TexasCHLforum.com

carlson1 wrote:If you can't get a license to OC you don't need to OC.

I don't like the license for CC, but it sure beats not carrying.

RoyGBiv wrote:

locke_n_load wrote:The CHL law was great because we had no way to carry a handgun in public previously. I just wonder if we go licensed OC, would we ever get the backing to go unlicensed?

Perhaps a relevant comparison can be made by considering "places weapons prohibited"?
The restrictions have been eased in some places, and there seems to be some momentum for further easing.
Just because we have CC doesn't mean anyone is content to leave the restrictions as-is.
I think the same will happen if we only get licensed OC this session.

KC5AV wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:

locke_n_load wrote:The CHL law was great because we had no way to carry a handgun in public previously. I just wonder if we go licensed OC, would we ever get the backing to go unlicensed?

Perhaps a relevant comparison can be made by considering "places weapons prohibited"?
The restrictions have been eased in some places, and there seems to be some momentum for further easing.
Just because we have CC doesn't mean anyone is content to leave the restrictions as-is.
I think the same will happen if we only get licensed OC this session.

Another good comparison is seat times in classes and renewals. It took some time, but we've managed to reduce the number of hours required for a CHL class, and removed the need to sit for a renewal class at all. We can't let perfect be the enemy of good.

jmra wrote:

locke_n_load wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Beiruty wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Beiruty wrote:After the election is over, NRA/TSRA has to lay it bare on the ground their strategy for open-carry. There is no point of keeping silent or keeping it a secret.

I've explained our two-year cycle and how we measure and garner support for issues and bills. Open-carry is no different.

Chas.

Cahs,
What I meant: "Are we looking for unlicensed open-carry, or CHL with an option to OC?" If I am asked, I do not know what to say.

Beiruty, the strategy is this: Several OC bills are being advanced. The NRA/TSRA goal appears to be ultimately unlicensed open carry, with a recognition that we may have to achieve that in steps. Bills being advanced seem to run the gamut from Constitutional Carry with 30.06 inclusive for OC (not supported) to Constitutional Carry with 30.07 for OC (recommended and the one with best NRA/TSRA support), to licensed OC with and without inclusion of OC into 30.06 (NRA/TSRA will not support inclusion of OC into 30.06 under any argument), and other bills not addressing OC but expanding our rights in other ways......for instance getting rid of exclusion areas in which CHLs cannot carry.

Here's what you can probably count on to tell your friends who ask:

1. TSRA and NRA will not support the inclusion of OC into 30.06 for any reason whatsoever because it is a step backward for concealed carry, so any OC bill that does this will not have their support.
2. Whatever we can get passed that does not include OC in 30.06 is a net positive gain.
3. The ultimate goal, whether we achieve it in this session or some future session is Constitutional Carry.

Charles, have I stated it accurately enough for general terms?

My only problem with the "steps" idea, is that if we get licensed open carry, would we ever be able to get enough support to remove the license requirement in further sessions? The question people would ask is "why remove the requirement for license and background checks, they are a good idea" to which we reply "licensing is burdensome and against the Constitution" to which they say "we don't care, it's good enough."

So you would rather not have the option to OC at all than to have licensed OC? Would you have preferred that we didn't pass a CHL law because it has restrictions that are difficult to get removed? Would you prefer that we didn't have the ability to CC because we didn't get what we wanted from the get go?

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Beiruty wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Beiruty wrote:After the election is over, NRA/TSRA has to lay it bare on the ground their strategy for open-carry. There is no point of keeping silent or keeping it a secret.

I've explained our two-year cycle and how we measure and garner support for issues and bills. Open-carry is no different.

Chas.

Cahs,
What I meant: "Are we looking for unlicensed open-carry, or CHL with an option to OC?" If I am asked, I do not know what to say.

Beiruty, the strategy is this: Several OC bills are being advanced. The NRA/TSRA goal appears to be ultimately unlicensed open carry, with a recognition that we may have to achieve that in steps. Bills being advanced seem to run the gamut from Constitutional Carry with 30.06 inclusive for OC (not supported) to Constitutional Carry with 30.07 for OC (recommended and the one with best NRA/TSRA support), to licensed OC with and without inclusion of OC into 30.06 (NRA/TSRA will not support inclusion of OC into 30.06 under any argument), and other bills not addressing OC but expanding our rights in other ways......for instance getting rid of exclusion areas in which CHLs cannot carry.

Here's what you can probably count on to tell your friends who ask:

1. TSRA and NRA will not support the inclusion of OC into 30.06 for any reason whatsoever because it is a step backward for concealed carry, so any OC bill that does this will not have their support.
2. Whatever we can get passed that does not include OC in 30.06 is a net positive gain.
3. The ultimate goal, whether we achieve it in this session or some future session is Constitutional Carry.

Charles, have I stated it accurately enough for general terms?