Open Carry In The News

[Charles L. Cotton]

Again and again, the behavior we see is that people who either don't want, or don't understand open carry retread the tried old arguments we hear from the gun banners.

"Tired old arguments we hear from the gun banners[?]" "Inventing reasons . . .[?]" I have admitted that my opposition to open-carry is in the minority, but my opposition is not based upon "inventing reasons . . ." it is based upon a very rational and well-reasoned concern about the backlash we likely would see from the Texas business community and, to a lesser degree, from the Legislature. Nor have I ever heard "gun banners" argue that they should allow open-carry because it will help them (anti-gunners) achieve our goal of limiting or abolishing civilian-carry in any forum. That's not something they would admit publicly. Counting those who disagree with you among the anti-gunners simply because they do not share your view on this issue would be tantamount to me accusing you of trying to sabotage concealed-carry by supporting open-carry.

If you are one of the ones inventing reasons not to do this, ask yourself why you are having an emotion reaction and not going over the OpenCarry.org and discussing the technical and tactical details with expert and experienced people?

". . . with expert and experienced people?" Experts on Texas? Experts on the Texas Legislature? I don't think I have to go to a national organization to seek expertise on Texas or the Texas Legislature. I don't post my opposition to open-carry in Texas on OpenCarry.org out of respect for the forum's founder and their mission and because it is working for open-carry in all states and I only care about Texas. If the NRA takes on this issue, then I will be concerned about other states. Additionally, my opposition to open-carry would be as well received at OpenCarry.org as would be an anti-gunner's opinions here on TexasCHLforum and I don't start any discussion solely to create an argument. Well, not outside of a lawsuit that is.

I have read OpenCarry.org in an attempt to get a feeling for the frequency with which handguns are openly carried in various states, but I found a lot of generalizations but no hard evidence that could be used. I'm not critical of OpenCarry.org for this, as I am quite certain that the evidence simply doesn't exist. I would also point out that I have a link to OpenCarry.org here on the TexasCHLforum, so I have no bias against it or their mission.

As for emotional responses, I haven't seen anything from the loyal opposition other than well-reasoned discussions why they oppose open-carry. For the most part, I've seen equally well-reasoned opinions from people who support open-carry. However, phrases like "Why would anyone with a CHL or who even owns a firearm at home favor gun control[,]" are high on emotion and insult and low on facts.

A good many of the TexasCHLforum members either weren't in Texas in the 1995 to 1997 time frame, or they were too young to care about the then-new CHL law. As soon as SB60 passed in 1995, small ghostbusters "no gun" decals started appearing on the doors of businesses all over the State. It was nothing short of an anti-CHL epidemic! Had it not been for the BOMA meeting in Houston in the later part of 1995 and the famous "BOMA Letter" that was issued as a result of that meeting, the vast majority of commercial buildings would have been posted against concealed-carry. That letter stemmed the growing tide of anti-CHL postings and bought us time to create a statutory impediment to barring armed CHLs. (The problem was so bad, it resulted in the creation of TPC 30.06.) So when people from other states that have always allowed open-carry argue that their state's experience for the last 100 years is relevant to how Texans would respond, I can't help be think back 13 years and wonder if they have any idea what we went through just a little over a decade ago.

I want to point out that I have stated my concerns about the potential backlash to open-carry in Texas. I have also acknowledged that it is not a certainty. I can no more guarantee my fears would come true than proponents of open-carry can guarantee they won't come true. To me the question comes down to this, "are you willing to risk a drastic increase in 30.06 signs that will impact 280,000 CHLs to obtain open-carry that will be exercised by a relative handful of CHLs?" My answer is "no."

Chas.

[drw]

To me the question comes down to this, "are you willing to risk a drastic increase in 30.06 signs that will impact 280,000 CHLs to obtain open-carry that will be exercised by a relative handful of CHLs?" My answer is "no."

Why must open carry impact CHL holders? If the businesses want to stop open carry, then it seems to me the solution is simple: create a new 30.XX sign that they can post, that only applies to open carry. Then concealed carry is left alone. They wouldn't think to bar concealed carry if there was a simple and convenient "no open carrying" sign they could post.

[DParker]

I have read OpenCarry.org in an attempt to get a feeling for the frequency with which handguns are openly carried in various states, but I found a lot of generalizations but no hard evidence that could be used. I'm not critical of OpenCarry.org for this, as I am quite certain that the evidence simply doesn't exist. I would also point out that I have a link to OpenCarry.org here on the TexasCHLforum, so I have no bias against it or their mission.

This subject was on my mind last week when my son and I drove to the Bitterroot Mountains for our bear hunting trip (more on that in another thread when I have the time to do it properly). Knowing that Montana is OC I wore my M&P on my hip for much of the time that we spent driving in that state, which was considerable. I also made a point of observing what others were doing whenever we stopped for gas and supplies, or simply drove through a town with people walking along the road. Surprisingly (to me, at least) I saw no one else carrying openly. On the other hand, I was not aware of anyone paying any special attention to me while standing openly armed at the gas pump, so perhaps it is more common than I was able to observe.

If I'd had time it would have been interesting to visit a random sampling of local retail businesses (other than gas stations and the occasional food stop) to see if there was any sort of tendency among the owners to post "No Guns" signs. But since I was unable to do so I don't know if the phenomenon you describe has occured there. Even so, I don't know how translatable the result would be to TX, which has far more of its population in large urban centers than does MT...and which no doubt means a substantial difference in attitudes among our two citizenries on the whole.

[jlangton]

To me the question comes down to this, "are you willing to risk a drastic increase in 30.06 signs that will impact 280,000 CHLs to obtain open-carry that will be exercised by a relative handful of CHLs?" My answer is "no."

Why must open carry impact CHL holders? If the businesses want to stop open carry, then it seems to me the solution is simple: create a new 30.XX sign that they can post, that only applies to open carry. Then concealed carry is left alone. They wouldn't think to bar concealed carry if there was a simple and convenient "no open carrying" sign they could post.

Just like I mentioned a few posts back. Leave the "Ghostbuster" signs alone as as a legal "stop sign" to people that choose to Open Carry. It's not like they can hide the fact that there's a gun on their hip.
JL

[HerbM]

Of course the arguments against open carry are tired old arguments -- they are tired and old because they are the same ones the gun banners use against the CHL/CCW and even defensive guns in the home.

There is only one valid argument against open carry. It is true, and it is sufficient.

"I don't want to open carry, as it is not right for me."

All the other reasons turn out to be just nonsense when applied to anyone else and we know this the same way we know that the arguments against defensive firearms and the CHL are bogus:

Opinions are fine when they sound reasonable unless they just don't correspond to the reality of the evidence.

People doing it everyday prove that all of this works. Home defense, concealed carry, and open carry.

The only difference that means anything is personal choice.

Choice is good. Gun control is bad.


ALL gun control is bad.

[Charles L. Cotton]

To me the question comes down to this, "are you willing to risk a drastic increase in 30.06 signs that will impact 280,000 CHLs to obtain open-carry that will be exercised by a relative handful of CHLs?" My answer is "no."

Why must open carry impact CHL holders? If the businesses want to stop open carry, then it seems to me the solution is simple: create a new 30.XX sign that they can post, that only applies to open carry. Then concealed carry is left alone. They wouldn't think to bar concealed carry if there was a simple and convenient "no open carrying" sign they could post.

The Legislature isn't going to create yet another Penal Code Section dealing with trespass. Everyone will come under TPC 30.06. It's very easy to say "just do this or that," but the political reality is it won't happen. Also, there isn't the slightest chance that open-carry without a license will pass, so we are talking about simply repealing TPC §46.035(a) "intentional failure to conceal" and renaming the CHL.

If my fears come true, businesses are going to post 30.06 signs thus impacting CHLs.

Chas.

[Charles L. Cotton]

To me the question comes down to this, "are you willing to risk a drastic increase in 30.06 signs that will impact 280,000 CHLs to obtain open-carry that will be exercised by a relative handful of CHLs?" My answer is "no."

Why must open carry impact CHL holders? If the businesses want to stop open carry, then it seems to me the solution is simple: create a new 30.XX sign that they can post, that only applies to open carry. Then concealed carry is left alone. They wouldn't think to bar concealed carry if there was a simple and convenient "no open carrying" sign they could post.

Just like I mentioned a few posts back. Leave the "Ghostbuster" signs alone as as a legal "stop sign" to people that choose to Open Carry. It's not like they can hide the fact that there's a gun on their hip.
JL

Again, this simply won't happen. The only way to get open-carry passed would be to modify the current CHL statute to delete the requirement to conceal; rename the licence, and modify TPC §30.06 to remove references to concealment. Thus, "ghostbuster" signs won't impact people carrying openly since they will be doing so pursuant to their HCL (Handgun Carry License). Thus, businesses will have to use 30.06 signs to bar open-carry and in so doing, they will also bar concealed-carry.

Chas.

[HerbM]

Don't you just love it when friends and supporters tell you that failure is inevitable even before any evidence is available?

[Charles L. Cotton]

Of course the arguments against open carry are tired old arguments -- they are tired and old because they are the same ones the gun banners use against the CHL/CCW and even defensive guns in the home.

Do a Google search and find me an anti-gun organization, spokesman, or representative that has ever said "I support or oppose open-carry because it will cause people to demand that businesses post no-gun signs and/or demand that the Legislature increase the number of statutorily off-limits for CHLs." Your comment doesn't make any sense.

Opinions are fine when they sound reasonable unless they just don't correspond to the reality of the evidence.

Does this standard apply to your position? If so, where is your "evidence?" What about 1995 - 1997 in Texas? What about the epidemic of "ghostbuster" signs and decals that were effective against CHL's until TPC §30.06 was passed in 1997? We have a very recent track record of strong anti-CHL sentiment and action in response to SB60 when it passed. In spite of that, you expect me to accept your position that another state's 100 year old tradition of open-carry is more indicative of what we can expect in Texas. Your argument not only is devoid of any evidence, it flies in the face of reason. The sad truth is, you want open-carry so bad that you are incapable of acknowledging that there is a risk.

People doing it everyday prove that all of this works. Home defense, concealed carry, and open carry.

Don't try to combine "home defense" or "concealed carry" with open-carry. Relatively few people carry openly anywhere in the country and there is no evidence to the contrary. Yes, it is more common in rural areas than in urban areas, but even there it is the exception rather than the rule. But again, what is acceptable in Wyoming has no bearing on what will happen in Texas.

Chas.

[135boomer]

Don't you just love it when friends and supporters tell you that failure is inevitable even before any evidence is available?

Some are worried about a drop in personal income.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Don't you just love it when friends and supporters tell you that failure is inevitable even before any evidence is available?

Some are worried about a drop in personal income.

Oh really. Every opposing opinion must have a monetary motive? If I was concerned about money, I wouldn't spend a minute away from my office where I can bill clients. You have no clue what my support of the Second Amendment and gun owners has cost my firm in lost billings since 1980.

On a more practical note, there won't be any unlicensed open-carry, so every CHL Instructor will still have classes to teach.

Chas.

[iratollah]

Choice is good. Gun control is bad.

ALL gun control is bad.

Let's take your strict 2A OC support argument and make it a 1A position.

Choice is good. All control of free speech or religion is bad.

So Herb, when your neighbor starts calling his flock to morning prayers at 6am using a 125db loudspeaker, in a language you don't understand, you will be as strong a supporter of him as well, yes? Just because we don't agree with him, doesn't mean we have any right to prevent his free exercise of speech or religion. Just because some may be offended by the morning (and four other daily) prayer calls doesn't mean anyone has the right to stop them, in fact, it means the neighbor should become even more adamant about flaunting his rights, correct?

Or do you find that the different items in the BoR are not equal in importance?

[NcongruNt]

Don't you just love it when friends and supporters tell you that failure is inevitable even before any evidence is available?

Perhaps you haven't read his comments in this thread. Charles isn't going to toot his own horn, so I will. He is on the boards of the NRA and TSRA, an organization that has been instrumental in getting us to the point where we enjoy what we DO have in the CHL statutes. Texas is also one of the more lax states in regard to CHL. This did not happen by accident or chance. It was a LOT of work put in by many dedicated people. Charles is one of these people, and he and the TSRA are continuing to work towards eliminating many parts of the law that restrict CHL holders from carrying. He has selflessly dedicated himself in great amounts of public service to secure the rights of the CHLs in this state. I find the fact that you belittle his opinion to a simple accusation of ignorance offensive.

He knows first-hand the dynamics of the Texas Legislature, and when he tells us from his own observations the backlash that can occur in terms of restrictions on carry in businesses, I believe him. As he stated above, there were mass postings of no-gun signs in businesses in reaction to the CHL laws being passed in 1995 - to the point that legislative action had to be taken to require a sign large enough and specific enough that most businesses would find it inconvenient or cosmetically detracting enough to post in blanket fashion. As he also stated above, he believes the only way to get an OC law passed is to marry it with the current CHL statues, and this will definitely affect those who carry concealed. Since Charles has been working with the Texas Legislature for over a decade on carry issues, I take much greater stock in his opinion than someone simply posting on an internet forum without the valuable experience he has in these matters.

[135boomer]

Don't you just love it when friends and supporters tell you that failure is inevitable even before any evidence is available?

Some are worried about a drop in personal income.

Oh really. Every opposing opinion must have a monetary motive? If I was concerned about money, I wouldn't spend a minute away from my office where I can bill clients. You have no clue what my support of the Second Amendment and gun owners has cost my firm in lost billings since 1980.

On a more practical note, there won't be any unlicensed open-carry, so every CHL Instructor will still have classes to teach.

Chas.

I did not refer to you personally. I did not say every opposing opinion. Like it or not, what I said is true. Yes, unlicensed open carry is possible. Unlikely maybe, but possible.

[NcongruNt]

Some are worried about a drop in personal income.

Oh really. Every opposing opinion must have a monetary motive? If I was concerned about money, I wouldn't spend a minute away from my office where I can bill clients. You have no clue what my support of the Second Amendment and gun owners has cost my firm in lost billings since 1980.

On a more practical note, there won't be any unlicensed open-carry, so every CHL Instructor will still have classes to teach.

Chas.

I did not refer to you personally. I did not say every opposing opinion. Like it or not, what I said is true. Yes, unlicensed open carry is possible. Unlikely maybe, but possible.

In response to your opinion, I heartily disagree. Every CHL Instructor I have met does not teach CHL classes as primary employment. Most have other trades or are retired, and are the type of people who are small business owners and do more than one thing for a living. They work hard to run their businesses, and my personal impression of these folks has been that they teach CHL classes primarily to promote concealed carry and defensive shooting in general. For these kinds of people, there are far more lucrative ways to earn money than teaching a state-regulated course on concealed carry. These folks (craftsmen, small business owners, etc.) are not the money-grubbers you seem to be making them out to be.