Open Carry

[Charles L. Cotton]

In my opinion, the fear of open carry will go the way of the fear of concealed carry. It (concealed carry) was going to cause un-mitigated death and destruction. Blood would turn all of our rivers red! etc etc etc. Once concealed carry passed all the fear was shown to be vapors in the guts of liberals. Nothing changed as lawful citizens are lawful with or without a firearm. Same will be true if the firearm is concealed or on the hip.

It may well happen that any fear of open-carry would go away with time, if it has the opportunity. However, comparing open-carry to concealed-carry is faulty as concealed-carry has the out-of-sight-out-of-mind element in its favor that open-carry does not. Also, many folks who were not in Texas when concealed-carry passed in 1995, or who were too young to care, don't know how badly the business community reacted to concealed-carry. Ghost-buster "no gun" signs and decals were popping up on mom & pop shops in epidemic proportions and they were effective because TPC §30.06 was not created until HB2909 passed in 1997. Many of those now-ineffective decals that were posted between the summer of 1995 and September 1, 1997 are still on doors all over Texas. Were it not for TPC §30.06 and its "big ugly sign," the CHL program would have died in Texas not because it would have been repealed, but because relatively few people would have bothered to get a license. The prevailing thought would have been "why get a CHL if most of the places you frequent won't let you carry your handgun?"

Chas.

[Greybeard]

Quote: "why get a CHL if most of the places you frequent won't let you carry your handgun?"

Over the years, I have been appalled at the number of under-informed people who used that (gun buster signs)
as a "reason" for not getting their CHL.

As an aside, I can just envision Wendy Davis' jumping on the OC bandwagon turning into to "Those business owners DO have an absolute right to put up all the new 30.06 signs."

[stash]

From what I heard on the radio yesterday, her position re OC may have changed a bit. She is still for it, but would leave it up to local municipalities to allow it or not. You know how that would work.

[Keith B]

From what I heard on the radio yesterday, her position re OC may have changed a bit. She is still for it, but would leave it up to local municipalities to allow it or not. You know how that would work.

This is the way Missouri has open carry. It it the ONLY firearm regulation in Missouri that is not protected by preemption. It is a nightmare trying to figuring out where you can and can't open carry going city to city. That is another reason I just carry concealed when there, even if I know it is not prohibited by the city ordinances.

[jbarn]

From what I heard on the radio yesterday, her position re OC may have changed a bit. She is still for it, but would leave it up to local municipalities to allow it or not. You know how that would work.

This is the way Missouri has open carry. It it the ONLY firearm regulation in Missouri that is not protected by preemption. It is a nightmare trying to figuring out where you can and can't open carry going city to city. That is another reason I just carry concealed when there, even if I know it is not prohibited by the city ordinances.

Missouri seems to be big on "city by city". It is a nightmare to run security business there......

[mamabearCali]

That would be awful. I would not even try to OC in MO.

It would be wonderful if TX could get OC. However, yall have a good thing going. I have thought about this and moderated my position a bit on TX and OC. If you can get it without screwing everything up...go for it. If it is going to mess up the good thing yall have going, work on something else, campus carry, etc.

[SA-TX]

In my opinion, the fear of open carry will go the way of the fear of concealed carry. It (concealed carry) was going to cause un-mitigated death and destruction. Blood would turn all of our rivers red! etc etc etc. Once concealed carry passed all the fear was shown to be vapors in the guts of liberals. Nothing changed as lawful citizens are lawful with or without a firearm. Same will be true if the firearm is concealed or on the hip.

It may well happen that any fear of open-carry would go away with time, if it has the opportunity. However, comparing open-carry to concealed-carry is faulty as concealed-carry has the out-of-sight-out-of-mind element in its favor that open-carry does not. Also, many folks who were not in Texas when concealed-carry passed in 1995, or who were too young to care, don't know how badly the business community reacted to concealed-carry. Ghost-buster "no gun" signs and decals were popping up on mom & pop shops in epidemic proportions and they were effective because TPC §30.06 was not created until HB2909 passed in 1997. Many of those now-ineffective decals that were posted between the summer of 1995 and September 1, 1997 are still on doors all over Texas. Were it not for TPC §30.06 and its "big ugly sign," the CHL program would have died in Texas not because it would have been repealed, but because relatively few people would have bothered to get a license. The prevailing thought would have been "why get a CHL if most of the places you frequent won't let you carry your handgun?"

Chas.

I agree about the history but given the extremely few numbers of CHLer who would OC if a licensed OC bill were to pass, I think fears of mass 30.06 postings are highly unlikely. You have rightly been protective of 30.06 and have resisted changes to it for good reason. Since OC is obvious I suspect that verbal warnings will be the response of non-accepting business owners since I'll wager most owners have no idea what 30.06 is.

In short, I hope we will pass a good OC bill without any changes to 30.06 and without unreasonable fear as to how 30.06 postings will be impacted. Even before 30.06 an owner could ask someone to leave - it happens in OC states regularly - and that will very likely handle the few OC instances that arise. That should go out in all of the TSRA press releases or interviews after passage so it becomes the widely broadcast method and "approved" way of withdrawing consent for the carrier to be present.

We can and should pass a good bill this session as our window won't last forever. Hopefully our lobbying operation can convince Speaker Straus, assuming he retains his post, that this is a small change, is popular, and not worth opposing.

SA-TX

[Jaguar]

In my opinion, the fear of open carry will go the way of the fear of concealed carry. It (concealed carry) was going to cause un-mitigated death and destruction. Blood would turn all of our rivers red! etc etc etc. Once concealed carry passed all the fear was shown to be vapors in the guts of liberals. Nothing changed as lawful citizens are lawful with or without a firearm. Same will be true if the firearm is concealed or on the hip.

It may well happen that any fear of open-carry would go away with time, if it has the opportunity. However, comparing open-carry to concealed-carry is faulty as concealed-carry has the out-of-sight-out-of-mind element in its favor that open-carry does not. Also, many folks who were not in Texas when concealed-carry passed in 1995, or who were too young to care, don't know how badly the business community reacted to concealed-carry. Ghost-buster "no gun" signs and decals were popping up on mom & pop shops in epidemic proportions and they were effective because TPC §30.06 was not created until HB2909 passed in 1997. Many of those now-ineffective decals that were posted between the summer of 1995 and September 1, 1997 are still on doors all over Texas. Were it not for TPC §30.06 and its "big ugly sign," the CHL program would have died in Texas not because it would have been repealed, but because relatively few people would have bothered to get a license. The prevailing thought would have been "why get a CHL if most of the places you frequent won't let you carry your handgun?"

Chas.

I agree about the history but given the extremely few numbers of CHLer who would OC if a licensed OC bill were to pass, I think fears of mass 30.06 postings are highly unlikely. You have rightly been protective of 30.06 and have resisted changes to it for good reason. Since OC is obvious I suspect that verbal warnings will be the response of non-accepting business owners since I'll wager most owners have no idea what 30.06 is.

In short, I hope we will pass a good OC bill without any changes to 30.06 and without unreasonable fear as to how 30.06 postings will be impacted. Even before 30.06 an owner could ask someone to leave - it happens in OC states regularly - and that will very likely handle the few OC instances that arise. That should go out in all of the TSRA press releases or interviews after passage so it becomes the widely broadcast method and "approved" way of withdrawing consent for the carrier to be present.

We can and should pass a good bill this session as our window won't last forever. Hopefully our lobbying operation can convince Speaker Straus, assuming he retains his post, that this is a small change, is popular, and not worth opposing.

SA-TX

People do not like confronting individuals for behavior they believe unacceptable, they would prefer to put up a sign and if that doesn’t work to just call the police. If someone were to walk into a retail store with no shirt on and there is no sign, even though they don’t like it they probably won’t say anything and just get the “no shirt, no shoes…” sign ASAP.

Add to that hesitation to confront people, what if the one wanting to do the confronting has hoplophobia. Sure, it’s irrational, but we all know there are those that have this irrational fear. They are not going to be happy about having to tell someone to leave especially if they are openly carrying a pistol. The only way an OC law will get passed is if there is a sign.

I do not want 30.06 to apply to OC; that should be for CC only. I do not want another “big ugly sign” for OC because then they will just put up a 30.06 and be done with it. I think a standard ghostbuster gun sign should be sufficient for keeping openly carried pistols (and rifles) out. I believe it should have force of law, but only as a class C misdemeanor and a trespass order if the property owner so chooses. I also think the 30.06 sign should only carry a class C but that is a different issue.

That’s my $0.02.

[SA-TX]

In my opinion, the fear of open carry will go the way of the fear of concealed carry. It (concealed carry) was going to cause un-mitigated death and destruction. Blood would turn all of our rivers red! etc etc etc. Once concealed carry passed all the fear was shown to be vapors in the guts of liberals. Nothing changed as lawful citizens are lawful with or without a firearm. Same will be true if the firearm is concealed or on the hip.

It may well happen that any fear of open-carry would go away with time, if it has the opportunity. However, comparing open-carry to concealed-carry is faulty as concealed-carry has the out-of-sight-out-of-mind element in its favor that open-carry does not. Also, many folks who were not in Texas when concealed-carry passed in 1995, or who were too young to care, don't know how badly the business community reacted to concealed-carry. Ghost-buster "no gun" signs and decals were popping up on mom & pop shops in epidemic proportions and they were effective because TPC §30.06 was not created until HB2909 passed in 1997. Many of those now-ineffective decals that were posted between the summer of 1995 and September 1, 1997 are still on doors all over Texas. Were it not for TPC §30.06 and its "big ugly sign," the CHL program would have died in Texas not because it would have been repealed, but because relatively few people would have bothered to get a license. The prevailing thought would have been "why get a CHL if most of the places you frequent won't let you carry your handgun?"

Chas.

I agree about the history but given the extremely few numbers of CHLer who would OC if a licensed OC bill were to pass, I think fears of mass 30.06 postings are highly unlikely. You have rightly been protective of 30.06 and have resisted changes to it for good reason. Since OC is obvious I suspect that verbal warnings will be the response of non-accepting business owners since I'll wager most owners have no idea what 30.06 is.

In short, I hope we will pass a good OC bill without any changes to 30.06 and without unreasonable fear as to how 30.06 postings will be impacted. Even before 30.06 an owner could ask someone to leave - it happens in OC states regularly - and that will very likely handle the few OC instances that arise. That should go out in all of the TSRA press releases or interviews after passage so it becomes the widely broadcast method and "approved" way of withdrawing consent for the carrier to be present.

We can and should pass a good bill this session as our window won't last forever. Hopefully our lobbying operation can convince Speaker Straus, assuming he retains his post, that this is a small change, is popular, and not worth opposing.

SA-TX

People do not like confronting individuals for behavior they believe unacceptable, they would prefer to put up a sign and if that doesn’t work to just call the police. If someone were to walk into a retail store with no shirt on and there is no sign, even though they don’t like it they probably won’t say anything and just get the “no shirt, no shoes…” sign ASAP.

Add to that hesitation to confront people, what if the one wanting to do the confronting has hoplophobia. Sure, it’s irrational, but we all know there are those that have this irrational fear. They are not going to be happy about having to tell someone to leave especially if they are openly carrying a pistol. The only way an OC law will get passed is if there is a sign.

I do not want 30.06 to apply to OC; that should be for CC only. I do not want another “big ugly sign” for OC because then they will just put up a 30.06 and be done with it. I think a standard ghostbuster gun sign should be sufficient for keeping openly carried pistols (and rifles) out. I believe it should have force of law, but only as a class C misdemeanor and a trespass order if the property owner so chooses. I also think the 30.06 sign should only carry a class C but that is a different issue.

That’s my $0.02.

I agree that some people may be a reluctant to inform an OCer of their no-carry policy but a) there are many examples of OCers asked to leave and b) do we really need to legislate specifically for this very rare occurrence?

The problems with gun busters for OC are the same as when it applied to CC: inconsistency in size, placement, contrast, etc. An enforceable gun busters sign could mean, for example, that someone could be arrested and charged (even if it is Class C) when only 1 door of several has a gun busters sign. Mere arrest has consequences even if the charges are later dropped or the accused is found not guilty at trial.

Stories from other states indicate that the end result is usually the same whether there is a sign or not: the police are called, often by a fellow shopper not store management, and the person is almost always contacted by officers. At this point, a store owner could certainly make his wishes known or have a trespass warning issued.

30.06 was a response to a real events. The same is true of the changes made to finally achieve car carry. Why not make the OC bill as simple as possible and the adjust if that is necessary? I am confident that Charles and the TSRA team can craft a bill that minimizes the chance of undesirable side effects.

Let's remember the big picture: we have a group of politicians running for office who are supporting a pro-2A change to Texas gun laws. I say that we must find a way to take YES for an answer.

[Oldgringo]

Politicians (most) are all about getting/staying in office...by whatever means/words necessary. Every now and then, one comes along and speaks the truth. If that's not what the majority wants to hear/believe, that candidate becomes an "also ran". That, boys and girls, is the way the game is played in our republic.

[WildBill]

Politicians (most) are all for getting/staying in office...by whatever means necessary. Every now and then, one comes along and speaks the truth. If that's not what the majority wants to hear/believe, that candidate becomes an "also ran". That, boys and girls, is the way the game is played in our republic.

Sad but true Oldgringo.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I am confident that Charles and the TSRA team can craft a bill that minimizes the chance of undesirable side effects.

Hold on now. I didn't write the bill last session. All I did was make it clear that 1) it was far too broad opening up virtually every section of the Government Code and relevant sections of the Penal Code to anti-gun amendments; and 2) we would be forced to kill the bill if a committee substitute didn't drop the amendments to TPC §30.06. There is no reason to believe I, TSRA or the NRA will be writing a bill in 2015. Rep. Lavender didn't ask us to do so last session and I have no indication he will this in 2015. Remember, I favor a two-session approach to protect prior gains, while everyone else wanting open-carry to pass want it done in one session, regardless of the risks.

Chas.

[Dori]

Changing the penalty for 46.035(a) to a $10 civil fine is a compromise I could get behind.

[steveincowtown]

Remember, I favor a two-session approach to protect prior gains, while everyone else wanting open-carry to pass want it done in one session, regardless of the risks.

Chas.

Sooo... I would assume we can look forward to TSRA helping write part 1 of this during the next session?

[G.A. Heath]

Remember, I favor a two-session approach to protect prior gains, while everyone else wanting open-carry to pass want it done in one session, regardless of the risks.

Chas.

Sooo... I would assume we can look forward to TSRA helping write part 1 of this during the next session?

The TSRA will not, and in all honesty can not, plan for the next legislative session until after the elections. They may develop preliminary plans but those are simply matters of "We would like to ...", "just in case ..." and "What if ..." type plans. I also believe they have a board of directors meeting that has to happen before any real plans are made. So basically they don't really know what they will do for the next session.