There's a question I often ask allegedly pro-gun folks who are more "aggressive" than is prudent in the political arena. (I'm not referring to you, but to the few in OCT leadership and in their "membership" who caused untold harm to the open-carry cause.) "Do you want to make a different, or merely a point?"stingeragent wrote:I'm not an OCT person but from the video's I have seen they didn't do anything legally wrong. It is hard to preach for open carry hand gun laws and then condemn folks that are walking around in stores on the streets with open carried rifles. It may have freaked some folks out, but if they can legally do it, why condemn them? It may not be what YOU would do, and you may think they are hurting the prospects of our rights, but they are exercising their right, so what's the problem?
You are correct, carrying rifles and shotguns into stores, restaurants and on public streets is legal, but it was not prudent. The motivation in the eyes of the nonaligned public was to scare and intimidate, not to educate as OCT claimed. OCT was telling the Legislature "if you won't let us openly carry handguns, then we'll carry things that scare the public even more." Whether this was the actual motivation is irrelevant, it is what the public perceived as their motivation. The vast majority of Texas gun owners realized the negative impact of OCT tactics, yet their calls for restraint and statesmanlike campaigning for open-carry fell on deaf ears. OCT made passage of licensed open-carry much more costly in terms of political capital. The widespread posting of 30.07 signs and no open-carry statements by businesses are the direct result of imprudent tactics used by OCT. Their conduct, while perfectly lawful, was damaging to Texas gun owners not only prior to and during the 2015 Texas Legislative Session, but now during the implementation of open-carry. This is why rational gun owners condemn OCT, OCTC, CATI, TC, etc.
The fact that OCT, Grisham, Carry Texas and Terry Holcomb now take credit for passing licensed open-carry adds salt to the wound. Everything they wanted in an open-carry bill did not happen. They wanted unlicensed open-carry, but they didn't get it. They wanted TPC §30.06 amended to apply to both open and concealed carry, but they didn't get it. They spoke long and loud against any licensed open-carry bill because that would be "begging for permission slip" and a "tax" on a constitutional right, but licensed open-carry (NRA/TSRA's HB910) is what passed.
Back to OCT's position on amending TPC §30.06 for a moment. If OCT had gotten its way, we'd be seeing 30.06 signs popping up instead of 30.07 signs. The end result would a huge blow to self-defense because stores would have been forced to ban concealed-carry if they wanted to ban open-carry. This is precisely what OCT wanted!
Legal doesn't necessarily mean prudent in the political arena. It would be legal for me to go to a legislative hearing in the Capitol wearing cutoff shorts and a t-shirt, but it wouldn't be prudent. My imprudent conduct would not help pass the bill on which I was testifying. Make no mistake, OCT tactics were designed to put CJ Grisham in the public eye, not to pass open-carry. He got his 15 minutes of infamy while the NRA brought open-carry to Texas.
Chas.