open carry bill filed

[AEA]

Thanks Charles......

Personally, ...... I give up.
It's obvious that too many Liberals have invaded Texas.
This is my last post on the topic.

[MasterOfNone]

Since they used the phrase "dual points of resistance" and not "dual points of retention," one could argue that a kydex holster with recesses that resist at the trigger guard and at the ejection port provide "dual points of resistance."

[johnferg69]

I have contacted Lavenders office before and been assured he is aware that to get broad support he needed to leave 30.06 unchanged. I was also told that he had asked for input from LE agencies, "TSRA" and other organizations on the new bill he was working on. If he did or not I don't know.
However, when I spoke to his staffer Bryan today he made it clear that they knew the 30.06 was a hot issue and they wanted it resolved to get this passed.

Now, if anyone feels that his office is not entirely truthful about this please feel free to call his office.

Is there things about this bill I don't like? Yes. But I do want people to have the freedom to OC if they wish like most states so I'm willing to call his office and voice my concerns. Maybe people critical of this bill but would like to see our freedoms expanded should do the same. That, in my opinion is the best way to hash out the problem.

[steveincowtown]

Since they used the phrase "dual points of resistance" and not "dual points of retention," one could argue that a kydex holster with recesses that resist at the trigger guard and at the ejection port provide "dual points of resistance."

Oh wow...check out the link to the article in this thread for more info about "dual points of resistance"

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=62202" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Has there been a rash of folks taking OC'ers guns in other states? I know of one incident in VA, but that is about it.

[The Annoyed Man]

I want to know what states like Arizona, Wyoming, and Oklahoma have in regards to requirements about holster types. That retention business sounds ridiculous. And you can certainly put me in the column that if this will mess up our concealed carry laws, then I don't want it. I'm an NOT against open carry, I think it might be useful in some situations...but not if it will ruin what we have now.

To the best of my knowledge, Arizona has no holster type requirement. I have open carried there, and nobody commented on my holster, which was a nicely boned OWB without any retention straps. If I was breaking the law, nobody cared enough to say anything.

[MasterOfNone]

Since they used the phrase "dual points of resistance" and not "dual points of retention," one could argue that a kydex holster with recesses that resist at the trigger guard and at the ejection port provide "dual points of resistance."

Oh wow...check out the link to the article in this thread for more info about "dual points of resistance"

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=62202" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Has there been a rash of folks taking OC'ers guns in other states? I know of one incident in VA, but that is about it.

The article says Level 2, but the letter of the bill doesn't say that. Is there an established precedent that "dual points of resistance" means Level 2?

[K.Mooneyham]

I want to know what states like Arizona, Wyoming, and Oklahoma have in regards to requirements about holster types. That retention business sounds ridiculous. And you can certainly put me in the column that if this will mess up our concealed carry laws, then I don't want it. I'm an NOT against open carry, I think it might be useful in some situations...but not if it will ruin what we have now.

To the best of my knowledge, Arizona has no holster type requirement. I have open carried there, and nobody commented on my holster, which was a nicely boned OWB without any retention straps. If I was breaking the law, nobody cared enough to say anything.

Thank you, TAM. I figured as much. Since it hasn't been an issue there, why must it be one here?

[cyphur]

Since they used the phrase "dual points of resistance" and not "dual points of retention," one could argue that a kydex holster with recesses that resist at the trigger guard and at the ejection port provide "dual points of resistance."

Oh wow...check out the link to the article in this thread for more info about "dual points of resistance"

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=62202" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Has there been a rash of folks taking OC'ers guns in other states? I know of one incident in VA, but that is about it.

The article says Level 2, but the letter of the bill doesn't say that. Is there an established precedent that "dual points of resistance" means Level 2?

In my quick read through the bill I could not see a reason they could force Level 2 holsters.

A holster that resists(provides tension) at the muzzle and at the trigger guard - like the quality boned leather holsters I have - should meet a dual point requirement.

Of course, IANAL, nor have I played one on TV.

[Wes]

I admit I am ignorant of the process bills undergo but am I under the correct assumption that introducing the bill is really just to start the conversation? As in, anything in it could (and should) change before it gets any further so some of these potential pitfalls could be ironed out? I know some probably get shot down immediately and have to start from scratch while others go right through, but do others get debating and refined? a bill like this with lots of interest but not being perfect seems like it would fall in to that category and if some of these could be fixed it would be nice to see it pass.

[jmra]

Would take a lot of fixing.

[joelamosobadiah]

On Rep. Lavender's Facebook page I expressed my concerns with the bill. He again stated that the bill doesn't affect 30.06. I'm starting to think that he didn't write much of the bill at all and is going off the word of lawyers. That or his staffers are responding to people and don't understand the ramifications of the bill.

[jmra]

On Rep. Lavender's Facebook page I expressed my concerns with the bill. He again stated that the bill doesn't affect 30.06. I'm starting to think that he didn't write much of the bill at all and is going off the word of lawyers. That or his staffers are responding to people and don't understand the ramifications of the bill.

[johnferg69]

I admit I am ignorant of the process bills undergo but am I under the correct assumption that introducing the bill is really just to start the conversation? As in, anything in it could (and should) change before it gets any further so some of these potential pitfalls could be ironed out? I know some probably get shot down immediately and have to start from scratch while others go right through, but do others get debating and refined? a bill like this with lots of interest but not being perfect seems like it would fall in to that category and if some of these could be fixed it would be nice to see it pass.

You are correct about the process! However not every law passed pleases everyone. I'm sure if conceal carry was trying to get passed with todays social networking there would be plenty touting the pitfalls and dangers cause the bill isn't perfect in their eyes.
IF an open carry bill gets passed it will be just like the CC law, it will get refined with age. Just like the silly "dual points of resistance" nonsense. I could see that getting changed in the next session. But people will shoot down the bill for that alone and say "I'm not getting stuck with that"
You also have to remember that there are people on "our side" that don't want OC to pass! They're not going to openly admit it because OC is a popular issue but their out there
It would be nice to have more people call their reps, tell them their complaints and ask for a common sense bill.

[Wes]

Thanks

[johnferg69]

On Rep. Lavender's Facebook page I expressed my concerns with the bill. He again stated that the bill doesn't affect 30.06. I'm starting to think that he didn't write much of the bill at all and is going off the word of lawyers. That or his staffers are responding to people and don't understand the ramifications of the bill.

I noted that twice on facebook he mentioned that he worked with the NRA on the language of the bill. And then we have this link:
http://texasgopvote.com/regions/texas/t ... rry-005062" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Where the NRA-ILA is mentioned to be supporting this bill.
Interesting????
And the plot thickens!!!