TexasCHLforum.com

i'm all for it!!!! i like the idea of having a choice. also no litigation if you print. but i still prefer to carry concealed. i like the element of surprise. hey to each is own right? lets go texas we're next!!!!

I'm am still happy that Texas doesn't allow a person who's been convicted of dangerous crimes to carry. Like a person who has assaults, family violence, burglary, etc. I don't want any and every thug out there carrying freely, with no worry about being charged. Our police force have very dangerous and tough jobs, I think letting just anyone carry freely makes it a bit harder on them. I'm glad Texas does background checks and sends denial letters to those who have certian charges on their backgrounds. I have no sympothy for assaults, burglaries, family violence, excessive DWI's, etc. that's my 2 cents on the topic.

infoman wrote:I'm am still happy that Texas doesn't allow a person who's been convicted of dangerous crimes to carry. Like a person who has assaults, family violence, burglary, etc. I don't want any and every thug out there carrying freely, ....

Neither does Arizona -- it's just that now, if you are not a prohibited person, you don't have to get a permit to legally carry concealed in Arizona.

Texas (and Arizona) law does not realistically restrict anyone convicted of a dangerous crime from carrying right now -- if criminals want to carry in violation of the law, they do. Texas law only "restricts" those who choose to obey the law. This has always been (and still is) the failure of "gun control" law -- it only disarms the good guys and the convicted felons who have decided to get their lives straight.

Because strict gun control has been the standard for so long in this country, we forget that the the CHL law is also a gun control law, just not as controlling as the Brady bunch et al would like. It doesn't keep genuine thugs from carrying, it just prevents law abiding Texans who are otherwise eligible, but haven't shelled out the $140 plus class fees, fingerprints, etc etc from carrying. Arizona has now moved away from this (while still allowing citizens to get a permit so they can comply with the gun control laws of Texas and other CHL-type states. ) Arizona has achieved an end goal...Texas is still at a less free stage...

74novaman wrote:1. The safety issue of just anyone carrying a gun without any necessary training or even knowledge about a gun scares me a little.

For Arizona it only allows unlicensed people to conceal the same gun they could carry openly before.

For Texas it wouldn't really be that much different than MPA. I know a lot of antis predicted blood in the streets if we passed MPA but I haven't seen it. I also haven't seen a lot of parking lots posted to prohibit MPA. There are some posted 30.06 but the ones I know had those signs before MPA anyway.

An oddity in AZ's new law?

At least some think that under the new version of the law, if you have a concealed weapons permit in AZ, you are STILL REQUIRED to carry it with you when you have a concealed handgun, regardless of the fact that if you don't have a permit (and are otherwise eligible to have a gun) you can carry concealed anyway.

Or maybe you only need a permit to carry in certain locations, like restaurants? (IIRC, for along time it was illegal to carry in AZ restaurants that served alcohol...I believe that changed last year or so).

http://www.arizonarifleman.com/2010/04/ ... ess-carry/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

According to an email I received from a state legislator, the permitless concealed carry law doesn’t apply to…get this, people who have a permit to carry a concealed firearm.

Basically, if you have a CCW permit in Arizona, you must continue to have the permit on you while carrying, as the new law does not affect or supersede the existing one regarding permits. If you don’t have a permit, you can — once the law comes into effect — carry concealed without a permit.

The actual part of the law this is apparently referring to reads:

A. A. The department of public safety shall issue a permit to carry a concealed weapon to a person who is qualified under this section. The person shall carry the permit at all times when the person is in actual possession of the concealed weapon and is required by any other law to carry the permit. If the person is in actual possession of the concealed weapon and is required by any other law to carry the permit, the person shall present the permit for inspection to any law enforcement officer on request.

To me, it sounds like you only need the permit in certain circumstances (which stinks), but I dunno. Will be interesting to see this play out.

The Annoyed Man wrote:Those that can't adapt will move to California.

Your are right drjoker---

!!!!!TAM HAS FOUND THE PLAN !!!!!!!

Pass it the soonest and get those poor sad people to california, as soon as possible, so they can be happy.

( )

WIN-WIN !!!

Now every business in Arizona will immediately put up "No guns allowed" signs to disallow those who choose to carry from entering

That was my first thought when I read about this the other day. Hope it doesn't happen. It hasn't been allowed to happen in Colorado, by law. At least not yet.

TX CHL 1997
CO CHP 2005

I don't think there will be too much of that. What with unlicensed open carry and licensed concealed carry for a while now, I think that people are kind of used to it there.