TexasCHLforum.com

texanjoker wrote: You brought up a good point there about the citations. There are those that will arrest any offense just to say they made an arrest, and there is some common sense. This case could be one. They may have been in a position they had to take an action, and by issuing a citation they did something w/o putting a person in jail which costs money when they bond out.

K.Mooneyham wrote:

Beiruty wrote:

talltex wrote:Charging them with "disorderly conduct" seems like a big stretch after watching the entire video. They were polite and cooperated with the officers...explained exactly what they were doing...had even made an attempt (unsuccessful) to notify the police department ahead of time. They were not displaying the weapons in any kind of alarming manner, and explained to anyone that asked, what and why they were doing it. They didn't even argue about showing their ID's to the officers. They weren't rude and didn't get agitated when they were told they were going to be cited for disorderly conduct...just asked why that was being done when they had broken no laws...one of them asked if public ignorance of the law was justification for a charge of disorderly conduct...and I think that was a very good question. When the woman manager came out, and said she didn't want them there, they immediately volunteered to leave as soon as the officer finished handing out the citations. They were not violating the law...they even complied with the City ordinance that required the rifles to be unloaded...no citizen filed any complaint against them...how is the charge justifiable? It's simply a "catch all" charge that can be used against someone anytime because the required legal elements of the offense are so vague.

How come the city can have an ordinance on manner of carrying a gun loaded? I thought there is a state preemption on firearms laws, no?

I think this is a great question. Does anyone have any ideas about this?

tomtexan wrote:

texanjoker wrote:I do have to say, what is the point of carrying an UNLOADED rifle? What will you do when the punks with a loaded handgun come over and rob you at gun point?

The point of carrying a unloaded rifle in this particular scenario was just to make a point about 2A. They were not out there for self defense purposes. The rifle takes place of a sign, just as other protesters would use a sign to get their point across. Had some "punks" come along with a handgun and tried to rob them, they would have then unholstered their concealed handguns and stopped the threat. They may very well be CHL holders for all we know.

Now, if this state had a open carry of handguns law in place, those men would have never been bothered.

tomtexan wrote:

Target1911 wrote:TAM.....well said

I am a big supporter of this group. They are very respectful to LEO and Businesses.
I do however agree that just walking into a business is bad idea on may levels.

The public needs to be educated and these demonstrations are a good way to do it if done properly and with respect. Its to bad that the media will not report on this until something goes south.

I have many pro gun friends that did not know it was legal until this started.

Perhaps the way to go about it is in larger numbers or groups instead of one or three individuals. The media does report on it when it is done in such a way.
"Open Carry Celebration" held in Longview