TexasCHLforum.com

Just a few years ago most members of this forum discussed keeping your being a chl holder should be kept a secret , could get you in trouble just telling folks . If you stop and think you realize how far licensed carry has come in a short while . Now open carry is a reality , even having the nutter/outlaw OCT crowd/liberals and others doing their best to NOT make it happen .
I can't help but believe (and hope) that we will achieve total victory with unlicensed carry in the near future . The political climate has changed , people are getting fed up with the way our state and country are headed . I am more that happy with the progress so far . Second amendment rights are being restored now , other rights should be worked on too .

I just want a law similar to Montanna's firearms freedom act- allowing citizens to build NFA items without registering through the ATF as long as the items are kept within state lines. I hardly ever leave Texas, and when I do I'm not worried about bringing a silenced SBR that I might build.

chuck j wrote:I can't help but believe (and hope) that we will achieve total victory with unlicensed carry in the near future.

Personally, I wouldn't want unlicensed carry. Having to go through the process we do, sets us apart. Makes us special if you will.

doncb wrote:

chuck j wrote:I can't help but believe (and hope) that we will achieve total victory with unlicensed carry in the near future.

Personally, I wouldn't want unlicensed carry. Having to go through the process we do, sets us apart. Makes us special if you will.

So you would rather pay the government a fee to exercise your 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms and be a part of a "special" club than have free constitutional carry?

doncb wrote:

chuck j wrote:I can't help but believe (and hope) that we will achieve total victory with unlicensed carry in the near future.

Personally, I wouldn't want unlicensed carry. Having to go through the process we do, sets us apart. Makes us special if you will.

I would support unlicensed OC for anyone who can pass a NICS check. I DO NOT want to see unlicensed concealed carry. I want for the cops to have some sort of recourse after pulling a concealed pistol off of some criminal.

doncb wrote:

chuck j wrote:I can't help but believe (and hope) that we will achieve total victory with unlicensed carry in the near future.

Personally, I wouldn't want unlicensed carry. Having to go through the process we do, sets us apart. Makes us special if you will.

I don't want unlicensed carry either. I want some accountability for people walking around with deadly weapons. I don't want reckless, irresponsible, incompetent people - people totally ignorant of any firearm safety rules walking around with guns. I personally know two people (bet you guys do too) who are so reckless and irresponsible when it comes to firearms I wouldn't want to be in the same county when they pick up a firearm. A former co-worker of mine was this type. Whenever he picked up a gun his finger was on the trigger and he wasn't particular where he was pointing it. He came over to my house one day and wanted me to show him how to clean his new Taurus PT92. He pulls it out of a paper bag (loaded with a round in the chamber) - naturally his finger in on the trigger. He pulls back the slide and it slips out of his grip and the gun goes off putting a hole in my carpet one inch from my foot! People like this have no business handling firearms. I support the state's insistence that some show of competency be demonstrated before they issue a license to carry. We require that to drive an automobile on public streets - why not to carry a gun? Seems like a reasonable requirement to me.

tiger1279 wrote:

doncb wrote:

chuck j wrote:I can't help but believe (and hope) that we will achieve total victory with unlicensed carry in the near future.

Personally, I wouldn't want unlicensed carry. Having to go through the process we do, sets us apart. Makes us special if you will.

I don't want unlicensed carry either. I want some accountability for people walking around with deadly weapons. I don't want reckless, irresponsible, incompetent people - people totally ignorant of any firearm safety rules walking around with guns.

For the most part these are criminals. But the ignorant will be ignorant regardless of the law. And laws only affect the law abiding.

tiger1279 wrote:

doncb wrote:

chuck j wrote: I personally know two people (bet you guys do too) who are so reckless and irresponsible when it comes to firearms I wouldn't want to be in the same county when they pick up a firearm. A former co-worker of mine was this type. Whenever he picked up a gun his finger was on the trigger and he wasn't particular where he was pointing it. He came over to my house one day and wanted me to show him how to clean his new Taurus PT92. He pulls it out of a paper bag (loaded with a round in the chamber) - naturally his finger in on the trigger. He pulls back the slide and it slips out of his grip and the gun goes off putting a hole in my carpet one inch from my foot! People like this have no business handling firearms.

I support the state's insistence that some show of competency be demonstrated before they issue a license to carry. We require that to drive an automobile on public streets - why not to carry a gun? Seems like a reasonable requirement to me.

Driving isn't a constitutional right and constitutional rights shouldn't be subjected to licensing scheme or fees. So I guess your OK with freedom of speech so long as you have a license and training that prevents you from saying something stupid?

The freedom to say something stupid is the most cherished and most oftened exercised of all our natural rights. No one, not even the Founders, could imagine that it would ever be in a government's interest to discourage it. Some theorize there could be NO government at all, certainly no elected government, without the freedom to say something stupid.

Without that, the Internet as we have come to know it, could not exist. Entire industries depend upon it, newspapers, media, advertising and PR , employing vast numbers of workers. The economy would crumble without it.

Contrary to the stupid claims of "Lake Wobegon Days," not everyone is above average; in fact most are below average. How could these people live happily if the right to say something stupid were to be curtailed or infringed? They would have to live like monks or something. Saying something stupid is so firmly ensconced in our culture, like sunshine, that it is inconceivable to license or condition that most natural right. You might as well require a license to lie! Everyone does it, and needs to.

When someone says something stupid, it very, very rarely leads to death or disfigurement. I don't want some irresponsible idiot with a gun shooting around my grandkids, but can hardly stop someone from saying something stupid to them.

I hardly need to point this out to participants on this Forum, where we encounter this on a regular basis.

jb2012 wrote:I just want a law similar to Montanna's firearms freedom act- allowing citizens to build NFA items without registering through the ATF as long as the items are kept within state lines. I hardly ever leave Texas, and when I do I'm not worried about bringing a silenced SBR that I might build.

While I agree with the intent of this law I don't suggest you test it as its already been declared void by Federal court. However, CLEO sign off for NFA registration has been eliminated (in 6 months) and replaced by CLEO NOTIFICATION and photos/prints for trusts and corps.

Criminals don't bother with licensing, so why should good guys? And our license test doesn't really show proficiency, especially when folks come to the class and don't even know how to load their semi-auto.

As nice as it would be, I would still opt to have a license if we get the ability to carry unlicensed. My reasoning behind that, is because I doubt we will see much change to 30.05, and everywhere that is illegal to carry an unlicensed firearm, such as ANY place that sells any amount of alcohol, with those little blue (under)51% signs that most people don't notice. I would hate to have my CHL/LTC protections taken away in order to waive the fees.

Just a bit to think on, but remember all the places you go that sell alcohol? Unless the TABC changes its law, and they don't make a new 30.05 sign that anybody can post banning unlicensed open/concealed carry, it won't be much of a win personally for me.

By all means, let it happen, but I still want to have my license, as I can imagine that every gas station, every grocery store, and anywhere else that sells any amount of alcohol will bar you legally, on top of any places that post a 30.05 sign if it bans unlicensed carry in the future. Also, if places like posting both 30.06 & 30.07 signs, how bad will it be when people start posting all three, because of the media's hysteria about unlicensed gun toters!

Constitutional Carry! We shouldn't have to jump thru hoops and pay fee's to exercise our Constitutional/God Given right to bear arms.

ScottDLS wrote:

jb2012 wrote:I just want a law similar to Montanna's firearms freedom act- allowing citizens to build NFA items without registering through the ATF as long as the items are kept within state lines. I hardly ever leave Texas, and when I do I'm not worried about bringing a silenced SBR that I might build.

While I agree with the intent of this law I don't suggest you test it as its already been declared void by Federal court. However, CLEO sign off for NFA registration has been eliminated (in 6 months) and replaced by CLEO NOTIFICATION and photos/prints for trusts and corps.

I thought I had read that today Obama plans to announce as part of his illegal OE that NFA Trusts are no longer permitted and all NFA items will require CLEO sign-off?

Bitter Clinger wrote:

ScottDLS wrote:

jb2012 wrote:I just want a law similar to Montanna's firearms freedom act- allowing citizens to build NFA items without registering through the ATF as long as the items are kept within state lines. I hardly ever leave Texas, and when I do I'm not worried about bringing a silenced SBR that I might build.

While I agree with the intent of this law I don't suggest you test it as its already been declared void by Federal court. However, CLEO sign off for NFA registration has been eliminated (in 6 months) and replaced by CLEO NOTIFICATION and photos/prints for trusts and corps.

I thought I had read that today Obama plans to announce as part of his illegal OE that NFA Trusts are no longer permitted and all NFA items will require CLEO sign-off?

No all NFA items trust or otherwise will require CLEO notification. This change was based on comments during the open comment period. The final version will be effective 180 days after it is posted in the Federal Register (June 2016). It's on page 32 of the press release that ATF put out yesterday.

ScottDLS wrote:

Bitter Clinger wrote:

ScottDLS wrote:

jb2012 wrote:I just want a law similar to Montanna's firearms freedom act- allowing citizens to build NFA items without registering through the ATF as long as the items are kept within state lines. I hardly ever leave Texas, and when I do I'm not worried about bringing a silenced SBR that I might build.

While I agree with the intent of this law I don't suggest you test it as its already been declared void by Federal court. However, CLEO sign off for NFA registration has been eliminated (in 6 months) and replaced by CLEO NOTIFICATION and photos/prints for trusts and corps.

I thought I had read that today Obama plans to announce as part of his illegal OE that NFA Trusts are no longer permitted and all NFA items will require CLEO sign-off?

No all NFA items trust or otherwise will require CLEO notification. This change was based on comments during the open comment period. The final version will be effective 180 days after it is posted in the Federal Register (June 2016). It's on page 32 of the press release that ATF put out yesterday.

Thanks! Greatly appreciate the clarification!