TexasCHLforum.com

I'm posting this on a new thread, so as not to hijack the one that gave me the idea.

I was reading the message about how Trump says, "Concealed Carry Permit Holders “Have An Obligation To Carry” In The Face Of Terrorism, and it got me thinking.

I'm glad Trump is in the race, because his presence is forcing a lot of conversations that I think most of the other candidates would have shunned (at best) or shut down (at worst) if someone more timid than he had brought it up.

I still think he's a buffoon, and I'm looking forward to when he gets out of the race so a more serious candidate with similar talking points (Cruz) can absorb some of his support base.

But on a related note...

This idea of an "Obligation To Carry In The Face Of Terrorism" does bring one thought to mind. Come 2017, if the ugly face of terrorism starts to show up more often in the US, I'd have to think that could be a selling point with the Texas Legislature on reducing and/or removing the quantity & effectiveness of 'gun free' zones in Texas.

We currently carry to protect ourselves in the face of a danger that likely won't manifest itself.

• Yep, I said it, the dangerous situations that we carry to protect ourselves against likely won't happen to most of us - ever. Most of us are not LEOs, and we live normal white-collar / blue collar lives where we don't seek out danger. As my signature line says, our, "number one option for personal security is a lifelong commitment to avoidance, deterrence, and de-escalation", and many of us practice that.
  
  Most of us truly expect that we'll be lying on our death bed someday thinking, "well, I carried that hunk of metal on my side all those years and never needed it after all...good thing". Like insurance, we hope and pray that we'll never need it, and for most of us, that will be true.
  
  Like it or not, the antis believe this as well, and many of them likely don't think any of us will ever use our guns for good. This forms a part of their argument for maintaining and promoting as many 'gun free' zones as possible (e.g. 30.06 posted places, schools, sporting events).

But we carry anyway, because like an Eagle Scout, it's best to Be Prepared in case that improbable, dangerous situation ever comes to fruition.

But if the danger becomes more real - if ISIS et. al. shows its ugly face in the form of repeated terrorist attacks - then the probability that we might need to have our handgun to protect ourselves (and others) increases. Assuming it becomes the "new normal" for citizens in the US to have to anticipate the next attack, then our legislators have to recognize that forcing us to disarm anywhere is really a bad thing.

Borrowing an idea from the lefties...never let a good crisis go to waste...we should be able to use this as one of our talking points with the lawmakers in 2017 (or 2019, or 2021, or whenever this new existence comes to be). Expansion of places where CHL holders can carry has long been a goal for us (and thanks to Mr. Cotton, Mrs Tripp, etc. for getting us closer every two years - in small, effective steps), but the growth of terrorism in our own country could help provide us with a more immediate justification to accelerate the process.

I hope I'm wrong. I hope that terrorism never really grows here in the US. But if it does, I think we should exploit it as much as possible so we can best protect ourselves in the face of the more imminent threat.

Any thoughts?

I for one, would like to see a Trump/Cruz ticket.

Let me qualify what I'm about to say: I detest OCT and everything they do.

I would though, in this terrorist climate, like to carry my AR slung over my back, when out and about as is done in Israel.

Will I do it?

No!

If however, it's carry is supported by the powers that be...then yes. At this point, I feel rather under-gunned with only a G19.

Perhaps, if more high profile people/politicians support this AR idea and it's broadly accepted, then yes, I sling up...

We are at war here on the U.S. homeland.

Abraham wrote:Let me qualify what I'm about to say: I detest OCT and everything they do.

I would though, in this terrorist climate, like to carry my AR slung over my back, when out and about as is done in Israel.

Will I do it?

No!

If however, it's carry is supported by the powers that be...then yes. At this point, I feel rather under-gunned with only a G19.

Perhaps, if more high profile people/politicians support this AR idea and it's broadly accepted, then yes, I sling up...

We are at war here on the U.S. homeland.

I would like TX to do what Montana has done and if you make the rifle in the state, and it stays in the state, federal laws do not apply. An SBR in a backpack broken down would be the best of both worlds. Keeping a rifle with you and keeping it out of sight. It would take a drastic change in society to accept the fact that you can walk around with an AR slung on your back in the open. Unfortunately, the terrorist climate may be what changes society.

Of course you could do it now with a stamp but to me that's an infringement the same as the CHL but that a different argument.

Abraham wrote:Let me qualify what I'm about to say: I detest OCT and everything they do.

I would though, in this terrorist climate, like to carry my AR slung over my back, when out and about as is done in Israel.

Will I do it?

No!

If however, it's carry is supported by the powers that be...then yes. At this point, I feel rather under-gunned with only a G19.

Perhaps, if more high profile people/politicians support this AR idea and it's broadly accepted, then yes, I sling up...

We are at war here on the U.S. homeland.

Israel actually has very strict gun control, with it almost impossible for a "regular" citizen to get a firearm carry permit. The people you see carrying in Israel are IDF Reservists, LEO's, and others in an official capacity.

That said, I like the fact that we "can" carry an AR-15 in Texas. It would be kind of awkward to go about my daily business with it, but I think it may be practical to keep one in the car. I bought a 12ga pump recently with this in mind. In the meantime I'm looking forward to open carry so I can comfortably carry a full size, with a couple extra mags.

So far, the hadjis have been doing a good job for us, keeping to gun free zones, military recruiting, military bases, etc. I doubt we ever see an attack on a LGS. Schools, stadiums, where a lot of people are gathered, guaranteed to be no weapons, are prime targets.

Much of our CHL law is statutory, and the Lege meets once every two years in Texas. No entity or authority is empowered to change those laws otherwise.

If it became overwhelmingly clear next month that openly carrying loaded rifles was a Real Good Idea(tm), it will be 2017 before that can be made lawful, other than a special session. Not impossible, but real tough.

jason812 wrote:

Abraham wrote:Let me qualify what I'm about to say: I detest OCT and everything they do.

I would though, in this terrorist climate, like to carry my AR slung over my back, when out and about as is done in Israel.

Will I do it?

No!

If however, it's carry is supported by the powers that be...then yes. At this point, I feel rather under-gunned with only a G19.

Perhaps, if more high profile people/politicians support this AR idea and it's broadly accepted, then yes, I sling up...

We are at war here on the U.S. homeland.

I would like TX to do what Montana has done and if you make the rifle in the state, and it stays in the state, federal laws do not apply. An SBR in a backpack broken down would be the best of both worlds. Keeping a rifle with you and keeping it out of sight. It would take a drastic change in society to accept the fact that you can walk around with an AR slung on your back in the open. Unfortunately, the terrorist climate may be what changes society.

Of course you could do it now with a stamp but to me that's an infringement the same as the CHL but that a different argument.

Can I make a machine gun in Montana as long as I keep it there?

JALLEN wrote:So far, the hadjis have been doing a good job for us, keeping to gun free zones, military recruiting, military bases, etc. I doubt we ever see an attack on a LGS. Schools, stadiums, where a lot of people are gathered, guaranteed to be no weapons, are prime targets.

Much of our CHL law is statutory, and the Lege meets once every two years in Texas. No entity or authority is empowered to change those laws otherwise.

If it became overwhelmingly clear next month that openly carrying loaded rifles was a Real Good Idea(tm), it will be 2017 before that can be made lawful, other than a special session. Not impossible, but real tough.

It's already legal in Texas.

jason812 wrote:...

I would like TX to do what Montana has done and if you make the rifle in the state, and it stays in the state, federal laws do not apply. An SBR in a backpack broken down would be the best of both worlds. Keeping a rifle with you and keeping it out of sight. It would take a drastic change in society to accept the fact that you can walk around with an AR slung on your back in the open. Unfortunately, the terrorist climate may be what changes society.

Of course you could do it now with a stamp but to me that's an infringement the same as the CHL but that a different argument.

Unfortunately this won't work. The Supreme Court has ruled in several cases (unrelated to guns) that the product 'possibly could' move in interstate commerce someday and also the 'product', even if staying within state lines, could affect commerce in the product in other states.

The Constitution's Commerce Clause has been used to federalize everything.

ScottDLS wrote:

JALLEN wrote:So far, the hadjis have been doing a good job for us, keeping to gun free zones, military recruiting, military bases, etc. I doubt we ever see an attack on a LGS. Schools, stadiums, where a lot of people are gathered, guaranteed to be no weapons, are prime targets.

Much of our CHL law is statutory, and the Lege meets once every two years in Texas. No entity or authority is empowered to change those laws otherwise.

If it became overwhelmingly clear next month that openly carrying loaded rifles was a Real Good Idea(tm), it will be 2017 before that can be made lawful, other than a special session. Not impossible, but real tough.

It's already legal in Texas.

Loaded?

I did not realize that. You mean the gents you lambast as kooks are carrying loaded rifles openly?

Yes. There's nothing about loaded or unloaded in the statutes.

jason812 wrote:
I would like TX to do what Montana has done and if you make the rifle in the state, and it stays in the state, federal laws do not apply.

What!!? I want that law!!!

SA_Steve wrote:

jason812 wrote:...

I would like TX to do what Montana has done and if you make the rifle in the state, and it stays in the state, federal laws do not apply. An SBR in a backpack broken down would be the best of both worlds. Keeping a rifle with you and keeping it out of sight. It would take a drastic change in society to accept the fact that you can walk around with an AR slung on your back in the open. Unfortunately, the terrorist climate may be what changes society.

Of course you could do it now with a stamp but to me that's an infringement the same as the CHL but that a different argument.

Unfortunately this won't work. The Supreme Court has ruled in several cases (unrelated to guns) that the product 'possibly could' move in interstate commerce someday and also the 'product', even if staying within state lines, could affect commerce in the product in other states.

The Constitution's Commerce Clause has been used to federalize everything.

I didn't realize that the feds pooh poohed on this :(

JALLEN wrote:Loaded?

I did not realize that. You mean the gents you lambast as kooks are carrying loaded rifles openly?

Frightening isn't it?

OCT is no different than MDA looking in the mirror. Same dumb, unreasonable, can't reason with, their right, you're wrong attitude. Just on the other side. Give a member of MDA a rifle and.... oh, never mind. What was I thinking.

doncb wrote:

JALLEN wrote:Loaded?

I did not realize that. You mean the gents you lambast as kooks are carrying loaded rifles openly?

Frightening isn't it?

OCT is no different than MDA looking in the mirror. Same dumb, unreasonable, can't reason with, their right, you're wrong attitude. Just on the other side. Give a member of MDA a rifle and.... oh, never mind. What was I thinking.

I prefer to carry my LOADED rifles concealed....and breaking with my handgun preference, I don't carry one chambered. The amount of time that it would take to bring my concealed rifle to bear makes the chambering of a round a minimal distraction.