TX rep to author OC

[Bart]

@Bart:

The issue that I have with your claim that the Parking Lot Bill would violate property rights is that it IS violating property rights...MINE!

You can do what you want with your property when you're not on company property. If companies have the right to prohibit guns inside a briefcase on company property, they have a right to prohibit guns inside a car on company property. You can park somewhere else if you won't follow the rules of the property owner.

You can even be a capitalist and buy land nearby, build a parking lot, and rent spaces to people who like your rules.

[SA-TX]

This is try #3 to post from my phone so pardon my brevity. I hope I am on of those reasonable members of both forums.

Yes some on OCDO didn't do the cause any good with their approach. That was born of frustration. Some took your advice and formed new organizations. As often happens there was no critical mass. None had the combination of legal talent, political connections and skill,time to devote, or money to fund a worthy effort. I assure you that at least two or three groups tried to do as you asked. I haven't participated in any because of a heavy work schedule but I saw the announcements.

Even some legit signs have come down since 1997. You are right about out of sight out of mind but legal OC will still be defacto out of site because so few will practice it. I still respectfully disagree with the assumption that there will be mass postings. On e the news coverage goes away so will the mindshare. Particularly if it is CHL-only OC, the history since 97 has been as you said fewer real signs over time and I'll add with increasing CHL #s. Our reputation with police are good as well. Total = more pital environment now than then.

Why isn't verbal notice sufficient for the rare occurance where an open carrier finds himself in a place where he isn't welcome? Your stats show CHLers are a small fraction of the population. Open carriers will be a very small number of that population. Interestingly those opposed seem to think, or fear, that it will be exercised more than proponents. I think rejecting evidence from other states is unfair. Didn't we point to other states in 95 to assuage opponent's fears? The irony is that people elsewhere in the country associate an equipped pistol belt with Texas yet it is likely legal in said hypothetical state but not here.

The recent election has presented the pro-2A community with a tremendous opportunity. The prior limitations may no longer exist. OK is about to inaugurate a governor who will sign the sure-to-pass bill. AK and AZ made big steps even considering their history by eliminating the permit requirement to CC. Wasn't this potentially controversial? I would argue this will result in many more unlicensed people carrying than unlicensed OC in TX. Our side is winning and I sure wish we would stop disagreeing and find common ground in this new friendlier environment.

Open carry isn't likely to happen without TSRA's support and it has almost zero chance with its opposition. Please TSRA members, of which I am a proud one, ask our leaders to sieze the moment for the benefit of liberty. I understand and agree with planning and preparation but please reevaluate in lighof recent events. Adjust the battle plan now that the opposition is on the run. I know there is redistricting, budget, etc. But you can do it. I've before that I agree that OC isn't a top priority and can be dumped if a sacrifice is necessary but at lea attempt to pass an acceptable bill.

SA-TX

[Charles L. Cotton]

Charley, you missed (or chose to ignore) my point - that there were LOTS of signs precluding CC immediately after passage, which faded away quickly as folks realized their fears were groundless. The 30.06 signage requirements further reduced the places you couldn't carry - but again, it was because of acceptance and education. And if you never talk about it, you'll never gain acceptance.

I didn't ignore anything, I answered by pointing out that your statement was factually incorrect. The number of "no guns" decals and small signs were not "fading away" at all; they were growing exponentially! If you were in Texas in the 1995 to 1997 period and were interested in concealed-carry, then you must know this. That's why it was critically important to pass HB2909 that set up TPC §30.06, among other things. Then and only then did we see a reduction in private businesses posting and that was solely because they didn't want to post "the big ugly sign." HB2909 went into effect on Sept. 1, 1997, only 21 months after the first CHL's became effective (Jan. 1, 1996). The public wasn't taught anything in that short of a time frame.

And if a minority of folks want something, they can have no effect? Really? How many times over the years have vocal minorities changed laws/business models? It happens regularly.

That's a very broad and vague statement. Give us some examples where 1.8% of the population changed business models, not the law, just business models and practices. Since you say it "happens regularly," it should be easy to give some examples.

As to "risk of backlash"......there's a risk ANY time you change something. Does that mean we shouldn't attempt it? More and more folks are becoming more open-minded about the carrying of firearms, thanks in part to the issues in Mexico, and the growing public realization that Police organizations can't (and aren't required to) protect us individually. There's something to be said for "striking when the iron is hot" as well, isn't there?

For the most part I agree, but since OC supporters claim only a very small number of people will actually carry openly, prudence requires an honest risk evaluation. OC supporters clearly feel the risk is worth taking and many concealed-carriers do not. As for the iron being hot, what makes you think the Texas Legislature or the public are ripe for passing and excepting OC? I see absolutely no evidence of either and I do spend a little time with legislative folks and their staff. But as I have been pointing out for three years now, a rational and well planned program could change both legislative and public perception of OC.

You decry the OCDC attitude, and I agree to a large extent - but I'll also point out that without some pretty strident efforts, CC would likely have never come to pass, either.

I know, I was there from the beginning. I wrote the first CHL bill in 1980 for the 1981 session. Rep. Ralph Wallace was going to introduce it in the House and I don't know who he had as a Senate sponsor. It wasn't introduced because the Dec. 1980 murder of John Lennon with a handgun spawned a nationwide anti-handgun furor. It took many sessions and a lot of very hard work to get CHL passed. It didn't get done because concealed-carry supporters tried to ram it down the legislature's throat. But there is a flaw in your analogy. Passing the CHL statute didn't put any other gun rights or abilities at risk; passing OC most certainly does.

One of the things that the new organization coming together to push for OC in Texas is working VERY hard toward is to ensure that the goals of other Pro-2nd organizations are not hurt by their efforts, and to find ways of effectively working together.

I hope you are right, but I wonder why these folks waiting until Nov. 2010 to start. The legislature should be the last stop in the program, not the first. I know nothing about the people or the effort, but I do see people posting on OCDO with the LSCDL logo as an avatar. Is there some place I can go to see their mission statement, or how they plan to approach the task of passing OC?

I know I'm going to regret disclosing this, but I prepared a open-carry battle plan in 2008, just in case NRA or TSRA Members wanted us to pursue OC legislation. I can promise you that most of the work would be done before the gavel sounded for the beginning of the 2009 or 2011 Texas Legislative Session. And every bit as much of that preparatory work involved the public as it did the legislature.

Chas.

[Charles L. Cotton]

@Bart:

The issue that I have with your claim that the Parking Lot Bill would violate property rights is that it IS violating property rights...MINE!

You can do what you want with your property when you're not on company property. If companies have the right to prohibit guns inside a briefcase on company property, they have a right to prohibit guns inside a car on company property. You can park somewhere else if you won't follow the rules of the property owner.

You can even be a capitalist and buy land nearby, build a parking lot, and rent spaces to people who like your rules.

They won't have that "right" if the employer parking lot bill passes. Commercial property is already regulated with fire codes, building codes, elevator codes, requirements for towing vehicles, ADA requirements for people with disabilities, the Civil Rights Act, and various county and city ordinances. Private commercial property is not on the same footing as private non-commercial property and this has been challenged in court.

The parking lot bill is the least invasive regulation a business owner faces; it simply says he can't control firearms in an employee's vehicle. The employer doesn't have to do anything.

As an aside, some employers will not allow employees to have guns in their cars during the workday even when it is not on the employer's property. There's certainly no property right claim in that situation.

Chas.

[TexasRedneck]

That's a very broad and vague statement. Give us some examples where 1.8% of the population changed business models, not the law, just business models and practices. Since you say it "happens regularly," it should be easy to give some examples.

Okay - how about "Merry Christmas" coming back into vogue at retailers? When a small but vocal bunch of folks raised hob with retailers that had finally made the jump to take "Christmas" out of almost everything, folks got involved and started the discussion about returning the Reason for the Season.

How about the campaign to change dates and phone numbers from "11/24/10" or "210-555-5555" to "11.24.10" or "210.555.5555".

How about the fashion industry (especially for women)?

Now, please tell me a single state where passage of OC has caused CC to be banned.

For the most part I agree, but since OC supporters claim only a very small number of people will actually carry openly, prudence requires an honest risk evaluation. OC supporters clearly feel the risk is worth taking and many concealed-carriers do not. As for the iron being hot, what makes you think the Texas Legislature or the public are ripe for passing and excepting OC? I see absolutely no evidence of either and I do spend a little time with legislative folks and their staff. But as I have been pointing out for three years now, a rational and well planned program could change both legislative and public perception of OC.

Charles, I am a CHL holder, an NRA Endowment member AND a TSRA member. I want OC. You say you have a plan. Those that know me from other boards where some of the latest efforts to bring this about were discussed will tell you that I recognize that there MUST be a plan - and a good one - to bring this about. You say you have one, I ask that you share it.

It didn't get done because concealed-carry supporters tried to ram it down the legislature's throat. But there is a flaw in your analogy. Passing the CHL statute didn't put any other gun rights or abilities at risk; passing OC most certainly does.

So, you're saying that it should be abandoned? If not, then help those trying to bring it about to understand the challenges and pitfalls and work with them to bring it through safely.

I hope you are right, but I wonder why these folks waiting until Nov. 2010 to start. The legislature should be the last stop in the program, not the first. I know nothing about the people or the effort, but I do see people posting on OCDO with the LSCDL logo as an avatar. Is there some place I can go to see their mission statement, or how they plan to approach the task of passing OC?

At their website. Have you contacted them with your questions/concerns? Have you offered to help? Have you done anything to let them know the kinds of pitfalls they could face? I can tell you that there is discussion with the NRA in terms of input/ideas/guidance. The guy that is putting this together isn't a lawyer or even a "polished professional". Much like the men that founded this country, he's a simple man trying to return a right that many feel should never have been relinquished. Will he do it "right"? I don't know - but I know that standing on the sidelines and throwing rocks at him certainly isn't going to help.

I know I'm going to regret disclosing this, but I prepared a open-carry battle plan in 2008, just in case NRA or TSRA Members wanted us to pursue OC legislation. I can promise you that most of the work would be done before the gavel sounded for the beginning of the 2009 or 2011 Texas Legislative Session. And every bit as much of that preparatory work involved the public as it did the legislature.

My Dad taught me that the true measure of a man is in his ability to recognize how much he doesn't know - and the folks trying to to put effort KNOW they need help. Then again, they HAVE managed to begin to open the debate. Maybe the timing is off - but frankly, when is it "right"? I've NEVER had the NRA ask me how I feel about OC, and I'm a 3rd-generation Life member. I'll spit on the floor, say "ain't" and am generally capable of insultin' about anyone - but I'm also a past president of one of the largest civic groups in the world, past national and state officer for that same group - and have been involved in both national and international meetings and conferences. The point is that myself and others like me have talked with those putting this effort together, and they understand they need help - problem is, so far no one is offering much. Rather than worry about my basis of some percentage poll that can cause change, why not say "Hey, maybe not a bad idea, but there are dangers you need to be aware of - let me get hold of these folks and HELP."?????

[G.A. Heath]

Rather than worry about my basis of some percentage poll that can cause change, why not say "Hey, maybe not a bad idea, but there are dangers you need to be aware of - let me get hold of these folks and HELP."?????

Charles has offered to help. IIRC he offered some suggestions to the folks at OCDO regarding their proposed bill last year, and was ignored then insulted. He has also, more than once, offered his suggestions on how to go about getting OC legalized. Now with that said I will trust Mr. Cotton's advice, even when I disagree with it, especially when it involves gun rights and Texas politics. As for why I trust him, he's been there and done that so he knows what he's talking about rather than being an armchair quarterback. Also, why would he want to help a group that has launched personal attacks against him because he wouldn't jump on their bandwagon at the expense of other goals?

[Charles L. Cotton]

This is try #3 to post from my phone so pardon my brevity. I hope I am on of those reasonable members of both forums.

You are. In fact, I need to talk to you so please PM your phone number if you don't mind.

Even some legit signs have come down since 1997. You are right about out of sight out of mind but legal OC will still be defacto out of site because so few will practice it.

No, by definition OC cannot enjoy the out-of-sight-out-of-mind effect because it isn't out of sight! I have no doubt that there will be few people who actually OC, but it will only take one to cause a store to post -- literally only one. If/when a shopper who is oblivious to Texas gun laws complains to a business owner or manager, that business man or woman has to respond. They can tell the complaining shopper he/she will do nothing, or he can tell the person openly-carrying to leave and post a sign so he doesn't have to deal with the issue again. One man, one gun, one complaining shopper and 450,000 CHL can no longer carry in that establishment. Now multiply that by the number of people openly carrying and the number of stores they enter. I can't guarantee this will happen and OC supporters can't guarantee it will not. The best evidence we have to go on is how Texans responded to citizen-carry in 1995 - 1997. This is why I say the path to passing OC doesn't begin with the legislature.

I still respectfully disagree with the assumption that there will be mass postings. On e the news coverage goes away so will the mindshare. Particularly if it is CHL-only OC, the history since 97 has been as you said fewer real signs over time and I'll add with increasing CHL #s. Our reputation with police are good as well. Total = more pital environment now than then.

Obviously you and I disagree as to whether a risk of backlash exists, but I agree with everything else you said in this paragraph. These are facts that should be put to use outside of the legislative arena and before, not after, an OC bill is passed.

Why isn't verbal notice sufficient for the rare occurance where an open carrier finds himself in a place where he isn't welcome?

If you mean legally sufficient, it will be sufficient. If you are talking day to day practicality, it is far easier for a business owner to post a sign, rather than have to deal with customer complaints and confront people openly carrying. If you are talking about the Legislature's perspective, they simply will not allow a law to be passed that would require a business owner to post two signs to keep armed customers out of their store -- one for OC and one for CC.

I think rejecting evidence from other states is unfair. Didn't we point to other states in 95 to assuage opponent's fears?

Yes, we pointed to Florida to help pass SB60. However, the best evidence of what to expect in response to OC is what actually occurred in Texas in response to concealed-carry. The irony is that OC supporters blast those of us who express concern saying we ignore other states' experiences, yet this is precisely what they are doing when they ignore Texas in 1995-1997. Plus, trying to argue that openly carrying so everyone can see is no different than concealed-carry around the same people is going to fall on deaf ears.

Open carry isn't likely to happen without TSRA's support and it has almost zero chance with its opposition.

I can't speak for TSRA but unless its policy changes, TSRA will not push OC unless its members want it to do so. When I say members, I don't mean a relative hand full, I mean a significant majority. If an equal number of TSRA members oppose OC, then TSRA cannot get involved. I feel confident that TSRA will not oppose OC, so long as any OC bill (as filed or as amended) does not hurt any current gun rights.

Adjust the battle plan now that the opposition is on the run.

There is no organized opposition to OC, there just isn't any support either. This can be changed, but it won't happen during the session. As you noted, 2011 is the worst year to try to pass OC; redistricting, budget shortfall, and school funding will eat up the majority of time. Remember what the Democrats did last time redistricting was an issue; then ran to Oklahoma to avoid a vote. It's going to be a slim year for pro-gun bills and it's not because of a lack of support; it's the calendar.

Chas.

[Skiprr]

Charley, you missed (or chose to ignore) my point - that there were LOTS of signs precluding CC immediately after passage, which faded away quickly as folks realized their fears were groundless.

TexasRedneck, I have to ask why you access this Forum from Virginia, yet you represent yourself as being "TexasRedneck"?

While I absolutely respect your right to state your opinions, I will also say that my evaluation of your opinions is based upon my perception of your veracity...your ability to be believed.

You are accessing this Forum from Virginia, home of the abrasive OpenCarry.org that caused us Texans so much grief in the last legislature. Yet you represent yourself as "TexasRedneck."

As a Texan whose family has been here for many generations, since 1829, I have difficulty understanding why I should listen to anything a Virginian has to say regarding Texas law and its legislative process. No offense intended.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Now, please tell me a single state where passage of OC has caused CC to be banned.

I never said concealed-carry would be repealed and for the record, it wouldn't be repealed. I said there is a substantial risk that the public reaction seen in the 1995 to 1997 time frame would be repeated and many businesses would post against all carrying. Will you at least acknowledge the risk exists?

For the most part I agree, but since OC supporters claim only a very small number of people will actually carry openly, prudence requires an honest risk evaluation. OC supporters clearly feel the risk is worth taking and many concealed-carriers do not. As for the iron being hot, what makes you think the Texas Legislature or the public are ripe for passing and excepting OC? I see absolutely no evidence of either and I do spend a little time with legislative folks and their staff. But as I have been pointing out for three years now, a rational and well planned program could change both legislative and public perception of OC.

You say you have one, I ask that you share it.

I've offered several suggestions, all of which were ignored. Early on I pointed out that the bill proposed by OCDC was an absolute disaster and I pointed out how a bill should be written to minimize the opportunity to amend anti-gun, anti-carry provisions to the OCDC bill. Those suggestions were also ignored.

I offered to help anyone who wanted to organize a Texas based, Texas only, association to promote OC in Texas, but no one accepted the offer.

I'm not about to put my 30 year reputation on the line and risk my ability to work with the legislature in the future by working with anyone or any organization I don't know. I'm certainly not going to work with people and/or organizations who have proven themselves not only to be ineffective, but destructive also.

As for my contingency plan, I'm not going to hand it to anyone and have them screw it up because they don't have the patience or resources to get it done. Plus, I stand ready to promote OC in the future, if and when our Members want it done.

It didn't get done because concealed-carry supporters tried to ram it down the legislature's throat. But there is a flaw in your analogy. Passing the CHL statute didn't put any other gun rights or abilities at risk; passing OC most certainly does.

So, you're saying that it should be abandoned? If not, then help those trying to bring it about to understand the challenges and pitfalls and work with them to bring it through safely.

No, I'm not saying abandon the OC cause, but I am saying abandon methods, people and organizations that have proven themselves not only useless but damaging to the overall OC cause as well. I've already addressed the trying to help issue.

I hope you are right, but I wonder why these folks waiting until Nov. 2010 to start. The legislature should be the last stop in the program, not the first. I know nothing about the people or the effort, but I do see people posting on OCDO with the LSCDL logo as an avatar. Is there some place I can go to see their mission statement, or how they plan to approach the task of passing OC?

At their website.

I see that it is up. I looked as recently as two or three days ago and it wasn't up. I have now read it, and its goals are far wider reaching than merely open-carry. They want to get into sentencing in criminal matters, just to name one. This is a big mistake.

In fact, their website shows they are far more than a gun rights group; they appear to be more of a Libertarian organization. Here is a portion of their statement in the "About Us" section of their website:

The Lone Star Citizens Defense League (LSCDL) is a non-profit, all volunteer, non-partisan grassroots organization dedicated to the principles contained in Article I, Section 2 of the Texas Constitution that "INHERENT POLITICAL POWER; REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit. The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient." Our freedom of speech, our freedom from unreasonable searches, our rights against self-incrimination, our right to bear arms, all of our fundamental rights only exist because we stand firmly resolved to preserve them. The LSCDL exists to strengthen that resolve.

LSCDL was founded by a group of activists who are from all across Texas who recognized that a sustained, coordinated, statewide effort was critical to protecting and expanding the rights of law-abiding citizens. Between legislative sessions, we look for ways to improve existing laws and meet with legislators on proposed bills. During a session, LSCDL’s representatives work full-time at the Capitol, testifying at committee hearings, monitoring Floor votes, working with other pro-rights groups and reporting back to you. LSCDL lobbies heavily on behalf of our membership and the good citizens of Texas. We lobby against bills that constitute a direct or indirect impairment on your Constitutional Rights.

Let me say that I have nothing against this organization nor against the people who founded it. I am merely noting that LoneStarcdl is not solely a gun rights organization and this dilutes any pro-gun message they want to send.

Have you contacted them with your questions/concerns? Have you offered to help? Have you done anything to let them know the kinds of pitfalls they could face?

I hope you don't mean this as it appears. You seem to think I have an obligation to contact them and "help." As previously noted, I don't work with strangers. My recommendations are in the public domain and these new folks can find them if they wish.

I can tell you that there is discussion with the NRA in terms of input/ideas/guidance.

This is interesting. I'm on the NRA Board and serve on several committees. I wasn't aware that we are working with LSCDL. Who are you/they dealing with at NRA?

The guy that is putting this together isn't a lawyer or even a "polished professional". Much like the men that founded this country, he's a simple man trying to return a right that many feel should never have been relinquished. Will he do it "right"? I don't know - but I know that standing on the sidelines and throwing rocks at him certainly isn't going to help.

Do you mean me throwing rocks? If so, based upon what? This is so typical of the OCDO types who truly believe that "if you are not with us, you are against us." Everyone who doesn't shout AMEN after every chest-pounding post is an anti-gun heretic.

I know I'm going to regret disclosing this, but I prepared a open-carry battle plan in 2008, just in case NRA or TSRA Members wanted us to pursue OC legislation. I can promise you that most of the work would be done before the gavel sounded for the beginning of the 2009 or 2011 Texas Legislative Session. And every bit as much of that preparatory work involved the public as it did the legislature.

Rather than worry about my basis of some percentage poll that can cause change, why not say "Hey, maybe not a bad idea, but there are dangers you need to be aware of - let me get hold of these folks and HELP."?????

Because I don't feel that way, that's why. You seem to believe I have a duty, beyond the Membership I represent, to help anyone and everyone who wants OC. I'm far more interested in employer parking lots, campus-carry and range protection than I am pouring political capital into a cause our members have not indicated they support in any significant numbers. If an organization wants to get serious about OC and do it the right way, I may change my mind. After three years of making this offer, no one has accepted it. And "the right way" doesn't begin this session.

Chas.

[cbr600]

deleted

[Charles L. Cotton]

As an aside, some employers will not allow employees to have guns in their cars during the workday even when it is not on the employer's property. There's certainly no property right claim in that situation.

Suppose a husband and wife work for different companies a few blocks apart in downtown Houston. They carpool and park in a mutally convenient third party parking deck. Which employers will not allow them to leave a gun in their car during the workday?

I don't know how to answer this question. I was talking about people who drive around in their own car during the workday. Many employers won't let them park in a customer's surface lot with a gun in their own car.

Chas.

[cbr600]

deleted

[TexasRedneck]

Charley, you missed (or chose to ignore) my point - that there were LOTS of signs precluding CC immediately after passage, which faded away quickly as folks realized their fears were groundless.

TexasRedneck, I have to ask why you access this Forum from Virginia, yet you represent yourself as being "TexasRedneck"?
As a Texan whose family has been here for many generations, since 1829, I have difficulty understanding why I should listen to anything a Virginian has to say regarding Texas law and its legislative process. No offense intended.

Okay....my first reaction was to explode - then I got curious - how in the BLAZES do you come up with me allegedly accessing this forum from Virginia?!?? As I read your post, I calmed down and realized that while you're challenging my comments based on your perception of my location, you remained reasonable.....so I'll do the same.

Not sure where you get the VA thing, but I've got to tell you that your family didn't beat mine by much. My maternal side of the family were a part of the original German settlers in New Braunfels. My paternal side arrived later - didn't come through Indianola until 1860, and then settled into San Antonio, opening a cooperage and donatin' the land upon which "Saint Joske's" was built.

I grew up in Leon Valley, attended LV Elementary, then Pat M. Neff Jr. High, and on to John Marshall High. My parents owned a hardware and liquore stores in Leon Valley - I grew up helping him in the Hardware Store, probably one of the few that knows what a cup leather is - or a bastard file!

We currently reside in New Braunfels. I travel to Houston, Dallas/FW and Austin routinely. So, next time ya accuse me of bein' in Virginia.....SMILE!

[Skiprr]

As I read your post, I calmed down and realized that while you're challenging my comments based on your perception of my location, you remained reasonable.....so I'll do the same.

TexasRedneck, all your posts have come in from Internet Prorotocols originating in Virginia via a range owned by RoadRunner, "RR-SOUTHEAST-BLK2," out of Herdon, Virginia.

It's rare to see ISP-assigned IPs used outside of their geographic area.

Speaking of rare, come to Houston. I'll buy you and your wife an excellent dinner at Taste of Texas. http://www.tasteoftexas.com/

Seriously. I'd like to meet you. Offer stands through December 4. Just let me know.

[TexasRedneck]

Will you at least acknowledge the risk exists?

Absolutely - I'm also concerned re. potential backlashes.....Charlie, I'm NOT rabid - I want OC, but I do NOT want to harm other 2nd A issues in the process. I can see the reason for the concern, however, hearing how OCDO treated the issue previously.

I've offered several suggestions, all of which were ignored. Early on I pointed out that the bill proposed by OCDC was an absolute disaster and I pointed out how a bill should be written to minimize the opportunity to amend anti-gun, anti-carry provisions to the OCDC bill. Those suggestions were also ignored.

Again - PLEASE remember that myself and others are NOT from OCDO - in fact, I'm neither registered w/them or a member thereof. I've looked at their website and got the feeling that they were a bit more radical than what I'm comfortable with.

I offered to help anyone who wanted to organize a Texas based, Texas only, association to promote OC in Texas, but no one accepted the offer.

Do you stand by that offer with a group that is TEXAS based, put together by TEXANS smart enough to know they need the input?

I'm not about to put my 30 year reputation on the line and risk my ability to work with the legislature in the future by working with anyone or any organization I don't know. I'm certainly not going to work with people and/or organizations who have proven themselves not only to be ineffective, but destructive also.

No sense of fun, eh? I understand that - part of the Texas-based groups' perception is that TSRA WON'T help - thing is, this is a side of the story I don't think they were aware of - it certainly never came up in any of our discussions. For the record, I am NOT a part of the Texas group at this time. I'm still debating whether I can be of more value as a member of the group, or a non-member advocate, one that can't be "painted" as it were during the early stages.

As for my contingency plan, I'm not going to hand it to anyone and have them screw it up because they don't have the patience or resources to get it done. Plus, I stand ready to promote OC in the future, if and when our Members want it done.

When was the last member poll done regarding OC? With all due respect, you're saying you have a plan....but won't use it or work with others so that they might - or at least that's the way I'm reading it. Again - I can understand that in regards to an "outside" group - but this is a Texas group.

No, I'm not saying abandon the OC cause, but I am saying abandon methods, people and organizations that have proven themselves not only useless but damaging to the overall OC cause as well. I've already addressed the trying to help issue.

Charles - again, we're talking a group other than OCDO.

In fact, their website shows they are far more than a gun rights group; they appear to be more of a Libertarian organization.

Huh?? Okay - maybe I'm dumb....but when quoting the Texas Constitution and saying it should be followed....that makes on Libertarian?

Let me say that I have nothing against this organization nor against the people who founded it. I am merely noting that LoneStarcdl is not solely a gun rights organization and this dilutes any pro-gun message they want to send.

With all due respect - does TSRA have only a single goal/mission?

Have you contacted them with your questions/concerns? Have you offered to help? Have you done anything to let them know the kinds of pitfalls they could face?

I hope you don't mean this as it appears. You seem to think I have an obligation to contact them and "help." As previously noted, I don't work with strangers. My recommendations are in the public domain and these new folks can find them if they wish.

No - but they have made several attempts to contact YOU....without response.

I can tell you that there is discussion with the NRA in terms of input/ideas/guidance.

This is interesting. I'm on the NRA Board and serve on several committees. I wasn't aware that we are working with LSCDL. Who are you/they dealing with at NRA?

As I said - "discussion". Not "working with", at least not at this point. The NRA views OC (according to them) as more of a "State" issue than a National one. What we're working towards w/them is resources in terms of potential feedback/information sources, etc.

Do you mean me throwing rocks? If so, based upon what? This is so typical of the OCDO types who truly believe that "if you are not with us, you are against us." Everyone who doesn't shout AMEN after every chest-pounding post is an anti-gun heretic.

<sigh> Charles, you keep saying you want to be willing to help - but you keep trying to read between the lines of what I say. I'm pretty plain-spoken. If I meant YOU, I would have said YOU. I'm talking about folks that will post negative comments without trying to understand issues, without asking questions, without trying to understand motivations. It's pretty obvious that OCDO sticks in your craw. From what I've been able to glean about it, I can't blame you - but this is NOT an OCDO group.

Because I don't feel that way, that's why. You seem to believe I have a duty, beyond the Membership I represent, to help anyone and everyone who wants OC. I'm far more interested in employer parking lots, campus-carry and range protection than I am pouring political capital into a cause our members have not indicated they support in any significant numbers. If an organization wants to get serious about OC and do it the right way, I may change my mind. After three years of making this offer, no one has accepted it. And "the right way" doesn't begin this session.

With all due respect - I will repeat - I AM A TSRA MEMBER. YOU REPRESENT ME. I'm trying to understand the issues, trying to work within your "rules" - yet you seem to be of the mindset that I'm an outsider or something. Maybe that's not how you mean it, but that is how it's coming across to me, and that is getting tiresome. I represent a 3rd-generation NRA membership. You say that you might change your mind, yet you won't respond to folks trying to reach you for input. I guess part of what frustrates me with that, Charles, is that *I* am the one that told them to contact you, to get your input/ideas/suggestions.