OC v CHL

[tbrown]

I'm disappointed at seeing another attempt to get pro gun people to fight against each other instead of fighting together to defeat the anti gun enemies.

[johnferg69]

I'm disappointed at seeing another attempt to get pro gun people to fight against each other instead of fighting together to defeat the anti gun enemies.

That is exactly what disturbs me when I visit this forum. Instead of everyone banning together to expand our gun rights we pick what's important to us and throw the others under the bus.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I'm disappointed at seeing another attempt to get pro gun people to fight against each other instead of fighting together to defeat the anti gun enemies.

That is exactly what disturbs me when I visit this forum. Instead of everyone banning together to expand our gun rights we pick what's important to us and throw the others under the bus.

Then how do you stomach Opencarry.org? You post there and virtually everyone sees open-carry as an issue that everyone should support regardless of how horrible a particular bill may be. Everyone who expresses any concerns are ridiculed. Opencarry.org wants everyone to band together to push for open-carry to the exclusion of anything and everything else, regardless of potential unintended consequences.

Why the double standard for TexasCHLforum.com and Opencarry.org?

Chas.

[RoyGBiv]

banning

ban together

band

[RX8er]

Opencarry.org wants everyone to ban together to push for open-carry to the exclusion of anything and everything else, regardless of potential unintended consequences.
Chas.

Yes they do. Kind of reminds me of the far left wingers position when you disagree with them.

[johnferg69]

I'm disappointed at seeing another attempt to get pro gun people to fight against each other instead of fighting together to defeat the anti gun enemies.

That is exactly what disturbs me when I visit this forum. Instead of everyone banning together to expand our gun rights we pick what's important to us and throw the others under the bus.

Then how do you stomach Opencarry.org? You post there and virtually everyone sees open-carry as an issue that everyone should support regardless of how horrible a particular bill may be. Everyone who expresses any concerns are ridiculed. Opencarry.org wants everyone to band together to push for open-carry to the exclusion of anything and everything else, regardless of potential unintended consequences.

Why the double standard for TexasCHLforum.com and Opencarry.org?

Chas.

Are you referring to the 2 threads there since my Jan '13 join date were I've questioned Rep. Lavenders OC bill and commented it needed work?

[Charles L. Cotton]

I'm disappointed at seeing another attempt to get pro gun people to fight against each other instead of fighting together to defeat the anti gun enemies.

That is exactly what disturbs me when I visit this forum. Instead of everyone banning together to expand our gun rights we pick what's important to us and throw the others under the bus.

Then how do you stomach Opencarry.org? You post there and virtually everyone sees open-carry as an issue that everyone should support regardless of how horrible a particular bill may be. Everyone who expresses any concerns are ridiculed. Opencarry.org wants everyone to band together to push for open-carry to the exclusion of anything and everything else, regardless of potential unintended consequences.

Why the double standard for TexasCHLforum.com and Opencarry.org?

Chas.

Are you referring to the 2 threads there since my Jan '13 join date were I've questioned Rep. Lavenders OC bill and commented it needed work?

I'm talking about the OpenCarry.org and the overall attitude expressed by its posters/members, just as I said. If TexasCHLforum "disturbs" you, how can you read or post there?

Chas.

[TexasCajun]

I'm disappointed at seeing another attempt to get pro gun people to fight against each other instead of fighting together to defeat the anti gun enemies.

I don't see this as a divisive or contentious issue. This is really only a matter of preference or a difference in philosophy, if you will. Especially on this forum where debate and expressed opinion are conducted with the utmost decorum. There are merits to both sides of this discussion. And eventually, both would ultimately lead to the same place - an expanded ability to express an appreciation for the 2nd Amendment (although technically self-defense is only a by-product of the 2nd Amendment, but a good one). I don't envision a horde of CHL holders turning in their plastic & selling their guns if their flavor gets passed over in favor of the other this session.

There are those like me, who see passage of a campus carry bill to be a more direct route to a better CHL experience. Eliminating the places that are off limits for carrying is, in my opinion, a better way to advance the rights of all CHL holders. Others would argue that passing an open carry bill would get us closer (back) to what the founding fathers envisioned. Who's to say that it couldn't all happen eventually - it would just be a simple matter of the order of operation.

I take a good, hard look at anyone on either side of this who puts it into 'us' vs 'them' terms.

[johnferg69]

I'm disappointed at seeing another attempt to get pro gun people to fight against each other instead of fighting together to defeat the anti gun enemies.

That is exactly what disturbs me when I visit this forum. Instead of everyone banning together to expand our gun rights we pick what's important to us and throw the others under the bus.

Then how do you stomach Opencarry.org? You post there and virtually everyone sees open-carry as an issue that everyone should support regardless of how horrible a particular bill may be. Everyone who expresses any concerns are ridiculed. Opencarry.org wants everyone to band together to push for open-carry to the exclusion of anything and everything else, regardless of potential unintended consequences.

Why the double standard for TexasCHLforum.com and Opencarry.org?

Chas.

Are you referring to the 2 threads there since my Jan '13 join date were I've questioned Rep. Lavenders OC bill and commented it needed work?

I'm talking about the OpenCarry.org and the overall attitude expressed by its posters/members, just as I said. If TexasCHLforum "disturbs" you, how can you read or post there?

Chas.

Maybe for the same reason you know I've posted there.

[sunny beach]

Thanks for the eye opener. Based on the sipping contest, that's two groups I don't want my name associated with.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I'm disappointed at seeing another attempt to get pro gun people to fight against each other instead of fighting together to defeat the anti gun enemies.

That is exactly what disturbs me when I visit this forum. Instead of everyone banning together to expand our gun rights we pick what's important to us and throw the others under the bus.

Then how do you stomach Opencarry.org? You post there and virtually everyone sees open-carry as an issue that everyone should support regardless of how horrible a particular bill may be. Everyone who expresses any concerns are ridiculed. Opencarry.org wants everyone to band together to push for open-carry to the exclusion of anything and everything else, regardless of potential unintended consequences.

Why the double standard for TexasCHLforum.com and Opencarry.org?

Chas.

Are you referring to the 2 threads there since my Jan '13 join date were I've questioned Rep. Lavenders OC bill and commented it needed work?

I'm talking about the OpenCarry.org and the overall attitude expressed by its posters/members, just as I said. If TexasCHLforum "disturbs" you, how can you read or post there?

Chas.

Maybe for the same reason you know I've posted there.

It's clear you aren't going to answer the question and we both know why.

Chas.

[Sport Coach]

I read this thread as an open discussion of what the individual would prefer, open carry or campus carry. This country is stronger if we 1) are allowed to have our opinions (educated opinions let's hope) and 2) we vote on our preferences so the majority (of voters) carry the day. My 2 cents: 1) I was a non-traditional student at Lone Star College and wanted to carry and appreciate that there are plenty of responsible people that I wanted carrying too. 2) open carry can be seen to defeat the "Who has a gun?" deterrent of concealed carry so I would vote for campus carry over open carry. Lastly, great thanks to Charles for his work on all these issues as I heard him put forth a very comprehensive rationale for campus carry a couple years ago at Lone Star College.

[baseballguy2001]

I'm just asking a simple question in this thread, If there is a well crafted open carry bill introduced, passed, and made law, will more people be impacted by open carry all over the state, or if Campus Carry makes it this session? IANAL, and I don't have a college degree, but logic tells me, higher numbers of CHLs will be impacted by a good, OC bill. I'm assuming an OC bill will be written saying only CHL holders would be allowed to open carry. I've read the replies by you parents and campus employees, and I agree, a CC bill is needed, but I'm talking sheer numbers. I'm NOT saying which is more important, they are equally needed, in my opinion, especially now. The OC v CHL fight is silly. I appreciate Mr. Cotten putting in his .02, with this forum, we can discuss this with dignity, and civility. Sheer numbers now, can someone demonstrate to me the higher numbers of campus carriers?

[Jumping Frog]

I'm just asking a simple question in this thread, If there is a well crafted open carry bill introduced, passed, and made law, will more people be impacted by open carry all over the state, or if Campus Carry makes it this session? IANAL, and I don't have a college degree, but logic tells me, higher numbers of CHLs will be impacted by a good, OC bill. I'm assuming an OC bill will be written saying only CHL holders would be allowed to open carry. I've read the replies by you parents and campus employees, and I agree, a CC bill is needed, but I'm talking sheer numbers. I'm NOT saying which is more important, they are equally needed, in my opinion, especially now. The OC v CHL fight is silly. I appreciate Mr. Cotten putting in his .02, with this forum, we can discuss this with dignity, and civility. Sheer numbers now, can someone demonstrate to me the higher numbers of campus carriers?

I would counter that the criteria of using sheer number of people impacted by either bill can be a wrongful criteria to use as it can fall under the same problems as "tyrannical democracy".

See, we are conditioned to think that a democracy is the best approach to make the rules we live by, but the downside of democracy is the potential to trample God-given rights and liberties simply because "the majority says so". There is the old cliche about the problem with democracy: it is like two wolves and a sheep voting to decide what is for dinner.

So it is more than just the number of people affected, it is also the way in which they are currently infringed. Any law-abiding citizen who wants to enter a college premises must disarm to do so. Placing a person's life at risk is a pretty substantial infringement on their right to self defense. In contrast, anyone being told they cannot open carry does not suddenly have to deal with being disarmed with their life at risk. They still have the option of carrying concealed.

[MasterOfNone]

Technically, both OC and CC would affect every licensee, they would all be able to legally _____. But the practical question of which would BENEFIT the most people can only be determined by asking all of them. Personally, I am not a student but I would be more likely to carry on a campus than to OC.