TexasCHLforum.com

cyphur wrote:. . . is as silly to me as telling me I shouldn't be allowed to drive a bright yellow Corvette because it is a distraction to other drivers.

Conagher wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:... no one has ever asked TSRA to take on open-carry as a legislative project.

Fair enough. So in front of God, Country and this Forum I would like to formally request TSRA take on open carry as a legislative project for the next session. Somewhat tongue-in-cheek but serious enough that I would kindly appreciate instruction on any formal process or procedure necessary to make such a request; and I will promptly follow through with a submittal .

Best Regards & God Bless,

Conagher

[Edited to delete my response. I'm through trying to give hints.]

Chas.

TheArmedFarmer wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:no one has ever asked TSRA to take on open-carry as a legislative project.

Well, on July 6th, 2008 at 1:19pm I emailed Jim Dark at the TSRA, and I made no mention of OpenCarry.org (I didn't even know about them at the time). Jim never replied to me.

My email on July 6th wrote:Mr. Dark,

I am not a member of the TSRA but am considering joining, in an
effort to throw my support behind an organization that defends
our second amendment right in Texas.

My issue is, though, that our state government currently requires
a license to carry concealed, and provides no provision for
carrying unlicensed.

The Supreme Court clearly said that individuals have the right to
keep and -bear- arms for self-defense, but Texas requires an
expensive permit, an arduous application process, and an
interminably long wait before you can bare arms.

Why do we need a permit (permission?) to exercise a right that
the Supreme Court recently upheld? Do we also need a permit to
operate a printing press?

Does the TSRA have a position on the matter? The answer to this
will determine whether I join, and whether I will encourage
others to do the same.

Thanks,
Dave

I'll have to say that I still haven't joined TSRA. It's a pity, too, as if Jim had responded that at the very least, the TSRA cares about the issue, I would have joined as a life member immediately. His ignoring my email discouraged me about the organization.

I mean no offense by this comment, but if you're not a TSRA member, then your opinion doesn't matter to TSRA. The political projects we take on are issues our membership consider important. That's the way it should be. Our members carry the financial burden of defending and promoting gun owners' rights, so it is appropriate that we respond to their wishes. You not only are not a member, your email said you wouldn't join unless we supported open-carry. That indicates someone who is dedicated to one single issue, not the overall fight for the Second Amendment. If you want to join us in the fight, then join us, but don't try to set conditions for your membership.

Before someone takes this to a ridiculous extreme, I'm not saying that a single phone call from one TSRA member will be the basis of a TSRA legislative project. When I refer to our membership, I'm talking about something that is important to a large portion of our membership, not just a few. Since there is only so much political capital to be spent each session, we have to focus on projects that will result in the greatest good for the largest segment of our members.

BTW, in spite of what OpenCarry.org says Heller absolutely did not establish a right to open-carry. Heller was a "keeping" case, not a "bearing" case and that is clear as a proverbial bell.

Chas.

Conagher wrote:. . . My personal belief is if TSRA would have been flexible enough to jump on board this past summer during the momentum build up for OC, we would have a bill submitted today.

Conagher

As I have posted several times now, I sincerely appreciate the efforts you and SA-TX have made to approach this issue in a statesmanlike manner. In fact, I'm somewhat reluctant to post this because I don't want it to sound like a criticism of you and it certainly isn't.

However, contrary to what some people have said both here on TexasCHLforum and on OpenCarry.org, no one has ever asked TSRA to take on open-carry as a legislative project. (I don't think our members have strong feelings about it, based little or no input from them on this issue.) A relative handful of people did call and ask us to endorse OpenCarry.org's project. Those are two markedly different things. When we take on a project, we do all of the work I've outlined in other posts. Then and only then do we put our name on it. If OpenCarry.org asks us to blindly endorse their goal of passing open-carry (this is what they wanted), then they are also asking us to endorse their methods and that will never happen; not next session or any other session. We make progress, not enemies. We meet with people and convince them, we don't get in their faces and make threats.

I know some people attack TSRA and NRA by claiming that we won't do anything if we aren't getting the credit. That's not true. We do it all the time and people never hear of it because the task has to be handled discretely. What we will not do is align ourselves with people or organizations that may (or may not) be well-meaning but inexperienced and thus hinder achieving whatever goal we have set. While some may call this arrogant it's merely a matter of doing our own work because we can do it better than anyone else. Yet we occasionally, albeit rarely, work with other organizations toward a common goal. For example, we worked with ACLU Texas (not the national organization) to help lay the ground work for last session's HB1815, Motorist Protection Act. But ACLU Texas did nothing on the political front; that's our arena. This session, we are working with Students for Concealed Carry on Campus because they have a goal, did a very good job of getting students, faculty and parents interested in protecting their children, did not alienate elected officials or gun owners, and because they didn't try to run the political show. They let us do what we do best! They came to us as dedicated people with a large and growing following, a cause that was right up there with God, Mom & apply pie, people willing to work to achieve their goals, but they asked us how to get it done in Texas. Then we worked through the two year process that TSRA uses to promote our agenda and SCCC did everything we asked them to do. Unlike OpenCarry.org, they didn't have someone from Virginia come up with a terrible bill, then come to Texas with no preparation or plan and ask TSRA to endorse anything and everything they would ultimately do.

You will "dance with who brung 'ya" so pick your date carefully.

Chas.

Captain Matt wrote:In fact, the Brady-style emotions against keeping and bearing arms openly has convinced me to make a few calls in support of the property rights of employers.

Brady-style my foot. If someone doesn't agree with you on open-carry, then they are acting in a Brady-like manner? Then by your standard, you are acting like Sarah Brady by making calls against a bill that employees need. Remember, no one has done anything to prevent open-carry from passing because there is no bill!!!!! But if you are serious, you are trying to harm the employer parking lot bill because of a philosophical dispute? And you expect people to support open-carry?

The attitude you promote is why I doubt open-carry will every garner significant support in Texas.

Chas.

Captain Matt wrote:Doesn't that work both ways? I'm not defending the OCD leadership who shot themselves in the foot but what about the common man who wants to carry openly when he's in the boonies? He didn't attack progun politicians and doesn't make fun of people who want to carry on campus or leave a gun in their car at work but other gun owners can make fun of his viewpoint? I see lots of people here attacking open carry using the same tactics as the Brady bunch and that behavior is as unproductive as the OCD people bashing progun politicians.

Why should he call or write to support campus carry when there's no quid pro quo?

Why should he call or write to support parking lot carry when there's no quid pro quo? Especially when that law only benefits people who choose to work for antigun companies?

I don't see anyone using Brady tactics except a couple of the radical, in-your-face people who post here and are strong OpenCarry.org supporters. When open-carry supporters claim that unintentional failure to conceal is a real threat in Texas, that is using a boogeyman Brady-style threat. When OpenCarry.org supporters threaten pro-gun elected officials it hurts all gun owners. That's the point of my post. The division that OpenCarry.org and some of its supporters are causing within the Texas gun owning community is both counterproductive and dangerous. If you and others want to see open-carry in Texas, then this must change. I'm not saying you should abandon your goal of open-carry; I'm suggesting that the tactics must change to be successful

Now as for quid prop quo, no I do not agree that people who support campus-carry or the employer parking lot bill are somehow obliged to support open-carry. My comments were suggestions as to how Texas open-carry supporters can better approach this issue next session. The two mandatory elements are 1) be statesmen and don't try to force your opinions on other gun owners; and 2) don't threaten Senators and Representatives with proven pro-gun records. The third suggestion was to support campus-carry and employer parking lot bills and the rationale behind that suggestion is to try to bring open-carry supporters back into the mainstream of all Texas gun owners. Because of the radical minority, OpenCarry.org is perceived as caring about one and only one issue -- open-carry. They are also perceived as not caring how much damage they do to other gun owners in their quest to pass open-carry. If open-carry has any chance of passage in Texas, then the local (i.e. Texas) open-carry supporters must distance themselves from this image. Supporting other pro-gun bills without any strings attached is a good start. It's a matter of political damage control.

The real irony here is that I don't want open-carry for the sole reason I've stated before, but if the majority of our TSRA members want us to pursue open-carry, then I'm sure we will do so. I will put aside my personal concerns and will work as hard for its passage as I do any other TSRA and/or NRA bill. If we're in this position next session or any other session, I'd rather be operating in a less hostile environment than OpenCarry.org and the self-proclaimed radicals have created. As I've said before, if the entire open-carry issue is so tainted by attacks on our friends in Austin, and division among gun owners themselves, then no experienced person or organization will touch it.

Chas.

Is open-carry dead for the 2009 Texas Legislative Session? It’s too early in the legislative session to be preaching any eulogies, but if an email posted on OpenCarry.org is accurate, then that just may be the case. The email is attributed to Representative Debbie Riddle’s Chief of Staff, Jon English and can be found at http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum66/22032.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

I hope that all supporters of gun owners’ rights and the Second Amendment will take a step back from what has become a very contentious issue and evaluate what was done well and what could be handled better. If we don’t, then the old adage “those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it” will take on special meaning in 2010 and 2011.

As a guy who fought for concealed-carry for fifteen years (1980-1995) during some very politically lean years, I know what it means to be passionate about an issue and how it feels to see your efforts fall short session after session. To open-carry supporters let me say that, while I disagree with you on this particular issue, I understand your drive, your current frustration and the disappointment you must feel. Many of you are veterans of the political wars and you know that passing any highly controversial bill usually takes multiple sessions, while others among you are getting your first experience in this arena we call Austin. Regardless where you fall on the spectrum of political experience, having to start over next session is not an easy pill to swallow. I know, I’ve had to swallow that same pill many times in the last thirty years and I'll be doing it again on some bills I wrote that won't even get filed this session.

I would like to offer these suggestions to open-carry supporters who plan to be around next session to promote your goals. First, take on the role of a statesman, as have SA-TX and Conagher, and try to sell your position rather than try to force it on someone else. If you are successful you have an ally, but even if you fail you have not created an enemy who may work against you now and in the future. The harsh rhetoric here on TexasCHLforum by some supporters of open-carry pales in comparison to that found all over OpenCarry.org. This serves only to alienate the very people you need to either be on your side next session, or at least not call their Senators and Representatives and tell them to vote against open-carry. It must be remembered that a large segment of Texas gun owners don’t support open carry. (I suspect it is well over 50%, but that’s just my opinion.) SA-TX and Conagher have played the role of peacemaker both here on TexasCHLforum and on OpenCarry.org in an attempt to unify gun owners. Their efforts should be emulated.

Don’t threaten Senators and Representatives with a proven record of supporting gun owners’ rights! This is perhaps the most distressing thing I have witnessed. Doing so diminishes your efforts and alienates both fellow gun owners and organizations whose help and support is vital to your movement. The worst thing that could happen to the open-carry movement is for the movement itself, as opposed to OpenCarry.org, to be perceived as opposing proven friends to gun owners. Let’s face it. People who do this are essentially saying that only their agenda matters and they don’t care if they harm fellow gun owners in pursuing their goal. Such self-centered thinking will only work to alienate the open-carry movement and guarantee its failure.

Actively support current pro-gun bills this session and in future sessions. Campus-carry is a highly emotional issue and it will face stiff opposition from the academic world, as well as “student government” that is merely a pawn of each school’s administration. Get on board with the employer parking lot bills so tens of thousands of workers don’t have to be disarmed and defenseless on their commutes to and from work. Make phone calls and send faxes when you see the “action needed” posts. Why should the mother driving her kids to school and herself to work unarmed because of her employer’s parking lot policy support your open-carry effort if you do not care enough about her life to get involved and help her reach her goal? Why should the adult college student support open-carry when you don’t support her cause, and you attack the A+ Senator who is going to try to make sure she doesn’t become a victim of a mass murderer on a Texas campus?

It is time for more people to follow the lead of SA-TX and Conagher and tell the radical open-carry supporters that their brand of activism is counter-productive and won’t be supported in Texas.

Chas.