TexasCHLforum.com

Hey, did you see the below message over on opencarry.org?

--------------
I sent an e-mail to find out for myself. I asked for their position on open carry and if they were supporting the movement in Texas. I received a reply within an hour. Here is their reply...

-----

Dear Mr. Jacobs,



Thanks for contacting NRA-ILA. NRA supports Open-Carry and currently pursues Open-Carry legislation on a state level. NRA endorses Open-Carry in the state of Texas.



Please let us know if you have further questions or concerns.



Sincerely,


Krista Cupp

NRA-ILA Grassroots Division

. .

I note that the NRA doesn't say that they support the legislation being brought forward by OpenCarry.Org, just that they support open carry in the state of Texas.

I don't think to support the idea means they have to physically do anything. They could support it (in my opinion) with a simple public statement, saying that they support the idea.

Of course it would be nice if they would take some steps to bring it to the attention of their membership & see if they also support the idea as well, but I would be perfectly happy with just a written statement as NRA appears to have done.

I support the idea of open carry, even if all I do is generally spread the word to people that I know. Well, I also signed the petition. On the same token, I wouldn't expect anyone to do anything more than what I have done. I do appreciate what many others have done to push the idea though. I just can't see supporting an organization that is not interested in doing at least what I have done, which I admit is very little. My impression of TSRA's unwillingness to state that they support the idea of open carry, leads me to believe that they are outright against it, and I'm sure many others perceive the same thing, including legislators. So not only are they not supporting it, they appear to be working against it.

I may be completely wrong in my thinking, and if so I do apologize. That is just the way I see it.

Easy Guys - I was just passing on some exciting information. It was not intended to chastise any person, group, place or thing.

TSRA has been very up front on what their priorities are for this session, I think believe we should respect that.

On the other hand, I find it difficult to disagree that it would take very little effort to make a statement similar to what the NRA did. But, there may items, issues, concerns that are not visible to all.

I still believe we are all on the same team; it's just that some of our teammates are not ready to play yet.

Have a nice day!

Locksmith wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:
That's a great attitude. Alice Tripp explained why TSRA can't work on open-carry this session. The explanation was in the forum of an email that someone on OpenCarry.org decided to post.

Chas.

I don't think to support the idea means they have to physically do anything. They could support it (in my opinion) with a simple public statement, saying that they support the idea.

Of course it would be nice if they would take some steps to bring it to the attention of their membership & see if they also support the idea as well, but I would be perfectly happy with just a written statement as NRA appears to have done.

I support the idea of open carry, even if all I do is generally spread the word to people that I know. Well, I also signed the petition. On the same token, I wouldn't expect anyone to do anything more than what I have done. I do appreciate what many others have done to push the idea though. I just can't see supporting an organization that is not interested in doing at least what I have done, which I admit is very little. My impression of TSRA's unwillingness to state that they support the idea of open carry, leads me to believe that they are outright against it, and I'm sure many others perceive the same thing, including legislators. So not only are they not supporting it, they appear to be working against it.

I may be completely wrong in my thinking, and if so I do apologize. That is just the way I see it.

My point is that TSRA has done tremendous work in Texas for many years. Most of the favorable gun laws we have are the result of work of TSRA and the NRA. The two top priority bills this session are employer parking lots and campus-carry. We made commitments to our members who are being disarmed and left defenseless driving to and from work, sometimes over great distances, simply because of their employer's policies. This is a very big issue for many of our members and our bill died on the House floor last session when time ran out. (170 other bills also died that way.) We also made a commitment to the students and faculty in Texas colleges and universities, as well as Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, that we would do everything we can to help prevent a Virginia Tech massacre in a Texas school. The parking lot and campus-carry issues were put through the procedures I have set out below, including the all-important Candidate Questionnaire. Open-carry just became an issue in Texas recently and then only because the Virginia-based OpenCarry.org (founded by at least one "Executive Member" of VCDL) chose to make a push in Texas. The issue has not been put through our extensive preparation procedures and it certainly wasn't included in our Candidate Questionnaire.

You suggest that TSRA should just make a statement that we support open carry, as did the NRA. First, I'm not at all convinced that is NRA's position. I am trying to confirm that with HQ now. I just got back from a week of NRA committee and Board meetings and this is news to me. More importantly, everyone needs to understand that TSRA operates on a two year cycle. As soon as a session ends, we start working on the next session. We do this by research, participation in interim studies during the "off-year," getting candidates elected, meeting with staff, attending fundraisers, and we do other things I can't put on an open forum. We discuss our agenda at every opportunity to pave the way for the next session.

One very important procedure in promoting our legislative agenda is the submission of Candidate Questionnaires to every elected official. Those questionnaires inquire about every major issue we intend to address in the next session. This not only gives us input on a candidate's position on our legislation, a positive response also serves somewhat as a commitment from the candidate and we can and do occasionally remind them of this fact.

Through our hard thorough work, candor and honesty, TSRA has earned the respect of the Texas Legislature. We don't do anything on the spur of the moment or without extensive planning for two reasons. First, that's not the way to win. Secondly it would put our friends in Austin in a terrible position if we were to suddenly, without warning or briefing, make a public statement that we support a concept or legislation. Just saying we support open-carry would make it "our" bill and no amount of disclaimer would make any difference. That is precisely the type of surprise that our friends in Austin don't want. So a mere statement of support is not an option for us.

I understand that OpenCarry.org, it's members, and a large number of TexasCHLforum.com members support open-carry in Texas. TSRA does its best to respond to issues that are of importance to our members based upon their communications with us. Currently, employer parking lots, campus carry, and streamlining the processing of CHL applications to avoid current delays are the top priority items, based upon member input and complaints. Open-carry hasn't even been mentioned until very recently and quite candidly, its supporters don't seem to be TSRA members, at least not based upon the input we have received from members.

If you choose to not support TSRA because we cannot take on the open-carry issue without doing all of the preparation we do, then that's your decision. I think it ignores everything we've done and everything we are trying to do this session under very difficult political circumstances, but it is your choice and I respect it. What I don't appreciate is your attempt to get others not to support TSRA simply because we cannot support your pet legislation this session. Don't even bother saying you're not trying to influence others, not when your post is made in big red letters. I see other members of OpenCarry.org doing the same thing.

Another tactic I've seen on OpenCarry.org is incredibly short-sighted and dangerous. At least some members are sending out emails, and perhaps publicizing it by other methods, stating something to the effect of "50,000 Texans who signed the open-carry petition will remember who supported open-carry and who didn't, when the next election comes around." This is not an accurate quote, but it is certainly the message. What an absurd, arrogant and damaging position to take! They are threatening long-term pro-gun Representatives and Senators who have voted with us for years. That's not the way you get things done, at least not in Texas. That's vintage in-your-face VCDL/OpenCarry.org philosophy and it's going to blow up in their collective faces, if people are really taking that approach. In fact, they may do so much damage to the issue, that no other pro-gun organizations will be able to touch it for years. When emotion controls over reason and planning, the battle is lost. "[Darn] the torpedoes, full speed ahead" is a great movie quote (and an actual order during the Civil War), but those who adopt it as a political plan of action will find themselves speeding headlong into one of those torpedoes.

Open-carry supporters should support their bill and their goals, but by all means do so in a way that doesn't damage the ability to promote the interest of gun owners in the future.

Chas.

Charles, thanks. I agree completely.....

Hi Chas.

A question if you don't mind; you may or may not be able to answer: If open carry does not pass in the legislator this session, will TSRA be supporting it in the next session; thus allowing ample time for the prep work you describe?

Thanks!

I can't speak for Chas or TSRA, but what I gathered from what he said was that they have a process that they employ to determine what is important, what they can get supported.... So I'd bet with the publicity that this issue has gotten, it would at least be discussed.

Conagher wrote:Hi Chas.

A question if you don't mind; you may or may not be able to answer: If open carry does not pass in the legislator this session, will TSRA be supporting it in the next session; thus allowing ample time for the prep work you describe?

Thanks!

I don't want to make it appear that I have more decision making authority than I do. While I'm Vice-Chairman of the TSRA Legislative Committee, I'm only one vote on the Committee. As an NRA Board Member, I have input on our legislative efforts, especially in Texas, but I certainly don't have command authority or veto power.

With that disclaimer , about all I can say is that we respond to our members. If enough of them want to see open-carry pass, and if they feel it is of greater importance than other issues, then I suspect we'll take on the project. I think some people feel that Alice Tripp, James Dark and I put our personal opinions ahead of the organizational goals and that simply isn't true. If it were true, I would have pushed a number of different issues over the last two sessions. I have very strong reservations about the backlash I believe we will see, if open-carry passes. However, if the TSRA membership wants us to take on this issue, then I'll put my personal concerns aside and I'll work hard to get it passed. This assumes that others haven't done so much damage to our friends in Austin this session that we have to stay away from the issue.

I hope this answers your question.

Chas.

No longer valid

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Conagher wrote:Hi Chas.

A question if you don't mind; you may or may not be able to answer: If open carry does not pass in the legislator this session, will TSRA be supporting it in the next session; thus allowing ample time for the prep work you describe?

Thanks!

I don't want to make it appear that I have more decision making authority than I do. While I'm Vice-Chairman of the TSRA Legislative Committee, I'm only one vote on the Committee. As an NRA Board Member, I have input on our legislative efforts, especially in Texas, but I certainly don't have command authority or veto power.

With that disclaimer , about all I can say is that we respond to our members. If enough of them want to see open-carry pass, and if they feel it is of greater importance than other issues, then I suspect we'll take on the project. I think some people feel that Alice Tripp, James Dark and I put our personal opinions ahead of the organizational goals and that simply isn't true. If it were true, I would have pushed a number of different issues over the last two sessions. I have very strong reservations about the backlash I believe we will see, if open-carry passes. However, if the TSRA membership wants us to take on this issue, then I'll put my personal concerns aside and I'll work hard to get it passed. This assumes that others haven't done so much damage to our friends in Austin this session that we have to stay away from the issue.

I hope this answers your question.

Chas.

Well put Charles. I think all of us would do well to remember who our friends are. Collectively we, the pro-2A community, should advance our cause by working effectively with everyone who will work with us. Let not the good be the enemy of the perfect. No matter our differences in tactics or style we should support each other to the extent that we can. The best means for achieving our common goals probably vary from state to state. As you mention, that which has been effective for VCDL or for GeorgiaCarry, for example, may not be the best approach in Texas. "In your face" tactics seem be have been very effective in some cases while tireless, behind-the-scenes work has advanced the ball in others. There may not be a one-size-fits-all solution.

As you know from prior posts, I'm a member of and contributor to OpenCarry.org but I've also been a member here for quite some time. Your excellent explanation about the workings of TSRA and the NRA is much appreciated. TSRA's thorough vetting process of ideas and legislation is wise and is a credit to the organization. No doubt you are correct when you say that it is for this reason that legislators trust it and that trust must be safeguarded. I'll admit to having wished at times that TSRA was faster in achieving the success that we all want, but slow progress is better than hasty failure. That Texans were disarmed for so long and still labor under many unnecessary restrictions probably feeds the frustration you've seen in some posts.

You, TSRA, and the NRA have done a tremendous amount of good work in Texas over the past decade. While I hope and suspect that the "open carry horror stories" that you fear will not come true, given your sterling reputation and knowledge of Texas gun politics, I take those concerns very seriously. In gratitude for the past efforts and in common cause with you for the ongoing initiatives, I have joined TSRA by purchasing a Life Membership.

I'm convinced that we can, and should, achieve those items on TSRA's agenda as well as some form of open carry this session. I agree that reducing the areas where CHL-holders can't carry (employer parking and college campuses, among others) is the top priority but I don't think we should fail to pursue any pro-2A initiative when given an opportunity to do so. The ugly fact is that time may not be on our side and it remains to be seen how responsive future legislators will be. While all of the abovementioned preparation should be done, I hope we will not pass on an opportunity to notch another success while we have a very pro-2A governor in addition to our friends in the House and Senate. That is a winning combination.

Please use my TSRA membership donation in pursuit of those goals and I'll be happy to assist in any way that I can.

Thanks, SA-TX

Mr. Cotton -- a tangential question.

You wrote above:

"The two top priority bills this session are employer parking lots and campus-carry."

+1 to both of those (or is that +2?). However, will there be any movement on eliminating some or all of the other "no-go" zones for CHL holders? I have been waiting to see what popped up in the legislative part of this site, figuring it is a bit early yet, but since you identified the two priority bills, I thought I'd go ahead an ask...?

SA-TX, thank you.

The rhetoric I've seen to date from OpenCarry.org has been single-minded, obstinate, and argumentative.

Convince OpenCarry.org that you need to assume the role of national spokesperson.

Without a thoughtful, measured voice before the public, OpenCarry.org stands to do more harm than good. And it stands also to alienate tens of thousands of Texas concealed handgun licensees, hunters, and recreational shooters who have fought and voted for the Texas laws we have today.

We can't afford to move backward in the 81st legislature. Our firearm laws have been moving appreciably forward in every legislative session for almost two decades.

Despite the over-zealous opinion of a Virginia law student (or two) we in Texas enjoy some of the most firearm-friendly laws and privileges in the United States. And that's thanks to dedicated folks like Charles Cotton, Joe Driver, Jim Dark, Alice Tripp, and others.


Conagher, in regards to that post you saw on OpenCarry.org: I don't dispute the content, but I'd tend to put it in the "Urban Legend" bucket. As an Endowment Life Member of the NRA, annual contributor to the NRA Foundation, and quarterly NRA-ILA contributor, I've received no communication from the NRA whatsoever in regard to Texas open carry or OpenCarry.org.

And an endorsement like this would be very big news from the NRA.

I'll wait to hear if Charles, as a member of the NRA Board of Directors, can substantiate this.

No longer valid