TexasCHLforum.com

txinvestigator wrote

<<<Wow. There are lots of HUGE stretches in this thread>>>

I'm a message board expert.

I might add that if you are having trouble with my legal analysis here, it is probably because you are a victim of the Common Law System used in Texas and the forty-eight other backward states in the Union, and I am coming straight out of the Napoleonic Code of Louisiana. The difference is you guys make up law as you go along, and over here we already have it down pat.

Lucky45, a handgun must no longer be concealed while traveling in Texas. And even if concealment was required, in your scenario the towel moved and not the gun, consequently the driver remained in "control" of his weapon, although not the towel. Under the old traveling law necessitating concealment, the driver could be cited.

But had the driver been in been in a wreck, and the towel, the handgun and every other thing lying loose inside the car strewn about while not under his control, the driver could not be cited, as the gun became unconcealed as a result of a force majeure, an unforseen event in which a party is excused from liability if prevented from performing a legal obligation, namely, to conceal the weapon.

It is highly unlikely that Mr. Marks, the unfortunate man who dropped the weapon inside the synagogue, would be cited for open carry under the circumstances.

However, as the discharge did occur within the confines of a synagogue, the incident does highlight an advantage to carrying a semi automatic pistol with an empty chamber, a.k.a. in the "Israeli Draw" mode.

seamus wrote <<<Actually, the pistol was not concealed at the time that it discharged. If it had been in a holster, the incident probably would not have happened.>>>

The pistol was concealed until Mr. Marks lost his control over it and the gun fell to the floor and discharged. This is an accidental discharge of a concealed weapon. The fact that it was unconcealed when it actually fired is immaterial. What determines is how it was being carried when it went out of the owner's control. If it had NOT been carried concealed, but in the open, Mr. Marks or a bystander might have noticed the gun in a precarious condition and prevented the unwanted discharge.

frankee the yankee,

No, I do not recall anyone the victim of a negligent discharge while the weapon was concealed. But I know a couple of people who have been shot in ND's/AD'S in addition to myself, and let me assure you it ain't pleasant. Actually, I only know one other person who was shot. The second guy died. Accidental/negligent discharge stateside on a U.S. Army firing range to the head during the Vietnam War. One takes precautions if one is sensitive to such things, and there is no such thing as too much precaution when it comes to firearms.

Are you really comfortable with standing behind some bozo trying to extract their autojammer from a concealed horizontal shoulder holster. How do you know they don't have their finger on the trigger when pulling on the gun? Because of their "training?"

First rule of the gun is never point it at anybody you don't intend to shoot. Second rule is never assume it's unloaded. Third rule is never assume a gun won't go off.

Anyone unconcerned about others while carrying in a shoulder holster should ask themselves would they utilize one where the gun points straight up at their armpit and the brachial artery.
http://www.dlsports.com/holster_dual_j_ ... up_med.jpg

Regarding open and concealed carry, the later has the advantage of surprise, the former speed. Depends on where you are and the likelihood of something going down.

Had the patrons at Luby's Cafeteria in Killeen been packing openly in 1991 as a matter of public policy, George Hennard probably would have been less inclined to enter the building and kill twenty-three people and shoot another twenty. And if he had, the outcome would have been decidedly different. The same might well be said for concealed carry, but an important visual deterrent factor is completely absent.

The visual deterrent to criminal activity, inherent in the open carry of firearms, is a freebee which should be itegrated into social policy.

Here is a story about a reasonable person who seems to have worked his way through the issues on how to carry.

This is why I prefer open carry. You know who's got what. The horror of concealed carry is incompetent persons causing accidental/negligent discharges to innocent bystanders. For example, I don't hanker to be standing in line behind anybody carrying a handgun in a horizontal shoulder holster under a jacket and I don't have a clue. Especially dangerous are some semi autos with either no safety, no decocker or no lock and a round in the chamber. Revos, not such a problem.