TexasCHLforum.com

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

DKSuddeth wrote:hearkens back to the wild west days......how 'pro gun' is he?

A heck of a lot more than you! What have you done for Texas gun owners?

What did Senator Wentworth mean by "wild west days?"

Chas.

While none of might really know, I think we are all in agreement that we wish he hadn't used that phrase. I'm hoping he regrets the phrasing also.

KaiserB wrote:This issue is a hot one for 2009, unfortunately what is demonstrated by a minority is but a symptom of a bigger issue. I have come to realize, over the past couple of years, the reason things such as open carry, fair tax and viable 3rd party candidates rarely succeed is:

The minority of people who act as a catalyst to start things are too radical and do not use discretion to communicate there points.
OR
The minority of people who act as a catalyst quickly lose control of an issue to the vocal radicals who do not use discretion to communicate points.

In both cases these people tend to explode at any dissenter of what-ever movement the minority is advancing. The loudest voices do not take the time to work the political process in the Constitution as the founding fathers intended and end up demanding things, tossing people under the bus, and threatening anarchy and revolution every 5 minutes. This causes a backlash and the public perceives the starting minority as radicals, moon bats and loons...then the movement dies off or goes to the political fringes.

Things like this are very disheartening...

I find it interesting to follow the paths of concept for the following year. A year ago I believe that the idea of putting a school carry bill and the odds of getting it passed would be pretty slim, the idea of open carry seemed to be an easier thing to accomplish. Now it looks as though school carry will be possible and most people now understand that open carry doesn't stand a chance this year. how did the radical concept become accepted as reasonable and the once reasonable conceptget painted as radical. a lot of it is about presentation. The campus carry people went and worked for support, They presented reasonable discussion and education, The empty holster protest was brilliant public relations, was non threatning got the media to cooperate usually sympathatically, and the students avoided any shouting matches. Those who objected with fear were allowed to express incoherently their concerns. They looked out right silly when they tried to address the scary empty holsters. The handbook campaign is a way of not only educating supporters and our legislators, for a very small fee supporters can an actually get the message out to our legislators, in such a way we can all understand.

The open carry folks have a lot of enthusiasm, but they haven't shown the political savy that the students have shown. They get a couple bill boards with a babe in a gun. Great poster beautiful girl, but in effect all it does is get a online cute statement out to general public, they don't manage to get the MSM discusing the real issues.

Just my thoughts.

KRM45 wrote:Those comments don't seem that bad to me. Mostly knee-jerk reaction to the posted article. If the quote attributed to him in the article is accurate, I can understand the response.

I notice one of our frequent posters is in the thick of it too...

I expected to see a thread ripping him to pieces, the comments weren't savage emotional, or unreasonable stretches of logic, and while OC isn't high on my list. I can see why the remarks attributed to Jeff Wentworth would bother those who are pushing for OC and remember the legislative debates of 1995 and 1993.

USA Today wrote:"Republican state Sen. Jeff Wentworth, who sponsored the college campus bill, opposes open carry. "I think that's harkening too far back to the Wild West," he says.

I think Rep. Wentworth would be well advised to pick his words a little more wisely.