TexasCHLforum.com

Just to pick a nit, the bills have to pass committee and make it to the floor for a vote. I guess Grisham dot sl have magic pixie dust to sprinkle on Straus to make sure this happens.

Interesting first posts guys, I guess CJ has called for an OC march on this forum?

Actually there are now 4 OC bills filed that I know of, the newest bill looks a lot like HB106. Coming here and lecturing us about rights is not going to help your cause, but keep in mind most people here want complete progress on the issue, OC, unlicensed carry, removal of off limits locations, and more ALL are things we want and will work for but we are not going to demand only one way of doing things while insisting that all other ways are unacceptable. If I were suddenly granted all the authority and power of the Supreme Court of the United States and could one thing and one thing only I would invalidate all gun control laws. I know that is not going to happen so I want ot keep moving the ball forward and if we can return the kickoff and score right off the bat then that is great, but that will not be my game plan because I know that we can move the ball forward every chance we can even it it is only a yard, and that will win us the game if we do it better than the other guys.

Miguel Reynaga wrote:So far there are three bills introduced for the House but more are to come. I will be communicating with my local rep this coming week. He's assured me he is submitting something similar to HB195.
Why is it so hard to understand that we already HAVE this right, guaranteed to us by BIRTH. Why must we be licensed to use it. You do NOT need a license to speak freely or write freely. You don't need a license to operate this forum. You don't need a license to deny being illegally searched or to refuse to answer questions in court. So WHY should I need a license for my 2nd amendment rights?
For those with CHL let them keep it, they can hide all they want but should they choose not to hide then they can do so freely.
If you surrender your rights, even a little, then you don't deserve them.

We're hiding? Is that really what you think? Are you in some way disqualified from having a CHL? Is that why you are so bitter towards those that have a CHL?

I guess we all knew these folks would be coming out of the woodwork the closer we got to the legislative sessions.

Okay, I can't help myself, I have to respond. I guess it the trial lawyer in me coming out. I suspect CJ won't respond in detail, it'll just be more ranting.

CJ Grisham wrote:After all, these are the same organizations (NRA/TSRA) that said we wouldn't last six months, we were hurting any chance of open carry passing in the 84th Legislature, and continue to say we have no political clout while ignoring our achievements.

Show me where the NRA, TSRA or I have said OCT would only last 6 months?
What achievements? All you've done is create a battle to pass open-carry when it was almost a certainty before you decided to walk into stores with long guns. Do you count negative TV and radio news casts an accomplishment? Do you think the fiasco in Houston where Quanell X made you look like an incompetent novice on every major network TV station in the Houston viewing area? Was it an accomplishment when you went to Oklahoma and openly carried a handgun, then refused to state that you had a license from some state such that your actions were not unlawful? (You stated on Gun Talk Radio that you would have to carry a rifle even if licensed open-carry passed because your conviction cost you your license.)

CJ Grisham wrote:These are also the same groups that have perpetuated the liberal fear mongering by attacking the public display of certain firearms.

You do have a convenient memory. The only thing we did was try to get you and OCT to stop carrying long gun into private property and in your demonstrations. We expressly stated that it was causing problems with legislators in Austin and it was generating negative news coverage. This can be confirmed in the Open Carry Report podcast and in the recoding of Gun Talk Radio when I was a guest and you called in. You later made public statements that OCT would no longer demonstrate with long guns. You even stated this policy change was due to the fact that you/OCT came to realize that that type of demonstration was counterproductive.

CJ Grisham wrote:Well, it's been 18 months and we're larger than ever.

Do you have anything other than your Facebook page and Facebook closed group? Both of those have shown little "growth" in months. I suspect it's your increasingly radical, hate-filled posts that are driving people away.

CJ Grisham wrote:Open carry is a virtue certainty next year. We are heavily involved at both the state and grassroots level in the political game. We were heavily involved in several races around Texas that got us pro-2A candidates in primaries and general.

What races were you involved in? Give some specifics.

You say open-carry is a "virtue [sic] certainly;" do you mean HB195 unlicensed open-carry? If you are going to claim an OCT victory, then anything other than HB195 will be a loss because you made that clear on your latest podcast.

CJ Grisham wrote:Charles Cotton is agitated because his and Alice Tripp's attempts to bully me and our members didn't work. It seems obvious the NRA/TSRA is dependent upon licensing away your gun rights because many states use their training and certification efforts in the CHL process.

I've never spoken to any of your members and the only thing Alice or I ever tried to get you to do is abandon the counterproductive tactic of carrying long guns into private property. (Again, this is documented in the Open Carry Report podcast and the Gun Talk Radio program.) You vowed not to stop, but as I mentioned earlier, you eventually did. How is that bullying?

CJ Grisham wrote:And why is, yet again, the NRA attacking pro -2A groups who are (successfully) fighting to bring more gun rights to Texas? In fact, why hasn't either organization submitted such legislation themselves? Instead, they preemptively attack us for daring not to budge on our rights.

While some might call you a pro-gun group, there are others who think your are an anti-gun group in disguise, based upon the damage you have done to the open-carry effort and the focus you have drawn to TPC §30.06.

Once again you claim success when you haven't passed a single bill, nor have you killed an anti-gun bill.

CJ Grisham wrote:I'm an Endowment Life and Golden Eagles member of the NRA, so I'm not speaking from the outside here. I've paid my dues, so to speak.

Wait a minute. You have stated on a few occasions, including Gun Talk Radio, that you tore up your NRA member card and resigned from the organization. Now you claim to be a member. Which is the truth?

CJ Grisham wrote: Over the past 20 years, how many bills has the NRA sponsored to lower the cost of the CHL, make it easier to obtain, or even do away with it as a requirement altogether?

Well, we got the 50% reduction for seniors, free for active military and those discharged less than a year before applying, and a flat fee of $25 for all military veterans both for the initial and renewal licenses.

CJ Grisham wrote:I learned pretty quickly that my money is best served supporting a national organization that isn't interested in licensing my rights away - National Association for Gun Rights.

This statement speaks volumes about you and OCT and I need not say more.

CJ Grisham wrote:What Cotton here won't admit is that homegrown groups like Open Carry Texas, Texas Carry and Come and Take It Texas are the reason we will get open carry next year.

Again, are you talking about HB195, unlicensed open carry? You must be since you have described HB106 as a "crappy bill" and that your members should say "no no no no" to anything other than HB195.

CJ Grisham wrote:The NRA/TSRA have done nothing but ride our coattails and try to undermine our efforts. They've virtually demanded that we stop exercising our rights because the gun control extremists weren't happy with such blatant exercising of a right. Instead of standing up to them, they stood against law abiding gun owners.

The only thing we tried to get you to do was stop carrying long guns into private property. You did precisely that, claiming it was your decision and it was made because you learned that that was not a good tactic.

CJ Grisham wrote: It's a sad day that Charles Cotton continues his attacks on our members without cause. He must be getting desperate and bitterly clinging to his relevance. Perhaps he should focus more on unity and gun rights and less on splintering gun owners.

I've never attacked your members, so this is just your latest lie. I haven't even attacked you personally, just your counterproductive tactics. This post of yours however is a clear indication that the gloves have come off. I have a 35+ year history of working for gun owners and the Second Amendment and I'll put my record against your as often as you like. The next time you attack me personally, be ready for your entire recent history and the truth about your legal problems to be fully aired here on the Forum. You called me and asked to bury the hatchet. I pointed out that I had not attacked you personally and that I wanted you to stop lying about the NRA. You agreed, but the false attacks about the NRA continued on the OCT website.

Chas.

Does anyone have a list of what businesses have put up 30.06 signs due to OCT walks?

Miguel Reynaga wrote:So far there are three bills introduced for the House but more are to come. I will be communicating with my local rep this coming week. He's assured me he is submitting something similar to HB195.
Why is it so hard to understand that we already HAVE this right, guaranteed to us by BIRTH. Why must we be licensed to use it. You do NOT need a license to speak freely or write freely. You don't need a license to operate this forum. You don't need a license to deny being illegally searched or to refuse to answer questions in court. So WHY should I need a license for my 2nd amendment rights?
For those with CHL let them keep it, they can hide all they want but should they choose not to hide then they can do so freely.
If you surrender your rights, even a little, then you don't deserve them.

Who is your Representative?

You can stop telling Noah about the flood. I have my personal opinion as to what the framers of the U.S. Constitution meant and I agree with yours. Unfortunately, neither of our opinions matter. What matters is what at least 5 judges in the U.S. Supreme Court think. You OCT folks ignore that fact that the dicta in Heller makes it clear that the SCOTUS is leaning toward holding that a license to carry or even to own a firearm is held constitutional, if/when such a case is presented. Recently, a case challenging the New Jersey "may carry" statute was upheld at the federal trial court and appellate court level and the SCOTUS refused to hear that case. This means that NJ can continue to require a "special need" to obtain a carry permit. The great decision in Peruta (9th Circuit) struck down the "special needs" clause in San Diego County's carry permit system. It's important to note that the focus wasn't on unlicensed carry, but upon how restrictive can a state law be when deciding whether to even issue a permit. We are a long long way from getting a SCOTUS decision that the Second Amendment protects a right to carry a handgun outside our home without a permit.

There's no reason to get agitated or emotional with other pro-gun people simply because they recognize the legal and political reality of the wold we live in. Rational people work to change things using methods that have proven successful for decades. Novices demand that which they cannot achieve, ignore or even ridicule the hard-fought accomplishments of others who have made a very real difference in the lives of others, all while claiming some mythical moral high ground.

Chas.

Selcouth wrote:Does anyone have a list of what businesses have put up 30.06 signs due to OCT walks?

That would be impossible to compile since property owners don't post the rationale behind their decision to post. Russell may have the capability of determining how many 30.06 signs went up after a certain point in time. If so, then someone would have to be able to give the date OCT started their in-store demonstrations.

Chas.

G.A. Heath wrote:Interesting first posts guys, I guess CJ has called for an OC march on this forum?.

When did I do any such thing?

We inherited our freedom and the constitution.. Now it may be time for us to fight for them!

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Selcouth wrote:If so, then someone would have to be able to give the date OCT started their in-store demonstrations.

We never did "in-store demonstrations." Never. That's the problem, Charles. You still have no concept of the reality behind our actions. Every place we've gone into we were invited or secured permission first. We have never used a business for a demonstration.

CJ Grisham wrote:

G.A. Heath wrote:Interesting first posts guys, I guess CJ has called for an OC march on this forum?.

When did I do any such thing?

Don't know if you did or didn't, that's the point of "I guess" but who knows. However it's odd that a number of people show up echoing your sentiments for their first post.

valno600 wrote:Charles,
Legislators work for us there is a difference between a politician giving you access (a pat on the head) and actual action (doing what you want). We would not even be having a conversation about Open Carry if it had not been for Open Carry Groups. You do not see that this work that is being done has taken us farther than anyone could have ever imagined. There was no game plan working on the defense. My experience with the NRA is that the game plan is to defend.

What is your legislative and political experience? What is your experience with the NRA? I can answer for you -- you have no experience with either. Every single pro-gun bill passed since 1987 has been supported by the NRA, save one that Alice and I did by ourselves. Stating that the NRA only fights a defensive battle shows that you know nothing about us.

valno600 wrote:We don't want access Charles, we want action OCT OCTC and other Open Carry groups are looking for a victory.

This statement implies that we have merely had access and no "victories." Every pro-gun bill passed since 1987 (even earlier) have been our accomplishments. By ignoring them, you prove yet again that you and OCT are out of touch with political reality and/or that you care about absolutely nothing other than open-carry.

I'll ask you the same question I asked CJ. By victory, do you only mean the passage of HB195? CJ has demanded that people support HB195 to the exclusion of all other "crappy" open-carry bills? As the OCT Houston Admin, is that your position also?

valno600 wrote:It has been pretty hard carrying a rifle around all this time (2 years).

It was more than "pretty hard;" it was a political disaster. Apparently CJ/OCT agrees since OCT at least claimed to have stopped the long gun demonstrations.

valno600 wrote:I reached out to you since you and I live close, I went back to see if you were still on my friends list. I don't know when you decided I was no longer worth having on your friends list however I do still want to make the most of any effort we can have to get HB195 passed.

You're really bringing up Facebook "friend" status? Okay then, I "unfriended" you because I grew tired of your incessant "I hate COPS," "I don't trust the government," "the government is out to get us" posts. In the world of politics and legislation, people are judged by the company they keep. Everyone, I mean everyone in Austin searches the Facebook pages of every lobbyist and others that want them to pass or kill a bill. I don't want to be on your "friends" list when they look at your page.

valno600 wrote:I read that you support HB195 but this is a Texas CHL forum. You know that means we are walking into the lions den here, I figure this is a very pro license group and HB195 is not pro license, it is there but only for reciprocity.

Herein lies the problem with you, OCT and all radical open-carry supporters. You've made this false allegation about me, the NRA, TSRA, the TexasCHLforum, Forum Members, and everyone else who wanted OCT to stop the counterproductive tactics. (OCT ultimately did, BTW.)

I/we want to be able to carry self-defense handguns, period. All of us would prefer not to have to get a CHL, but that's the reality in Texas. I wrote the Motorist Protection Act (HB1815-2007) after meeting with key legislators and convincing them that we need unlicensed car-carry. If I was "pro license" I would never have done that, as many people, me included, thought that would slash the number of people getting and keeping a CHL.

valno600 wrote:What we are for is liberty, you know like what is identified in the Constitution of the United States. It is not so hard to understand that we have the opportunity to do something truly spectacular in this legislative session. (Granted Joe Strauss has to go).

Save the jury speech for someone who hasn't been working for gun owners for over 35 years. I'm not impressed by people who ignore Supreme Court decisions.

Are you saying/acknowledging that HB195 will not pass if Joe Strauss is still in the Speaker's Chair?

valno600 wrote:Charles at the end of the day they are our employees, the Reps are our employees and what do you do if they don't do what you want? You fire them or make them wish that they had another job.

If OCT is so good at "hiring" the "employees" you want, why is it that you couldn't even get George Lavender a victory in his primary?

valno600 wrote:Change; Charles it is the only constant, Change is what you are seeing and the longer you do not embrace it the harder it will be to catch up later.

Don't even think about posting this condescending crap here again.

Chas.

CJ Grisham wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Selcouth wrote:If so, then someone would have to be able to give the date OCT started their in-store demonstrations.

We never did "in-store demonstrations." Never. That's the problem, Charles. You still have no concept of the reality behind our actions. Every place we've gone into we were invited or secured permission first. We have never used a business for a demonstration.

First, learn how to quote. Secondly, you are saying something different than you acknowledged on Gun Talk Radio when you refused to stop such demonstrations.

Chas.

This is Mr. Cotton's house. One does not go into another person's house and throw a party for one's own friends.

CJ Grisham wrote:We never did "in-store demonstrations." Never. That's the problem, Charles. You still have no concept of the reality behind our actions. Every place we've gone into we were invited or secured permission first. We have never used a business for a demonstration.

Are you going to answer my questions CJ? Obviously, you don't have to, but your silence will speak volumes since every question was based upon statements you made here on the Forum.

Also, are you now saying that OCT did not issue a statement that it has stopped long gun demonstration?

Chas.