of options to visit that are CHL friendly other than Wal-Mart. I carry every day and haven't been in a Wal-Mart in years.

This is true if you live in a big city, but not for millions of Texans living in small towns with just one Brookshire Brothers or a small Wal-Mart. I agree with txcharvel that simply walking to the store next door may not be an option for many people and if an alternative exists, then it may be a distant second choice.

"Just go somewhere else" may not be a realistic option. It also assumes that other merchants won't follow suit. Remember, most of these folks are part of their local Chamber of Commerce and they talk among themselves frequently. As many others have said, I suspect open-carry will be a non-issue for folks in rural Texas, but a major one in big cities, at least for a while. Police and sheriff's departments are going to be getting man-with-a-gun calls and they are going to respond. How long this goes on will depend on several factors, including public education. Unfortunately, the education the public has received on open-carry has been overwhelmingly negative.

I don't know what will happen in response to open-carry, but the experience of other states is not nearly as relevant as what happened in Texas from 1995 until Sept. 1, 1997 when TPC §30.06 came into effect. Those who were in Texas during that period and had a CHL know it wasn't pretty.

Chas.

Part of the potential problem, I think, is that open carry has been banned in Texas for so long, and the lunatic fringe of the activists pushing it have gotten so loud and obnoxious, that you're guaranteed to have people not just wearing but parading their holsters just because they can, and "scurrin' the wimmin 'n chillern" in an act of childish spite. And yes, this will tick off some business owners, and yes, it will make life uneasy for honest and unassuming gun owners quietly going about their daily business.

Thing is, this is a situation where the only way to avoid ticking them off will be to maintain an infringement of rights, to maintain the status quo, and that's not exactly right or moral either. In all honesty, things wouldn't have gotten this far if this situation had been rectified years, decades ago. The loonies would have had to find some other cause to latch on to and damage through their "friendship," and open carry would be a non-issue. And in that vein, if the status quo is maintained, the loonies will only get -louder-, and the backlash worse, when it eventually hits. Kicking the can down the road again will only make it hurt more.

Just my $0.02.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:
I share your concern. The people most likely to carry openly are those who have been participating in long gun demonstrations and the gentleman who was arrested at the Capitol yesterday. As we have seen, it doesn't take thousands of people to get the attention of the media; it just take a few when they are willing to use in-your-face tactics.

Chas.

For those unaware of the events that went on outside of the chambers yesterday, here is an article http://www.myfoxaustin.com/story/280972 ... ee-hearing" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Keith B wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:
I share your concern. The people most likely to carry openly are those who have been participating in long gun demonstrations and the gentleman who was arrested at the Capitol yesterday. As we have seen, it doesn't take thousands of people to get the attention of the media; it just take a few when they are willing to use in-your-face tactics.

Chas.

For those unaware of the events that went on outside of the chambers yesterday, here is an article http://www.myfoxaustin.com/story/280972 ... ee-hearing" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thank you - was just about to ask.

CATI was talking about wearing their guns OWB with socks that have a picture of a gun on them. Anyone aware of this happening? I thought that was going to be why the person was arrested.

mojo84 wrote:CATI was talking about wearing their guns OWB with socks that have a picture of a gun on them. Anyone aware of this happening? I thought that was going to be why the person was arrested.

It kind of was. He had a cap gun under the sock which is why he got arrested.

Thanks guys… you're elaborating on my original fear and what I meant in the OP when I referenced the OCT people who have damaged our cause.
These are the same loons who would likely abuse this new law in an effort to "educate the public" on guns.

You all just stated it more clearly than me.

TVGuy wrote:

mojo84 wrote:CATI was talking about wearing their guns OWB with socks that have a picture of a gun on them. Anyone aware of this happening? I thought that was going to be why the person was arrested.

It kind of was. He had a cap gun under the sock which is why he got arrested.

At least he had a cap gun under it. I got the impression from their Facebook page they were going to try to claim their real gun was concealed because it was in the sock.

The level of idiocy never ceases to surprise me.

It is somewhat ironic to me another state is working towards allowing concealed carry while we are working to allow open carry.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/2015021 ... sentatives" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;