TexasCHLforum.com

anygunanywhere wrote:Hey Herb.

I feel your pain.

In spite of my posts on these threads, I try to stay away from these open carry discussions.

Really, I try. I would be right alongside you. I agree with you. We be blood brothers.

This thread has reached the dead horse phase. Your intentions are honorable, but these folks will not change their minds because this forum is dedicated to concealed carry. You need to go to TCDL and rant a bit. It will make you fell better.

Everything in its time. OC will be a big change. Let's get more involved over at the TCDL site. These fine folks here will support us.

I see Charles' argument as very valid.

That is why I have started a few other threads today to see if we can focus on a few things I think are more important.

Just to be clear here, I am not in opposition to open carry. I simply believe that it will not happen right now, given the timing and political climate. What I am opposed to is an absolutionist mindset that does not take into account the precarious balancing act required in getting legislation passed to make steps forward regarding the RKBA. There are a lot of things being worked on for the upcoming session that will take us forward and closer to a situation where open carry in Texas can be had without stomping on concealed carry.

I simply think that it would be a very poor time to press our lawmakers to focus their efforts on an open carry bill, especially when it has the distinct potential to be to the detriment of concealed carry. The legal climate and public perception of self-defense firearms needs to change significantly (and it is, slowly) in order for open carry to become an accepted enough idea to pass and become accepted. This takes time, and screaming "we want open carry now" doesn't help the situation. Neither does stating that informed caution and risk assessment equate a person to a Brady Bunch gun-grabber. Insults like that weaken the credibility of the Open Carry movement, and only serve to push people away from your cause.

The only reason I even got involved in this discussion is because someone insulted Charles, by implying that he is ignorant, and I'm not going to stand for that. Very little has been brought to the table in the past eight open carry threads here, so I have resolved to let people state the same thing repeatedly so they can feel good until the thread dies out. These threads have only served to strengthen my opinion against an open carry bill, as no one can bring anything new to the table, and when someone does bring a dissenting opinion and articulates it with historical evidence, he is called and anti and told (in essence) that he's as good as Tom Brady himself. Some people need to reconsider who their friends are, and stop believing that anything and everything not identical to their ideals is uniformly against them.

I am through with this issue until someone can be civil about it.

HerbM wrote:There still has not been ONE argument against open carry either supported by the facts or different from the EXACT SAME (and tired) old arguments copied direction from the Brady Bunch against home defense and concealed carry -- except one:

I don't like it and it is therefore not for me.

Every other 'reason' is just a bad as what the Brady folks do...and by now everyone knows that.

You seem to be repeating yourself:

HerbM wrote: Of course the arguments against open carry are tired old arguments -- they are tired and old because they are the same ones the gun banners use against the CHL/CCW and even defensive guns in the home.

There is only one valid argument against open carry. It is true, and it is sufficient.

"I don't want to open carry, as it is not right for me."

All the other reasons turn out to be just nonsense when applied to anyone else and we know this the same way we know that the arguments against defensive firearms and the CHL are bogus:

Opinions are fine when they sound reasonable unless they just don't correspond to the reality of the evidence.

People doing it everyday prove that all of this works. Home defense, concealed carry, and open carry.

The only difference that means anything is personal choice.

Choice is good. Gun control is bad.


ALL gun control is bad.

Perhaps you would like to bring something new to the discussion. Where are these "FACTS" you mention, and how to we obtain them. It seems to me that Charles brought a valid argument supported by historical facts that occurred here in Texas in response to the CHL statute being passed. You seem to be dismissing what he has contributed to the discussion.

135boomer wrote:

NcongruNt wrote:
In response to your opinion, I heartily disagree. Every CHL Instructor I have met does not teach CHL classes as primary employment. Most have other trades or are retired, and are the type of people who are small business owners and do more than one thing for a living. They work hard to run their businesses, and my personal impression of these folks has been that they teach CHL classes primarily to promote concealed carry and defensive shooting in general. For these kinds of people, there are far more lucrative ways to earn money than teaching a state-regulated course on concealed carry. These folks (craftsmen, small business owners, etc.) are not the money-grubbers you seem to be making them out to be.

I did NOT say all CHL instructors. I know that most are honorable good people and I'm darned glad to have them on my side. However, there are some in every crowd who are more concerned with personal issues.

That could be said for just about any group of people in just about any situation, which is why I believe the point is moot.

135boomer wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

135boomer wrote:
Some are worried about a drop in personal income.

Oh really. Every opposing opinion must have a monetary motive? If I was concerned about money, I wouldn't spend a minute away from my office where I can bill clients. You have no clue what my support of the Second Amendment and gun owners has cost my firm in lost billings since 1980.

On a more practical note, there won't be any unlicensed open-carry, so every CHL Instructor will still have classes to teach.

Chas.

I did not refer to you personally. I did not say every opposing opinion. Like it or not, what I said is true. Yes, unlicensed open carry is possible. Unlikely maybe, but possible.

In response to your opinion, I heartily disagree. Every CHL Instructor I have met does not teach CHL classes as primary employment. Most have other trades or are retired, and are the type of people who are small business owners and do more than one thing for a living. They work hard to run their businesses, and my personal impression of these folks has been that they teach CHL classes primarily to promote concealed carry and defensive shooting in general. For these kinds of people, there are far more lucrative ways to earn money than teaching a state-regulated course on concealed carry. These folks (craftsmen, small business owners, etc.) are not the money-grubbers you seem to be making them out to be.

HerbM wrote:Don't you just love it when friends and supporters tell you that failure is inevitable even before any evidence is available?

Perhaps you haven't read his comments in this thread. Charles isn't going to toot his own horn, so I will. He is on the boards of the NRA and TSRA, an organization that has been instrumental in getting us to the point where we enjoy what we DO have in the CHL statutes. Texas is also one of the more lax states in regard to CHL. This did not happen by accident or chance. It was a LOT of work put in by many dedicated people. Charles is one of these people, and he and the TSRA are continuing to work towards eliminating many parts of the law that restrict CHL holders from carrying. He has selflessly dedicated himself in great amounts of public service to secure the rights of the CHLs in this state. I find the fact that you belittle his opinion to a simple accusation of ignorance offensive.

He knows first-hand the dynamics of the Texas Legislature, and when he tells us from his own observations the backlash that can occur in terms of restrictions on carry in businesses, I believe him. As he stated above, there were mass postings of no-gun signs in businesses in reaction to the CHL laws being passed in 1995 - to the point that legislative action had to be taken to require a sign large enough and specific enough that most businesses would find it inconvenient or cosmetically detracting enough to post in blanket fashion. As he also stated above, he believes the only way to get an OC law passed is to marry it with the current CHL statues, and this will definitely affect those who carry concealed. Since Charles has been working with the Texas Legislature for over a decade on carry issues, I take much greater stock in his opinion than someone simply posting on an internet forum without the valuable experience he has in these matters.

Just in case you really want to discuss this topic, please read the following threads in their entirety to make sure your particular viewpoint hasn't been discussed at length already. Also, those new to the forum can get caught up on the extensive discussion on this topic so far.

http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_F ... f=7&t=1875

http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_F ... =7&t=10360

http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_F ... =7&t=13096

http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_F ... =7&t=13805

http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_F ... 23&t=15444

Just trying to save some folks valuable internet discussion hours.

*sigh*


(again)