TexasCHLforum.com

gigag04 wrote:Lots of new names in this thread....



Jussayin...

cb1000rider wrote:

jmra wrote: Who's asking permission? Texas is a shall issue state. No one is asking permission. IMHO you are unnecessarily carrying a chip on your shoulder.

Because we have to be licensed and pay fees, we're all essentially asking permission. He's just providing a nod to the reality of the 2nd amendment in Texas. It's not just an issue of criminality. We shouldn't have to pay or jump through hoops to exercise rights. We pay and jump through hoops to exercise privileges.

Do you need a license or have to fill out an application to post a political sign? How about to join a church? Those are first amendment rights.

Although I have mixed feelings about open carry, I support the ideology of the constitution, which says I can keep and bear arms.

teraph wrote:

jmra wrote:Who's asking permission? Texas is a shall issue state. No one is asking permission. IMHO you are unnecessarily carrying a chip on your shoulder.

Everyone that has a TXCHL has asked permission. Even though Texas is a shall issue state, what did all of us have to go through to get that piece of plastic that, by Texas law, allows us to conceal carry? The fact that TXDPS has the ability to deny us that right means that we asked permission. The fact that we paid the state of Texas for that piece of plastic means we asked permission. The fact that before we received that piece of plastic we would get arrested in public for carrying concealed, means that we asked permission. We asked permission when we offered up all of our information and asked DPS to run their checks, and when we asked DPS to issue us a TXCHL. We should not have to ask for a piece of plastic to conceal or open carry.

teraph wrote:

o b juan wrote:Why open carry when you may Legally carry Concealed???

Not to get too far off topic, but I am not a big fan of asking permission to exercise my right of self defense (IE getting a CHL). Ideally, we would all be part of a texasconstitutionalcarry.com website, but sadly that doesn't exist (at least in TX). At least for me, open carry is one of the penultimate ways one can exercise their 2nd Amendment rights as well as their basic human right of self defense. I am not saying that open carry doesn't have its drawbacks, but for me it is an idealogical standpoint. I know that there are many others that, even if open carry were allowed, would still carry concealed. Heck, I still carry concealed (I'm currently living in WA where open carry is 100% legal) even though I don't have to. And I still sucked it up and "asked permission" from the state of Washington to do so.
It grinds my gears that I must have to ask permission to exercise both my right to self defense and my uninfringable right to bear arms. We should all get the ability to choose whether or not we open or conceal carry, without asking permission from some government entity. Will people abuse and misuse it? Many will, but the vast majority that choose to, will do so responsibly. I believe that is what our Founding Fathers had in mind. A responsible citizenry taking responsibility for itself and not allowing others to do it for them. And that is why conceal AND open carry should be 110% legal, WITHOUT asking for permission.

jrandyw wrote:Ok, I get it now. Exercising your rights is tolerable so long as law enforcement approves and it is good PR.

SherwoodForest wrote:Reality check. Those folks at the Capitol were engaged in a peaceful, and lawful assembly, and were violating NO TEXAS LAW.

The Travis County D.A.'s office did not like the message they were communicating plain & simple.

These people that were arrested Sunday were defending YOUR Texas Constitution.

linuss wrote:

philip964 wrote: I am unfamiliar with the law regarding open carrying black powder pistols made before 1900.

Or for that matter for failing to identify yourself when asked by LEO.

Laws are actually quite simple: In the state of Texas, any black powder weapon made before 1899, or any replica of such made before 1899, is not considered a firearm in the eyes of the law. If it's not considered a firearm, you aren't openly carrying a firearm. I

As for identifying yourself, you're only required to identify yourself if you're doing something that requires you to, ie driving, or carrying a CHL. If I'm walking down the street and an officer stops and asks for my name, I can choose to give it or not. SCOTUS has ruled that the simple act of stating your name fulfills the "Stop and identify" laws in the US, and you cannot be forced to do more unless the task you're doing requires something more (such as a DL for driving, and it's a traffic stop).

Right2Carry wrote: unless they are carrying documented proof that their black powder firearms were made before 1899 then I don't see how they are in the right. The officers can't be expected to make a determination on whether the firearms are genuine or fakes. The offenders will get their day in court to plead their case.

The onus is on the officers to prove a law was broken and not for the citizens to prove a law wasn't. Your idea that an officer should be able to arrest anyone for anything because they can't be assed to actually know the law and let the courts sort it out is scary.