Charles, I'm loath to disagree with you but I doubt that many businesses would post 30.06 as a result.Charles L. Cotton wrote:Not if no one is open-carrying.jlangton wrote:Well put and the hard,cold truth.anygunanywhere wrote:If open carry was an issue at all in the 44 states where it is legal then it would be made illegal faster than a democrat changing his position based on a poll in an election year.
Anygunanywhere
JL
Chas.
First, that assumes that the law allowing open carry is based on those with a CHL. That may be true but maybe we'd be able to get unlicensed open carry
No 30.06 concerns there. 
Secondly, as you mention, even in those states whose laws have NEVER restricted open carry, it is rarely practiced as a percentage of the overall population. Thus the chance that an anti business owner will run across an open carrier isn't very good.
Thirdly, I think that open carry is truth-in-advertising and it gives an anti business owner the opportunity to ask someone to disarm or leave. Maybe they will post 30.06 in the future as a result; maybe they won't. Either way, as a property rights issue, it is good for them to know what's going on inside their business. For this reason alone, ANTI people should support open carry because they can benefit even though they haven't taken the time to post 30.06
Honestly, my projection of the impact is this: tiny. A small percentage of the CHLers or general law-abiding public (depending on how the law is written) would actually open carry. The vast majority would not. The good news is that worries about printing (despite the wording of the current statute that ought to put most people's worries to rest "intentionally or knowingly"; not accidental or inadvertant) or accidental exposure would be eased.
Finally, aside from the important philosophical reasons to support it (regaining lost liberty, TX being on the "loser list" of states, etc.), the very practical one is sooooo compelling: it is H-O-T here and sometimes concealing or fully concealing is inconvenient. Think about riding a bicycle or a motorcycle (bent at the waist, leg movement, etc). Concealing under these conditions can be problematic. As a practical matter, I think it would directly benefit very few, but I think as a matter of principle it ought to be pursued. Personally, I can name some times where I had to choose between carrying and not carrying because concealing was going to be such a burden. I'd love to have the option of going open, even if I don't know how much I'd use it. I'll take more freedom/choice every day of the week.
SA-TX
BTW -- since I am directly addressing an attorney, can you give me your legal opinion (not whether it is wise) on whether or not openly carrying a pre-1899 firearm is legal? No one will give me a straight answer and, no, no matter what you say I'm not going to go out and do it. It is just a point of intellectual curiousity (although I do have this definitely pre-1899 S&W safety hammerless .38 ...
). Just kidding. I have no desire to sample the county's "hospitality". It does distress me a bit that this maybe completely legal (you tell me), but yet we shy away because those charge with upholding and enforcing the law are ignorant of it. 