TexasCHLforum.com

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

parabelum wrote:mojo84,
I'm getting little fed up with your bully attitude towards anyone who's "new". Who are you?

People are stating their opinions here and you go around with that attitude.

While I state my opinion sometimes more forcefully then I ought to, I have not gone into an attack mode. Is this your usual modus operandi?

I'm new here, so please do educate me. I'm just going to do my best to fit in.

Parabelum, you are new to the Forum and I believe you said you are relatively new to this country. Some of your posts are coming across rather antagonistic, but that could well be unintended. You have experiences that are foreign to virtually all Forum Members and that could well influence your opinions and comments. I understand and respect your feelings and your appreciation for our country.

Most Members of the Forum are a close-nit group and some are almost like family members. Like family members, we agree, disagree, joke and sometimes get irritated. But let one of the "Family" need help or prayers, and all the banter is put aside and we support our brothers and sisters. My description obviously doesn't apply to everyone, but it does to most.

Take a step back, don't take offense, and become one of us. It really doesn't take long.

Chas.

mojo84 wrote:

parabelum wrote:I really wasn't going to chime in on this anymore, as we've already had plethora of intelligent posts depicting what a proper and mature response to a business ought to be with respect to this topic...BUT, discussing this ad infinitum serves no purpose other than giving anti-2A more potential material.

Appreciate the rebuke. However, I do believe we need to make sure accurate info is out there and it needs to come from US. As long as people jump in an add incorrect info, it needs to be addressed.

WinoVeritas wrote:

gljjt wrote:

winters wrote:http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... -tote-guns

Since when does walmart have any legal right to even ask to see someones chl even if they have a liquor license? I could care less if they ask me to leave but asking for my chl crosses the line. I own supressors and you would be surprised by the people who think they have some legal right to inspect my paper work.

They have the right to ask. You have the right to show it or leave. Free speech is a constitutionally protected right. Can you go into Wal-Mart and start yelling? No. Freedom of assembly is a constitutionally protected right. Can you go into Wal-Mart with your 50 best friends and block the aisles? No. This is pretty simple. I really don't know why some aren't getting it.

I suspect many gun owners are obtuse....................................or that's the impression I get from reading the myriad threads regarding OC.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Apparently, they are trying to protect their liquor license. No rational person could fault them for doing so. The fact that Grisham and OCT are making an issue of this could well result in Walmart posting 30.07 signs.

The political reality is this. Open-carry has passed and it is no longer unlawful, except under limited circumstances. TPC §30.07(e) provides the same protection afforded to concealed-carry. In 2017, the "Fines for Signs" law will likely be amended to include 30.07 notices and signs. In short, the state and local governments are removed from the open-carry issue.

Not satisfied, the more ardent open-carry supporters now want to force private individuals and companies to accept open-carry. These same people often claim to be the strongest supporters of private property rights, yet when it comes to open-carry, they are quick to abandon that position. As a result of OCT and other "all or nothing folks," many businesses are posting 30.07 signs. Some are also posting 30.06 signs meaning open-carry has cost almost 1 million LTCs the ability to carry self-defense handguns where they have been able to do so for two decades. The more harassment businesses receive, the more 30.07 signs will be posted and, unfortunately, more 30.06 signs also. Now who is the true enemy of the Second Amendment, the company that prohibits open-carry but allows concealed-carry, or the open-carry supporters who's conduct ultimately results in more business banning all handguns?

Chas.

mojo84 wrote:

winters wrote:

ScottDLS wrote:I guess they could say if you don't show it to them, you have to leave. In my opinion better than posting 30.07. Also another reason why I probably won't OC at WalMart. They don't have any right to "demand" it from you, but you don't have a "right" to be in their store either.

Your "right" or privilege comes with conditions. They do not have to allow you in their store. If you refuse to show your chl to confirm you have one, they can terminate your "tight" or privilege to be there. They have a vested interest in confirming you have a chl if you are going to open carry.

This still has nothing to do with cops stopping people on the street.