parabelum wrote:LEO's check in their guns before entry into detention. Should they cover the holster as well
This wasn't a jail or prison, it was an elementary school. LEO's don't disarm when they walk into a school.
I approach a gun-related activity with an eye to promoting a positive impression of gun owners.
Chas.
OK maybe one comment.
There is a strong contingent of people working to remove prohibited locations for LTC holders. These efforts, rely not only on LTC holders, being law abiding, but understanding that in your face, just because I can, attitudes, undermine those efforts. What is so difficult about not only disarming, but removing the holster?
Take away the Second first, and the First is gone in a second
21 posts. One post in the "General Texas CHL Form" having to do with self-defense insurance, one in this thread about display of empty holsters at a grammar school under the "Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues" forum, and 19 posts in a thread about Open Carry at the Texas State Fair in the "Open-Carry Discussions" forum. This thread has a distinctive whiff of a "They Who Shall Not be Named" flavor, with some open-carry overtones.
User Statistics
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”
parabelum wrote:LEO's check in their guns before entry into detention. Should they cover the holster as well
This wasn't a jail or prison, it was an elementary school. LEO's don't disarm when they walk into a school.
I approach a gun-related activity with an eye to promoting a positive impression of gun owners.
Chas.
Right. My wires got crossed. Elementary school is different, from public perception point of view the most. Covering up would be prudential exercise of 2A/carry. Don't think it should be a requirement per se, but, it would make LTC'er project a more positive disposition, especially in the eyes of someone who is already nervous nelly about guns.
I'll go to the back of the class now, sit down, and take notes.
In my opinion, the value of which can be determined by you, this is an example of just because it's legal doesn't mean it is right or wise.
Note: Me sharing a link and information published by others does not constitute my endorsement, agreement, disagreement, my opinion or publishing by me. If you do not like what is contained at a link I share, take it up with the author or publisher of the content.
21 posts. One post in the "General Texas CHL Form" having to do with self-defense insurance, one in this thread about display of empty holsters at a grammar school under the "Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues" forum, and 19 posts in a thread about Open Carry at the Texas State Fair in the "Open-Carry Discussions" forum. This thread has a distinctive whiff of a "They Who Shall Not be Named" flavor, with some open-carry overtones.
parabelum wrote:LEO's check in their guns before entry into detention. Should they cover the holster as well
This wasn't a jail or prison, it was an elementary school. LEO's don't disarm when they walk into a school.
I approach a gun-related activity with an eye to promoting a positive impression of gun owners.
Chas.
OK maybe one comment.
There is a strong contingent of people working to remove prohibited locations for LTC holders. These efforts, rely not only on LTC holders, being law abiding, but understanding that in your face, just because I can, attitudes, undermine those efforts. What is so difficult about not only disarming, but removing the holster?
I have to take my belt most of the way off to remove the holster. I always just unholster since it's easier, faster and just adds to muscle memory. It's never occurred to me that someone would be offended.
21 posts. One post in the "General Texas CHL Form" having to do with self-defense insurance, one in this thread about display of empty holsters at a grammar school under the "Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues" forum, and 19 posts in a thread about Open Carry at the Texas State Fair in the "Open-Carry Discussions" forum. This thread has a distinctive whiff of a "They Who Shall Not be Named" flavor, with some open-carry overtones.
Screen Shot 2016-10-19 at 5.08.19 PM.png
I don't think it was me he was referring to as a troll. I don't know what shall not name group you're referring to, but I don't belong to any gun organizations. I had to open and switch to this user name after my other got locked for unknown reasons. Previously, I was "So Confused" here.
Last edited by Ambassador on Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
mojo84 wrote:In my opinion, the value of which can be determined by you, this is an example of just because it's legal doesn't mean it is right or wise.
