TexasCHLforum.com

speedsix wrote:...if I remember correctly, KA had only OC of UNLOADED handguns...they didn't lose just a whole lot, now, did they...
...it's not perfect here, but we've got it good...thank God for CC and if we ever get OC...OK...if not, OK, too...

Yeah, they were supposed to be unloaded, but you could also open carry a loaded magazine. You might not get the gun into play as fast as if it were loaded, but if you practice a lot and you know what you're doing, you can load up and rack a slide pretty fast. It's certainly better than not being able to carry at all.........which is what they "enjoy" now, thanks to the stupidity of in-your-face advocacy.

high_landerDZ wrote:Well as a recent Californian, the OC movement invited a lot of scrutiny and made public a lot of their events, and encouraged their members to carry recording equipment for LEO encounters. There was a fellow who almost went to jail in the city I used to live in. He was at a laundromat and police showed up and he was under the impression he was on private property and the ADA decided to prosecute since he violated the GFSZ statute. Long story short he lost his gun rights for 10 years and moved out of the country. The CalGuns Foundation is doing quite a lot legally speaking with litigation to overturn a lot of the stupid laws, and trying step by step to get CA to a shall issue state. One misstep I think they made was endorsing Jerry Brown for gov, as he was very pro-2A, but it looks like he screwed them over.

Persoanlly I would like to see TX have the option of Open Carry or CCW.

I moved out of California in 2006, so I also have some connection to gun rights activism in that state. Also, I agree that constitutional carry in Texas is a worthy goal. Arizona's model is a good one: OC/CCW without permit, CCW with permit for reciprocity if so desired. However, the California OC movement, much like the most vocal OC movements in other states, have themselves alone to blame for what happened. As 2nd Amendment absolutists, we are absolutely foolish if we refuse to acknowledge that our position—although it is the correct one—is anything but a minority position. Polling data nationwide, even from fairly reputable polling agencies, indicates that Americans tend to favor the 2nd Amendment.......and they tend to agree with "common sense" regulation of its expression. Of course, what the bulk of that middle ground fails to appreciate is that "common sense" is code for "draconian laws that practically eliminate it." They aren't gun owners....or they are gun owners but they are not particularly enthusiasts. Gun ownership is not really a significant part of their lives even if they own one. They may not even remember what manufacturer/model/caliber their gun is. To people like that, "common sense" restrictions are... ....common sense. They do not see the threat to their own rights in those restrictions.

Heck, there are probably millions of gun owners, even active gun owners who disagree with OC as being "too radical." Now, I am not agreeing with any of those folks. Like I said, I favor constitutional carry. But, I would be an idiot to deny the facts of the demographics, and so would be any OC activist who denied the facts. Consequently, it is monumentally STUPID, particularly in an anti-gun state like California, to provoke authorities into action, when the only action one can realistically expect is that authorities will react by cracking down and criminalizing a formerly legal behavior. So now, thanks to foolishly stupid, unwise, feckless OC advocates, Californians no longer enjoy that right.

Way to go. It's like hiring your plumber to do your colonoscopy. The results will never be good.

boba wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:BTW, Brown got elected on a platform of fiscal rectitude. HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!

Looks like he fiscal wrecked it dude.

I totally agree. That's what made me laugh. California democrats think that anytime the government can spend the people's money, that's fiscal rectitude. (....and yes, I got the joke....)

sjfcontrol wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote: Some day, they will be completely on their knees because of their policies, and they will beg for relief from the other 49 states. They are the Greece of the American Union. I have no sympathy.

That "Some Day" isn't far off. Many would say it's here now.

Not yet. Right now they're asking, but trying to dictate the terms. That means they're still in denial. They've got to hit rock bottom and live there for a while before they put aside their pride and ask with humility and a demonstrated willingness to change their ways.

BTW, Brown got elected on a platform of fiscal rectitude. HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!

sjfcontrol wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:Who elected this clown y'all call Governor Moonbeam?

Liberals, and illegal aliens.

That's pretty much it. There are conservatives to be found in California, but they are far outnumbered by two other categories: unapologetic liberals (mostly democrats), and republicans who say they stand for conservative ideals.......which are apparently no different from liberal ideals. We haven't had anything resembling a true conservative as a California governor since Reagan, and even he wasn't always a conservative.

There's conservatism, of the rock-ribbed fiscal and social variety; and then there's "conservatism" of the fiscal variety but hands off everything else (which is essentially libertarianism). And then there's California republicanism: "I own a shotgun. Therefore I am a conservative. It's a $40,000 Purdy shotgun, but still.....I believe in the right of all people to own a $40,000 Purdy shotgun for upland bird hunting. But nobody needs a $800 'cop killer assault rifle.'"

There are comparatively few Californians who believe that a Korean-born store owner has the right to defend his store with an AR15 during a riot....let alone carry a handgun, concealed or unconcealed. Those that do are a small minority, and they are divided between the outspoken, and those who know not to bring trouble down on their heads. That small group of open carry activists has no political clout. Zero.......which is exactly why "in your face" open carry demonstrations blew up in their faces. But they lack the political wisdom to see that, and so they took a step backwards. That's as much on them as it is on the commies who run that Animal Farm.

THAT is how cement-heads like Brown get elected, and that that is why California is headed irrevocably into the toilet. Some day, they will be completely on their knees because of their policies, and they will beg for relief from the other 49 states. They are the Greece of the American Union. I have no sympathy.

It is a beautiful state, geographically; maybe one of the 3 or 4 prettiest in the nation. But it is governed by complete dolts.

mamabearCali wrote:

knotquiteawake wrote:How is taking away the right to carry an unloaded firearm "laying out the red carpet" for criminals? Its not like an unloaded gun is any kind of deterrent or useful in stopping any crime. If you can't carry the firearm loaded legally then you might as well not be carrying it, its going to reduce the number of MWAG calls at least. CC Permits are going to vary by county from what I understand. Where my parents live (In the country, very conservative elected officials) it is not unreasonable for a business owner who makes cash deposits on a regular basis to be fairly easily granted a CC permit by the local authorities. Los Angeles is another story though... impossible to carry there unless you are LEO. Their CC permit system is the red carpet, its among the reasons I move out of California and into Texas.

It is making it clear that no there will be no resistance possible in the event of a criminal act. My brother is stuck in Sacramento, deals with large amounts of cash and was denied a CHL in CA. He had one in VA. Why should only business owners be able to have a CHL? No CA is a nightmare. Leave and leave quickly. John (my brother) is working hard towards moving to AZ, but is running his FIL's business so that is hard.

Actually, even business owners are routinely denied carry licenses in California. When I lived in Los Angeles County, the LA Co Sheriff's office went literally decades at one point without issuing any permits. The lone exception was made when former chief Willie Williams of the LAPD failed his qualifications several times and could not carry under the authority of his badge. The sheriff issued him a courtesy license so Williams could carry.

knotquiteawake wrote:How is taking away the right to carry an unloaded firearm "laying out the red carpet" for criminals? Its not like an unloaded gun is any kind of deterrent or useful in stopping any crime. If you can't carry the firearm loaded legally then you might as well not be carrying it, its going to reduce the number of MWAG calls at least. CC Permits are going to vary by county from what I understand. Where my parents live (In the country, very conservative elected officials) it is not unreasonable for a business owner who makes cash deposits on a regular basis to be fairly easily granted a CC permit by the local authorities. Los Angeles is another story though... impossible to carry there unless you are LEO. Their CC permit system is the red carpet, its among the reasons I move out of California and into Texas.

In California you could (technically) OC an unloaded gun AND carry the loaded magazines for it. True, you can't deploy and fire the gun as quickly as you can a loaded gun, but you can still deploy a loaded gun pretty fast, and it definitely beats not being able to carry one at all.

In actual practice, OC'ing an unloaded gun in California, in about 99% of the state, was an invitation to police harassment and detention/arrest. BTW, this same Governor Moonbeam also signed the California Dream Act into law, making all social services and in-state tuition officially available to illegal aliens. California is a lost cause and a write off. It should be treated as such.

Edited to add: By the way, the new law outlawing unloaded OC was a direct backlash against OC advocates in California holding public OC events at California restaurants and other public places this year. Until these events occurred, there was no drive to outlaw it. The bill was filed within a very short time of a well-publicized event at which OC advocates open-carried their guns at a restaurant location in Old Town Pasadena—an area that could be likened to something like Southlake Town Center or some other similar area populated with upscale restaurants, bars, boutiques, and movie theaters.

I am personally in favor of some day arriving at the point where we have constitutional carry. But I think that there is a right way and a wrong way to do things, and invariably when it comes to guns, "in your face" tactics always seem to blow up in the faces of the advocates. Working slowly, intelligently, behind the scenes, and with great wisdom (the way Charles Cotton does things, in other words) takes longer, but tends to yield better results. I am not happy that California has squashed one more expression of the RKBA, but I am not surprised, and I believe that the activities that lead to this result were utterly predictable and unwise.

Lack of wisdom seems to be the lot of many of those most vocal supporters of OC. I'm not saying all OC supporters are stupid or unwise, but some are, and they do damage to the cause far out of proportion to their individual importance as activists.