TexasCHLforum.com

Here's an article from "The Tactical Wire" by Tiger McKee giving his reasons why he isn't a proponent of open carry.

http://www.thetacticalwire.com/features/223321" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's a good argument about the tacticality of Open Carry, yes.

But just because something isn't Tactically Wise, doesn't mean it should be illegal.

Most people here have said that even if OC was legallized, they would not do it.
Personally, I would enjoy it simply for the protection it would give CHL'ers against accidental unconcealment.

dicion wrote:It's a good argument about the tacticality of Open Carry, yes.

But just because something isn't Tactically Wise, doesn't mean it should be illegal.

Most people here have said that even if OC was legallized, they would not do it.
Personally, I would enjoy it simply for the protection it would give CHL'ers against accidental unconcealment.

I would like the choice to choose for myself. I've often thought that OC could prevent a crime and enhance my safety but more than likely, it might lead to being shot in the back.

dicion wrote: I would enjoy it simply for the protection it would give CHL'ers against accidental unconcealment.

I am not against open carry at all, but I thought the following already gave us protection against this...

UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER.

(a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun.

I have read a couple posts around here that real world experience has been different. But it seems to me (in court at least) they would have to prove that you Intentionally unconcealed.

dicion wrote: Most people here have said that even if OC was legallized, they would not do it.
Personally, I would enjoy it simply for the protection it would give CHL'ers against accidental unconcealment.

Didn't seem to be a purely tactical viewpoint to me. Seemed to be composed of common-sense reasoning. I fully agree with his reasoning for not open-carrying.

camlott wrote:

dicion wrote: I would enjoy it simply for the protection it would give CHL'ers against accidental unconcealment.

I am not against open carry at all, but I thought the following already gave us protection against this...

UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER.

(a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun.

I have read a couple posts around here that real world experience has been different. But it seems to me (in court at least) they would have to prove that you Intentionally unconcealed.

You'd think that, but Just Ask Handdog how it plays out in real life.

I'd rather not be arrested at all, then have to prove myself in court, having to pay a lawyer, and take time off of work, as well as having to report an arrest on my record for 2 years until I have to pay a lawyer again to get it completely expunged.

Legal open carry would be one additional way to keep from being arrested in the first place.
Not saying it couldn't happen. It could. Sometimes people get arrested for things that aren't supposed to get them arrested, as shown above.

camlott wrote:I have read a couple posts around here that real world experience has been different. But it seems to me (in court at least) they would have to prove that you Intentionally unconcealed.

And therein lies the problem. You shouldn't have to go to court to prove that you did not violate the law if you didn't violate it in the first place. Normally, under the American justice system, the prosecution bears the burden of proof. However, proving intentional failure to conceal is difficult, and unless the prosecution can demonstrate that your failure to conceal was deliberate, you will likely be acquitted. The problem is that very few people budget unjust prosecutions into their financial planning, while the district attorney's office exists to prosecute, and it has an annual budget in the millions of dollars allocated exactly for that purpose.

So if you get dragged into court on a charge of intentionally failing to conceal, unless you were open carrying, you will likely beat the charge. But the cost of defending yourself will put you in the poor house, while the DA's office gets to crow about "getting another gun off the street" and will use your statistic to justify a demand for a larger budget for next year.

I agree 100% with the author of the OP's linked article, and in other OC threads, I have made exactly those points and have stated that, were OC legal in Texas, I would probably still carry concealed. But, even so, I still would like to see OC eventually made legal exactly so that people who carry concealed don't have to worry about some minor unintentional failure to conceal.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

camlott wrote:I have read a couple posts around here that real world experience has been different. But it seems to me (in court at least) they would have to prove that you Intentionally unconcealed.

And therein lies the problem. You shouldn't have to go to court to prove that you did not violate the law if you didn't violate it in the first place. Normally, under the American justice system, the prosecution bears the burden of proof. However, proving intentional failure to conceal is difficult, and unless the prosecution can demonstrate that your failure to conceal was deliberate, you will likely be acquitted. The problem is that very few people budget unjust prosecutions into their financial planning, while the district attorney's office exists to prosecute, and it has an annual budget in the millions of dollars allocated exactly for that purpose.

So if you get dragged into court on a charge of intentionally failing to conceal, unless you were open carrying, you will likely beat the charge. But the cost of defending yourself will put you in the poor house, while the DA's office gets to crow about "getting another gun off the street" and will use your statistic to justify a demand for a larger budget for next year.

I agree 100% with the author of the OP's linked article, and in other OC threads, I have made exactly those points and have stated that, were OC legal in Texas, I would probably still carry concealed. But, even so, I still would like to see OC eventually made legal exactly so that people who carry concealed don't have to worry about some minor unintentional failure to conceal.

I agree with McKee's reasoning too, but I also agree with TAM and others that lawful OC is desirable both to prevent frivolous prosecutions and to put an exclamation point on how we view our right to keep and bear arms.

dicion wrote:

camlott wrote:

dicion wrote: I would enjoy it simply for the protection it would give CHL'ers against accidental unconcealment.

I am not against open carry at all, but I thought the following already gave us protection against this...

UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER.

(a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun.

I have read a couple posts around here that real world experience has been different. But it seems to me (in court at least) they would have to prove that you Intentionally unconcealed.

You'd think that, but Just Ask Handdog how it plays out in real life.

I'd rather not be arrested at all, then have to prove myself in court, having to pay a lawyer, and take time off of work, as well as having to report an arrest on my record for 2 years until I have to pay a lawyer again to get it completely expunged.

Legal open carry would be one additional way to keep from being arrested in the first place.
Not saying it couldn't happen. It could. Sometimes people get arrested for things that aren't supposed to get them arrested, as shown above.

One or two isolated incidents are not enough to be a real big concern.

Interesting replies all - - - just a note nowhere in the article did Mr. McKee state that OC shouldn't be legal he was just expressing his reasons for not wanting to OC. His reasons are a lot like mine I would like OC in Texas but not at the cost of Parking lot and Campus Carry. Oh yes, a hard and fast definition of a "school" would be nice.

Open Carry is legal here in Kentucky. Right now it's the only way I can legally carry because one has to be a resident of the state for 6 months before they can apply for a CCDW license. It's rather liberating to carry openly and most people do not even notice.

dicion wrote:But just because something isn't Tactically Wise, doesn't mean it should be illegal.

It may not be "tactically wise" to be openly Christian when there's Islamo-terrorists running around, but that doesn't mean it should be illegal.

It's also not wise to go to certain places of most towns at certain times or walk around with a large roll of cash sticking out the top of your back pocket, but I don't want a law saying that I can't do those things even if I'm never going to do them.

Why can't the Texas government just trust people to use their own discernment for when it is or is not appropriate to open carry a handgun?

And as for isolated incidents such and with handdog not being a big concern with open carry being illegal, how about we turn that around and say that the few isolated incidents that might be caused by legalising open carry shouldn't be a big concern either?

I just have a hard time understanding the justification behind anti-open-carry laws, especially when looking at other states that have open-carry and their very few and isolated incidents.

I'm of the opinion that laws shouldn't exist to solve problems that don't exist, and don't even get me started on some of these other Texas laws, like what constitutes an illegal weapon, etc.

I just don't like the state treating me like I'm a little baby with no common sense.

Edit: By the way, I agree with most points of the article, and there are very few places that I would even think about open carrying.

My concern is that with open carry, a lot of family restaurants, shopping malls and other businesses will put up signs prohibiting all firearms.

What good is open carry or concealed carry if you can’t go in most places armed, and have to leave it in the car? A lot of mothers and some fathers would not want a person sitting at the next table with a gun on his belt.

It could also turn a lot of voters against open or concealed carry. Remember lawmakers are going to do what the voters want. We have come a long way in even having concealed carry. Let’s not blow it now.

Out of sight, out of mind.