TexasCHLforum.com

HerbM wrote:This is just not a problem anywhere that you can point to and say see --

HerbM wrote:This is just not a problem anywhere that you can point to and say see -- it is just speculation and the same junk argument as the Brady Bunch folks use.

Don't scare the sheeple

agbullet2k1 wrote:Charles,

Would you support open carry if some effort were also made to make the 30.06 provision apply to OC only, or to make it more restrictive on the business? I can see where most business owners would be a bit worried about some of their business being scared off, but they'd also risk alienating a large portion of C/OHLers by posting. It seems like allowing OC with a similar 30.06 provision, along with removing 30.06 for concealed, would be a good interim comprimise and allow business owners to satisfy a larger group of people.

....of course I may just be dreaming.

DoubleJ wrote:Sr Cotton, a question. Sure, you can, state-law-wise, OC with a long arm, but can a local municpality (in your case, Houston), further restrict it? I thinking similar to how SanAntonio has attempted to bar ALL knives within city limits.

MBGuy wrote:Charles,

By open-carry only, are you saying that some view it as either you open-carry, or you don't carry at all? Why can't the license be amended that you can do either, with the license? Obviously the name change is required, somewhat like Tennesse, but I can't understand the logic that the anti's are using (there's a first....not!) that by allowing open carry, the whole CHL operation ceases to exist. Trying to see it from their point of view, it seems to me that'd be wishful thinking. Louisiana among others have a license requirement to conceal, no license at all to open-carry, probably knowing not many people would have the guts to open carry, which is true since I've yet to see one during my visits.

I think one difference between now and then is that it's a whole lot harder to get rid of this huge mechanism right now than it was to prevent it from being born back then. But, that's just my opinion, and you're obviously in the loop a lot more then we are. I just find it incredible that this is what they're thinking knowing how other states treat the difference.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:. . . Yes, many states allow open carry, but I am not aware of any that only recently changed their law to allow it. I may be mistaken, but if so I suspect such states are very few in number. I also suspect that no other state has gone from a 125+ year ban on open carry to allowing it. That is why I feel that other states' experience is not necessarily a good indicator of what we can expect in Texas.

I also have serious doubts as to how many states that technically don’t prohibit open carry actually see a great deal of open carry occurring. Texas doesn’t prohibit the carrying of long guns, so in theory I could walk into my downtown Houston office every day with an AR-15 slung over my shoulder. Buy in my 25+ years of having an office in downtown Houston I have never seen anyone carrying a long gun; not once! For that matter, I can’t recall the last time I’ve seen anyone openly carrying a rifle or shotgun anywhere in Houston. Rural areas are different, but our major cities have huge voting blocks and that’s a fact we simply can’t ignore.

Those who argue that there was no "blood-in-the-streets" after CHL passed are absolutely correct. That was a ludicrous argument that has proven to be false. But that has nothing to do with a store owner or manager watching his/her sales revenue going down because the soccer moms won't shop there because he won't post a 30.06 sign and stop "those people" from carrying guns. Also, the tremendous success of the CHL statute, and even the passage of SB501, hasn't stopped governmental entities and agencies from posting unenforceable 30.06 signs. It hasn't stopped some Texas cities from posting a 30.06 sign and declaring entire buildings (ex. city hall) off-limits to CHL's simply because the municipal court clerk has a small office somewhere in the building. The open carrying of handguns captured on videotape by anti-gun activists, especially those in the news media, will once again thrust the carrying of handguns by citizens into the public eye. Can you imagine the bad press we'd see if Houston's rabid anti-gun Ch. 2 TV followed people into stores, malls, school parking lots and daycare centers?

Our carrying of handguns is not being seriously attacked now because people don't give it a second thought. They don't give it a second thought because 1) the predicted genocide did not occur and our opponents lost face; and 2) people don't see our guns.

I realize I'm in the minority with this opinion and I respect those who disagree with me on this issue. This is one time when I'd like very much to be wrong and I may be just that. Those who believe open carry will not have any ill effects on our ability to carry handguns could also be wrong. Perhaps we should all consider this; where does the greater risk lie? Be careful what you ask for, . . .

I also want to say this. If the decision is made to push for open carry, I will put aside my concerns and fight for its passage just a diligently as I work for passage of the CHL bill. I just hope people will stake a step back and fully consider the risks this path may present. Do we really want open carry at any cost?

Chas.