TexasCHLforum.com

srothstein wrote:But, in all honesty, I have not figured out how to address the fears of a backlash. I do not believe it will happen, and I have not been able to figure out how to convince people the effects are truly being over-exaggerated.

It's not really possible to counter fear with logical argument. You can quote safety statistics until you're blue in the face but that's not going to change the emotional reaction of a person who is afraid of flying.

roberts wrote:

srothstein wrote:But, in all honesty, I have not figured out how to address the fears of a backlash. I do not believe it will happen, and I have not been able to figure out how to convince people the effects are truly being over-exaggerated.

It's not really possible to counter fear with logical argument. You can quote safety statistics until you're blue in the face but that's not going to change the emotional reaction of a person who is afraid of flying.

You would be referring to an irrational fear of flying. A rational fear of flying can be countered with information. Just as the rational concern of over reactive backlash can be countered by properly written legislation.

The way to get OC legal is to realize freedom of speech and the right to keep and bear arms both have something in common. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater for fear of causing unnecessary panic in the same way you can't wear a gun openly without some folks being uneasy. However, if that person (or people) knew in order to wear a gun openly, the wearer had to jump through a few hoops showing they were responsible, had a clean record, and knew how to operate the weapon competently, that would make folks say OK, they know what they are doing, I feel safe.

On the other hand, if anybody can walk around openly carrying, nobody knowing if they are responsible, if they have a clean record, if they know how to operate and take care not to have accidental discharges, (hello Plaxico) Well, why would anybody be nervous about that?

If you have a CHL= open carry if you like.

baseballguy2001 wrote:The way to get OC legal is to realize freedom of speech and the right to keep and bear arms both have something in common. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater for fear of causing unnecessary panic in the same way you can't wear a gun openly without some folks being uneasy. However, if that person (or people) knew in order to wear a gun openly, the wearer had to jump through a few hoops showing they were responsible, had a clean record, and knew how to operate the weapon competently, that would make folks say OK, they know what they are doing, I feel safe.

On the other hand, if anybody can walk around openly carrying, nobody knowing if they are responsible, if they have a clean record, if they know how to operate and take care not to have accidental discharges, (hello Plaxico) Well, why would anybody be nervous about that?

If you have a CHL= open carry if you like.

Unless I am misreading your post, the crux of your argument is centered around a certain level of training (or the perception of same).

If so, what is your position on the Motorist Protection Act...which allows for exactly what you seem to be most concerned about? Just curious?

Are you (or the public) O.K. with folks having and handling firearms at home? What about at a public gun range? All levels of experience/inexperience exist those places as well.

baseballguy2001 wrote:you can't wear a gun openly without some folks being uneasy.

You can't read a Koran openly without some folks being uneasy.

Women can't wear a burqa openly without some folks being uneasy.

Gays can't hold hands openly without some folks being uneasy.

You can't invoke your Fifth Amendment rights without some folks being uneasy.

American citizens can't carry a concealed handgun without some folks being uneasy.

I oppose restricting Constitutional rights to appease the narrow minded opinions of some folks.

flintknapper wrote: Unless I am misreading your post, the crux of your argument is centered around a certain level of training (or the perception of same).

If so, what is your position on the Motorist Protection Act...which allows for exactly what you seem to be most concerned about? Just curious?

There will be blood flowing like water in the street... Blood in the streets I tell ya ..

Liberty wrote:There will be blood flowing like water in the street... Blood in the streets I tell ya ..

Don't forget parking lots. Cars with handguns go there too. No training, no finger prints, no gun license.


Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes...

boomerang wrote:

Liberty wrote:There will be blood flowing like water in the street... Blood in the streets I tell ya ..

Don't forget parking lots. Cars with handguns go there too. No training, no finger prints, no gun license.


Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes...

Ahhh...man! I HATE volcanoes!

Yep...OC isn't something we will be seeing for awhile.

A little OC in the eyes and you won't see anything for a while.

boomerang wrote:A little OC in the eyes and you won't see anything for a while.

Thanks for everyone’s replies and for getting back on topic.

From reading the posts, I have garnered two priority items we can work on to move forward. Please let me know if you think there are others besides, or in addition to these.

1. Contact TSRA and let them know you are in favor of OC in Texas.
a. Is there a preferred or best way to do this? Call, write, email Alice Tripp? Doug Moreland? Dan Walker? etc.

2. Address primary resistance (concerns):
a. Training
b. Backlash (more 30-06 signs)

For those of you who have either one or both of the above concerns, could you please respond with what would relieve these concerns for you personally? Some have suggested education, so would having additional information, facts and figures relieve your concerns?

Thanks & Have a Nice Day!

Conagher

Conagher wrote:
2. Address primary resistance (concerns):
a. Training
b. Backlash (more 30-06 signs)

For those of you who have either one or both of the above concerns, could you please respond with what would relieve these concerns for you personally? Some have suggested education, so would having additional information, facts and figures relieve your concerns?

Thanks & Have a Nice Day!

Conagher

1. Here's the law, but local jurisdictions could enact more restrictive legislation for OCs.
2. Initially, OCs would have a similar test to CHLs (but less time on the background checks or EVERYONE IS FIRED ).
3. Separate signs are required for private property to restrict OC and CHL. it wouold be easier signage wise to restrict OCs then CHLs.

IANAL but I don't understand the new sign argument. Current laws allow property owners to prohibit unlicensed open carry of rifles without banning CHL (and vice versa) so why wouldn't the same apply to unlicensed open carry of pistols?

Carry open and often http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_F ... =7&t=22975#" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;