Open Carry impact

[skychief12]

I'm wondering how the new open carry (assuming final passage) could effect conceal carry rules. For example, I thinking about an optional switch from an officer size 1911 to a full size government model if it becomes final. That leads me to thinking about issues around peeking that I don't have now with the shorter gripped officer and IWB holster. Using the IWB and government the bottom of the longer grip will bulge out the back of my untucker T-shirt when sitting. If I went with an OWB the tip of the barrel will peek out below the untucker t-shirt in some situations.

If the end result is that the law states clearly "fully exposed" or "fully concealed", I'm sure some will dance in the above mentioned gray areas (as they do today). But that would clear it up for me and I'd just stay with my officer rig.

Thought?

[TVGuy]

"Fully" is not in the bill. You'll be fine with partially exposed as long as it's in a shoulder or belt holster.

[treadlightly]

I think the law will consider a partially visible handgun to be openly carried.

That's what I'm hoping, anyway. All I want out of open carry, at least on a day-to-day standpoint, is protection from printing. I know that's not illegal, but I worry about getting arrested and having to defend myself in court.

I don't worry about it too much, but I do try to keep my gun well concealed. I will continue to do so after open carry goes into effect, but with a little less nervousness.

Nothing in the law will prevent some people for thinking less of me for my affinity for guns. It's not a perfect, universally armed and law-abiding world. Darn it.

[RoyGBiv]

I think we're in for another round of big ugly signs.
Folks will put up both 30.06 and 30.07. If they're gonna put up one, putting up both isn't much of a stretch.

[skychief12]

I think we're in for another round of big ugly signs.
Folks will put up both 30.06 and 30.07. If they're gonna put up one, putting up both isn't much of a stretch.

I fear you are right.

[howdy]

Hoping I am wrong.

[The Wall]

You think they will have two signs? That seems kinda silly to me. If they don't allow concealed handguns they certainly won't allow open carry. I'm thinking it will be one sign covers both. Call it the 30.30 no-leverage action sign.

[Keith B]

You think they will have two signs? That seems kinda silly to me. If they don't allow concealed handguns they certainly won't allow open carry. I'm thinking it will be one sign covers both. Call it the 30.30 no-leverage action sign.

Apparently you have not bee following the bills closely. There WILL be two signs required to prohibit carrying in a location; 30.06 for concealed carry and 30.07 for licensed open carry.

[Rrash]

I think we're in for another round of big ugly signs.
Folks will put up both 30.06 and 30.07. If they're gonna put up one, putting up both isn't much of a stretch.

I think we are going to see more 30.06 signs for three reasons. First, there has been so much media attention. This isn't going to stop now, and 30.06 and 30.07 signs will be covered ad nauseam. While local store owners are probably aware of 30.06 signage (at least most of them), there will be pressure from anti groups, well-meaning, ignorant customers, corporate decisions, etc. Second, it will be one of those things, where if you are going to have to put one up, making your entrance look ugly, you might as well put both up. Thirdly, and I hope this doesn't happen often, but I would also not be surprised to see lots more 30.06 signs simply due to poor attempts at concealment where 30.07 is posted (i.e. full size frame in an OWB printing through a thin t-shirt - which isn't concealing anyway).

In the end however, I think it will be a big non-issue, but that will probably take a couple years for everyone to calm down.

[oljames3]

You think they will have two signs? That seems kinda silly to me. If they don't allow concealed handguns they certainly won't allow open carry. I'm thinking it will be one sign covers both. Call it the 30.30 no-leverage action sign.

I really appreciate the intricate beauty of a pun that references multiple subjects, especially one that refers to the legendary .30/30 Henry.

[The Annoyed Man]

I'm wondering how the new open carry (assuming final passage) could effect conceal carry rules. For example, I thinking about an optional switch from an officer size 1911 to a full size government model if it becomes final. That leads me to thinking about issues around peeking that I don't have now with the shorter gripped officer and IWB holster. Using the IWB and government the bottom of the longer grip will bulge out the back of my untucker T-shirt when sitting. If I went with an OWB the tip of the barrel will peek out below the untucker t-shirt in some situations.

If the end result is that the law states clearly "fully exposed" or "fully concealed", I'm sure some will dance in the above mentioned gray areas (as they do today). But that would clear it up for me and I'd just stay with my officer rig.

Thought?

FWIW, I'd choose to still carry the smaller gun if that's what you had, and I wouldn't spent the money for a 5", unless you just had to have one. In that case, by all means......

A well-made 1911, even a 3" or 4" barreled model, is plenty enough gun. I've nothing against 5" 1911s, and I own two of them with steel frames, but I've also owned an alloy-framed 3" Kimber, and that was my carry gun while the 5" guns stayed at home. It was purely a matter of all day comfort and weight........and I have carried OWB almost from the beginning, so it would be the same whether it was CC'd or OC'd. So unless you're in a barrel-measuring contest......

Just my 2¢.

[thetexan]

I suspect that this is what will happen.

As more people carry open more businesses will gasp at the change of events in Texas law, especially those who are not friendly to guns. For most of these types they have not been aware that the concealed carry's have been frequenting their stores.

These will want open carry stopped so they will put up a 30.07. That's when they will realize that there is such a thing as a 30.06 sign and want to put one of those up also...anything they can do to stop the uncontrolled and vile practice of carrying a weapon.

The beauty of concealment is that it doesn't draw attention to yourself and create interest where it is to your advantage to not create interest. So, sometimes keeping something under wraps is the better part of valor. I don't envision there being many 30.07 signs where there isn't also a 30.06.

The kind of owner who would only put up a 30.07 is one who knows about concealed carry and doesn't object but does object to open probably because of his other customer's alarm.

In the end what good will it do us to win open carry if, by exercising that right, we loose a substantial number of locations where we can carry openly. Especially when the other alternative serves our purpose nicely...protection and the exercise of 2nd amendment rights.

What I worry about is that starting on January first, there will be a suddenly increased number of open guns being seen by everyone. Most of those people will be caught off guard and wonder what has happened. They will complain profusely and it will draw attention to the perceived idea that all of this open carry stuff was ill-thought out. Legislators will scramble to make modifications to ease the tension. Luckily for us, the legislature only meets every two years.

Hopefully, by then, everything will settle down and people will be more accepting of the idea.

I will still go to Walmart at least once just because I can.

tex

[oljames3]

I'm wondering how the new open carry (assuming final passage) could effect conceal carry rules. For example, I thinking about an optional switch from an officer size 1911 to a full size government model if it becomes final. That leads me to thinking about issues around peeking that I don't have now with the shorter gripped officer and IWB holster. Using the IWB and government the bottom of the longer grip will bulge out the back of my untucker T-shirt when sitting. If I went with an OWB the tip of the barrel will peek out below the untucker t-shirt in some situations.

If the end result is that the law states clearly "fully exposed" or "fully concealed", I'm sure some will dance in the above mentioned gray areas (as they do today). But that would clear it up for me and I'd just stay with my officer rig.

Thought?

As I understand it from reading the bills and watching the sausage being made, concealed still means the same thing it always has. The only real change for me is I don't have to concentrate on covering when I leave my house.

I'll probably just tuck my shirt behind my in waist band holster for a while so I can wear my larger jeans a while longer. That will also give me a chance to ascertain the signage at my usual haunts. I'll use the paddle holster unless I know I'm going somewhere requiring concealment. For the first few months of 2016, for instance, I'll wear my suit coat over my IWB in church. After that, its suit coat over paddle holster.

[txglock21]

This is just my opinion, but I really don't foresee a rush of new 30.06 signs going up. Now I can see businesses that currently do NOT have 30.06 signs to put up 30.07 signs when this goes into effect, mainly to calm the general public from seeing the nasty, evil guns in plain view. Again, just my opinion, but I have been wrong before once or twice in my life.

[thetexan]

I'm wondering how the new open carry (assuming final passage) could effect conceal carry rules. For example, I thinking about an optional switch from an officer size 1911 to a full size government model if it becomes final. That leads me to thinking about issues around peeking that I don't have now with the shorter gripped officer and IWB holster. Using the IWB and government the bottom of the longer grip will bulge out the back of my untucker T-shirt when sitting. If I went with an OWB the tip of the barrel will peek out below the untucker t-shirt in some situations.

If the end result is that the law states clearly "fully exposed" or "fully concealed", I'm sure some will dance in the above mentioned gray areas (as they do today). But that would clear it up for me and I'd just stay with my officer rig.

Thought?

As I understand it from reading the bills and watching the sausage being made, concealed still means the same thing it always has. The only real change for me is I don't have to concentrate on covering when I leave my house.

I'll probably just tuck my shirt behind my in waist band holster for a while so I can wear my larger jeans a while longer. That will also give me a chance to ascertain the signage at my usual haunts. I'll use the paddle holster unless I know I'm going somewhere requiring concealment. For the first few months of 2016, for instance, I'll wear my suit coat over my IWB in church. After that, its suit coat over paddle holster.

The new law will mean that CHL holders wont have to be concerned at all about whether his gun is concealed or not concealed except for any portion of the law that specifies a distinction. Otherwise, let it be concealed or let it become exposed. It won't matter to a license holder. Carry it partially exposed if you'd like. What will matter is that it is holstered in a belt or shoulder holster.

tex