TexasCHLforum.com

EEllis wrote:

K.Mooneyham wrote:SNIP

EEllis wrote:Lets face it CHL's are a minority, a fringe group if you will, and making a big deal about this and putting extra effort into OC makes you a minority of a fringe group.

So, CHLers are a "fringe group"? How many CHLers are there in Texas, about 1 million now? If I divide 1 by 28, which is the state population in millions, that gives me a bit over .035. That means that CHLers are about 3.5 percent of the population. The Supreme Court just changed how marriage is defined for about that percentage of the population. Again, "fringe group"? Maybe in the minds of "Moms Demand Disarmed Citizens" and "Bloomberg Gun Grabbers, Inc.".

What you don't like the word fringe? Because you just proved my point. Less than 4 percent of the population total and even less who beliefs have them carrying every day day, fringe may come with some negative baggage but it's accurate by definition. I was using the term in order to make a point. It won't be mainstream to oc and trying to make it so will cause you took like a nutter. Pretend it's the same as being gay and now you will look like a homophobe as well as a gun nutter. You want to only see it from your point of view that's fine with me. I just think that doing so, while trying to effect the viewpoint of those non gun people in a positive way towards the oc of handguns handguns, is less than helpful. Know your audience. Yelling at people about how normal you are is unlikely to be effective.

Okay, now I've got it. You think that anyone who open carries and isn't police is just like Kory and CJ. Well, glad to know where you stand. FYI, the "shame game" isn't going to work. I've stated more than once that I have no plans to go open carrying in major urban areas because I think its unwise to do so. I've also stated that I still intend to basically cover the firearm in most general situations. YOU called anyone who will open carry fringe and a nutter, and in no instance did I ever, or have I ever, condoned the Kory and CJ mentality of yelling at people about firearms rights. Your implication that I have or will is flat wrong. I could equate you with the "Mom's Demand" group since you seem to be almost as anti as they are. Not saying it would be right to do so, but it would be equivalent.

anygunanywhere wrote:

biomass1 wrote:I like open carry simply because it does away with the problem of inadvertent display of a firearm. There are practical and tactical advantages to carrying concealed and I plan to stay that way.

There has not been a problem with inadvertent or accidental display since the legislature fixed the law. You have to now intentionally display to violate the law.

I'm certain that is entirely factual. However, what is always said on this forum? "Don't be the test case". Accordingly, with the passage of licensed OC and once it goes into effect, I am moving from IWB to OWB, and I'm not going to have to try shirts on and figure out whether an inch of the bottom of the holster sticks out or not. It'll still be more or less covered, but I really won't be risking anything if someone might see a bit of it. Right now, I will not chance that.

SNIP

EEllis wrote:Lets face it CHL's are a minority, a fringe group if you will, and making a big deal about this and putting extra effort into OC makes you a minority of a fringe group.

So, CHLers are a "fringe group"? How many CHLers are there in Texas, about 1 million now? If I divide 1 by 28, which is the state population in millions, that gives me a bit over .035. That means that CHLers are about 3.5 percent of the population. The Supreme Court just changed how marriage is defined for about that percentage of the population. Again, "fringe group"? Maybe in the minds of "Moms Demand Disarmed Citizens" and "Bloomberg Gun Grabbers, Inc.".