User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/18/2015 3:19:38 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By motown_steve:
No, it's an ignorant point. Police are going to initiate encounters with people open carrying to verify they are licensed. The purpose of licensed open carry is to ensure that people who are carrying have been trained and have gone through a background check, and having the license is going to give police the ability to make that verification when the encounter someone open carrying. So, if a cop sees someone carrying then they will want to verify by asking to see your license. However, without a license there is a logical assumption that you are simply exercising your right. There is no license to check, there is no requirement or standard to uphold, so unless someone is doing something wrong there is no need to initiate an encounter unless someone is doing something else wrong. To be clear, I am advocating MORE freedom, not less freedom! The leg had been reviewing two bills. One bill was for licensed open carry and the other was for open carry without a licensing requirement. They passed the bill with a licensing requirement. I want them to pass the bill without the licensing requirement. It doesn't Impact me personally, because I carry concealed and don't need to open carry. But, if you're happy with the permission slip then you can keep your permission slip. I advocate MORE freedom and I am the anti-gun bad guy. So cops pull over every car to make sure you have a drivers license? I didn't know that, good to know. |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 3/18/2015 3:24:11 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 2000Z3M:
So cops pull over every car to make sure you have a drivers license? I didn't know that, good to know. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 2000Z3M:
Originally Posted By motown_steve:
No, it's an ignorant point. Police are going to initiate encounters with people open carrying to verify they are licensed. The purpose of licensed open carry is to ensure that people who are carrying have been trained and have gone through a background check, and having the license is going to give police the ability to make that verification when the encounter someone open carrying. So, if a cop sees someone carrying then they will want to verify by asking to see your license. However, without a license there is a logical assumption that you are simply exercising your right. There is no license to check, there is no requirement or standard to uphold, so unless someone is doing something wrong there is no need to initiate an encounter unless someone is doing something else wrong. To be clear, I am advocating MORE freedom, not less freedom! The leg had been reviewing two bills. One bill was for licensed open carry and the other was for open carry without a licensing requirement. They passed the bill with a licensing requirement. I want them to pass the bill without the licensing requirement. It doesn't Impact me personally, because I carry concealed and don't need to open carry. But, if you're happy with the permission slip then you can keep your permission slip. I advocate MORE freedom and I am the anti-gun bad guy. So cops pull over every car to make sure you have a drivers license? I didn't know that, good to know. I'd go further and suggest that this "could" be a learning experience for LE and the populous at large "if" people come to understand the point you are making. I do fear that far too few people understand your profound point. It is sad this point is "profound", a good American ought to just "get it in his gut". |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/18/2015 3:55:34 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RenegadeX: Prouse ruled license checks unconstitutional. I have never seen one in other OC states, doubt they will be done here. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RenegadeX: Originally Posted By motown_steve: I think it's also bad for police and for licensed gun owners. Let's say this becomes law, which it almost certainly will. Cop sees a gun with openly displayed handgun at the gas station. Now the cop has to initiate an encounter. 'Excuse me sir, are you licensed to carry a firearm? OK, can I see your license please?' Prouse ruled license checks unconstitutional. I have never seen one in other OC states, doubt they will be done here. Do any other OC states require licenses? Honest question because I don't know. In te states that I know of, NH, AZ, NC and MI there is no licensing requirement for OC. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/18/2015 4:09:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: MateFrio]
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By motown_steve: Do any other OC states require licenses? Honest question because I don't know. In te states that I know of, NH, AZ, NC and MI there is no licensing requirement for OC. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By motown_steve: Originally Posted By RenegadeX: Originally Posted By motown_steve: I think it's also bad for police and for licensed gun owners. Let's say this becomes law, which it almost certainly will. Cop sees a gun with openly displayed handgun at the gas station. Now the cop has to initiate an encounter. 'Excuse me sir, are you licensed to carry a firearm? OK, can I see your license please?' Prouse ruled license checks unconstitutional. I have never seen one in other OC states, doubt they will be done here. Do any other OC states require licenses? Honest question because I don't know. In te states that I know of, NH, AZ, NC and MI there is no licensing requirement for OC. Add WI and LA to those that don't |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/18/2015 4:16:12 PM EDT
[#5]
TX < WI, LA, NH, AZ, NC and MI.
 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/18/2015 4:31:52 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RenegadeX:
It is not so much OC, but do not care too much of my CC is not very good. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RenegadeX:
Originally Posted By motown_steve:
If you have a CHL then why would you open carry? It is not so much OC, but do not care too much of my CC is not very good. For me, I would agree with this exactly. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/18/2015 4:35:44 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MateFrio: OK requires license. Add WI and LA to those that don't Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MateFrio: Originally Posted By motown_steve: Originally Posted By RenegadeX: Originally Posted By motown_steve: I think it's also bad for police and for licensed gun owners. Let's say this becomes law, which it almost certainly will. Cop sees a gun with openly displayed handgun at the gas station. Now the cop has to initiate an encounter. 'Excuse me sir, are you licensed to carry a firearm? OK, can I see your license please?' Prouse ruled license checks unconstitutional. I have never seen one in other OC states, doubt they will be done here. Do any other OC states require licenses? Honest question because I don't know. In te states that I know of, NH, AZ, NC and MI there is no licensing requirement for OC. Add WI and LA to those that don't That alone is reason enough to reject licensed open carry.  |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 3/18/2015 4:54:38 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RenegadeX:
We have been over this many times. And in 40+ OC states, we have only found 1 instance of an OC'er being targeted. It is is just silly unsubstantiated hypothetical, like shootouts over parking spaces. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RenegadeX:
Originally Posted By motown_steve:
I'm not insisting that people shouldn't open carry. I think that for practical purposes it will put you at a disadvantage in a gun fight because the criminal will know you're armed before you know he is armed. We have been over this many times. And in 40+ OC states, we have only found 1 instance of an OC'er being targeted. It is is just silly unsubstantiated hypothetical, like shootouts over parking spaces. There is one issue I don't see talked about enough. In Texas it is perfectly legal to carry a long arm YET time after time we see people harassed for doing so. Is this gonna happen to CHL open carriers? It seems like this time next year we may know the answer to that question. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/18/2015 4:57:10 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By motown_steve:
Do any other OC states require licenses? Honest question because I don't know. In te states that I know of, NH, AZ, NC and MI there is no licensing requirement for OC. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By motown_steve:
Originally Posted By RenegadeX:
Originally Posted By motown_steve:
I think it's also bad for police and for licensed gun owners. Let's say this becomes law, which it almost certainly will. Cop sees a gun with openly displayed handgun at the gas station. Now the cop has to initiate an encounter. 'Excuse me sir, are you licensed to carry a firearm? OK, can I see your license please?' Prouse ruled license checks unconstitutional. I have never seen one in other OC states, doubt they will be done here. Do any other OC states require licenses? Honest question because I don't know. In te states that I know of, NH, AZ, NC and MI there is no licensing requirement for OC. I already told you that 14 other states require licenses to open carry, but you ignored it. Here's a helpful map, courtesy of opencarry.org 
Also, you are still ignorant of how laws being passed in Texas has worked for a very long time. It has not been done in huge jumps, it's been done one step at a time and will continue to do so. We will not go straight to constitutional carry. This is the path to constitutional carry. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/18/2015 4:59:11 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chas_martel:
There is one issue I don't see talked about enough. In Texas it is perfectly legal to carry a long arm YET time after time we see people harassed for doing so. Is this gonna happen to CHL open carriers? It seems like this time next year we may know the answer to that question. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chas_martel:
Originally Posted By RenegadeX:
Originally Posted By motown_steve:
I'm not insisting that people shouldn't open carry. I think that for practical purposes it will put you at a disadvantage in a gun fight because the criminal will know you're armed before you know he is armed. We have been over this many times. And in 40+ OC states, we have only found 1 instance of an OC'er being targeted. It is is just silly unsubstantiated hypothetical, like shootouts over parking spaces. There is one issue I don't see talked about enough. In Texas it is perfectly legal to carry a long arm YET time after time we see people harassed for doing so. Is this gonna happen to CHL open carriers? It seems like this time next year we may know the answer to that question. Most of the people who open carry rifles in Texas that get harassed are the ones who are TRYING to get harassed. I've openly carried a rifle when I need to, and I've never been harassed. I've also never done so with a group of 8 other people at the Capitol building. |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 3/18/2015 5:27:38 PM EDT
[#11]
If all of us on this thread walked outside and around the block of our office buildings during the day with an AR15 slung at our sides how many would
be harassed by the cops? 0%, .0025%, .05% ?????? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/18/2015 5:39:37 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chas_martel:
If all of us on this thread walked outside and around the block of our office buildings during the day with an AR15 slung at our sides how many would be harassed by the cops? 0%, .0025%, .05% ?????? Want to know how I know that you failed jr high school math? |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 3/18/2015 6:04:42 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By John-in-austin:
Want to know how I know that you failed jr high school math? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By John-in-austin:
Originally Posted By chas_martel:
If all of us on this thread walked outside and around the block of our office buildings during the day with an AR15 slung at our sides how many would be harassed by the cops? 0%, .0025%, .05% ?????? Want to know how I know that you failed jr high school math?   
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/18/2015 6:51:59 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By John-in-austin:
Want to know how I know that you failed jr high school math? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By John-in-austin:
Originally Posted By chas_martel:
If all of us on this thread walked outside and around the block of our office buildings during the day with an AR15 slung at our sides how many would be harassed by the cops? 0%, .0025%, .05% ?????? Want to know how I know that you failed jr high school math? So what's your (decimal) point 
|
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 3/18/2015 6:58:50 PM EDT
[#15]
It's been a while since my last visit.
Heard on 550 KTSA that Open Carry, if passed, would go into effect in January per a request by DPS. I'm sure DPS wants to formulate the changes to the CHL/OC program. But really now...nine months? How about making it retroactive to Jan 1, 2015 for existing CHLs so as soon as it is signed it takes effect. But that's just me. |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 1:09:10 AM EDT
[Last Edit: chas_martel]
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By John-in-austin:
Want to know how I know that you failed jr high school math? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By John-in-austin:
Originally Posted By chas_martel:
If all of us on this thread walked outside and around the block of our office buildings during the day with an AR15 slung at our sides how many would be harassed by the cops? 0%, .0025%, .05% ?????? Want to know how I know that you failed jr high school math? Given that I have a BS in Math why don't you educate me. Do you know what sarcasm is? Do you realize the number of people that would be harassed by cops would approach 100%? The sarcasm is imbedded within the small percentages. PS: How many herein believe that percentages can't go below 1.0? |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 1:14:13 AM EDT
[Last Edit: chas_martel]
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By dropdbombnow:
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By dropdbombnow:
Originally Posted By John-in-austin:
Originally Posted By chas_martel:
If all of us on this thread walked outside and around the block of our office buildings during the day with an AR15 slung at our sides how many would be harassed by the cops? 0%, .0025%, .05% ?????? Want to know how I know that you failed jr high school math? Why don't you rocket scientists educate me on my stupidity? I'm man enough to admit my mistake, if there is one. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 8:00:50 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chas_martel:
Given that I have a BS in Math why don't you educate me. Do you know what sarcasm is? Do you realize the number of people that would be harassed by cops would approach 100%? The sarcasm is imbedded within the small percentages. PS: How many herein believe that percentages can't go below 1.0? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chas_martel:
Originally Posted By John-in-austin:
Originally Posted By chas_martel:
If all of us on this thread walked outside and around the block of our office buildings during the day with an AR15 slung at our sides how many would be harassed by the cops? 0%, .0025%, .05% ?????? Want to know how I know that you failed jr high school math? Given that I have a BS in Math why don't you educate me. Do you know what sarcasm is? Do you realize the number of people that would be harassed by cops would approach 100%? The sarcasm is imbedded within the small percentages. PS: How many herein believe that percentages can't go below 1.0? I would recommend ignoring everything that JIA posts. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 8:03:49 AM EDT
[#19]
This bill is a step in the right direction, and I look forward to constitutional carry.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 9:22:09 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chas_martel:
Given that I have a BS in Math why don't you educate me. Do you know what sarcasm is? Do you realize the number of people that would be harassed by cops would approach 100%? The sarcasm is imbedded within the small percentages. PS: How many herein believe that percentages can't go below 1.0? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chas_martel:
Originally Posted By John-in-austin:
Originally Posted By chas_martel:
If all of us on this thread walked outside and around the block of our office buildings during the day with an AR15 slung at our sides how many would be harassed by the cops? 0%, .0025%, .05% ?????? Want to know how I know that you failed jr high school math? Given that I have a BS in Math why don't you educate me. Do you know what sarcasm is? Do you realize the number of people that would be harassed by cops would approach 100%? The sarcasm is imbedded within the small percentages. PS: How many herein believe that percentages can't go below 1.0? I think this is where the younger generation would say "aw snap!" |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 9:34:53 AM EDT
[#21]
When is the House voting on this?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 10:03:21 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By eeshooter45:
When is the House voting on this? The house OC bill is HB 910. It shows "left pending in committee" as of this AM. It needs to be voted out of committee before it can come to the full house floor for debate. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 10:38:28 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BobTheGreat: Retention holsters are not required. The amendment added a requirement to have retention instruction in the CHL (soon to be LCH) class, but does not require that licensees use a retention holster when they open carry. The only requirements in the bill on holster type for OC is that it must be a shoulder or belt holster (I guess people who want to ankle carry in shorts are out of luck). Pushing the start date back to Jan 1st is annoying, but not fatal. IMO, the bill should go into effect the minute the governor signs it, since it's just a modification of an existing license framework, but oh well. The only truly negative amendment was the one forbidding open carry on the premises or walkways of an institute of higher education. Maybe we can knock that one out next time, presuming campus carry passes in this session also. TX does things in baby steps. We'll get to full constitutional carry eventually, but I'll take small wins over no wins any way. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BobTheGreat: Originally Posted By AlamTX: What kind of amendments were added to the bill? I couldn't find any details. https://legiscan.com/TX/drafts/SB17/2015 ETA: Found em. http://www.legis.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Amendments.aspx?LegSess=84R&Bill=SB17 I get the first two: The start date is January 1, 2016 and a retention holster is required. What's the skinny on the third one? Is it just limiting carrying on a campus? http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/84R/amendments/html/SB00017S2F1.HTM http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/84R/amendments/html/SB00017S2F2.HTM http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/84R/amendments/html/SB00017S2F21.HTM Retention holsters are not required. The amendment added a requirement to have retention instruction in the CHL (soon to be LCH) class, but does not require that licensees use a retention holster when they open carry. The only requirements in the bill on holster type for OC is that it must be a shoulder or belt holster (I guess people who want to ankle carry in shorts are out of luck). Pushing the start date back to Jan 1st is annoying, but not fatal. IMO, the bill should go into effect the minute the governor signs it, since it's just a modification of an existing license framework, but oh well. The only truly negative amendment was the one forbidding open carry on the premises or walkways of an institute of higher education. Maybe we can knock that one out next time, presuming campus carry passes in this session also. TX does things in baby steps. We'll get to full constitutional carry eventually, but I'll take small wins over no wins any way. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 10:42:21 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RCK1999: The house OC bill is HB 910. It shows "left pending in committee" as of this AM. It needs to be voted out of committee before it can come to the full house floor for debate. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RCK1999: Originally Posted By eeshooter45: When is the House voting on this? The house OC bill is HB 910. It shows "left pending in committee" as of this AM. It needs to be voted out of committee before it can come to the full house floor for debate. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 11:29:51 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlamTX:
Thanks for the clarification on the holster, Bob. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlamTX:
Originally Posted By BobTheGreat:
Originally Posted By AlamTX:
What kind of amendments were added to the bill? I couldn't find any details. https://legiscan.com/TX/drafts/SB17/2015 ETA: Found em. http://www.legis.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Amendments.aspx?LegSess=84R&Bill=SB17 I get the first two: The start date is January 1, 2016 and a retention holster is required. What's the skinny on the third one? Is it just limiting carrying on a campus? http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/84R/amendments/html/SB00017S2F1.HTM http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/84R/amendments/html/SB00017S2F2.HTM http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/84R/amendments/html/SB00017S2F21.HTM Retention holsters are not required. The amendment added a requirement to have retention instruction in the CHL (soon to be LCH) class, but does not require that licensees use a retention holster when they open carry. The only requirements in the bill on holster type for OC is that it must be a shoulder or belt holster (I guess people who want to ankle carry in shorts are out of luck). Pushing the start date back to Jan 1st is annoying, but not fatal. IMO, the bill should go into effect the minute the governor signs it, since it's just a modification of an existing license framework, but oh well. The only truly negative amendment was the one forbidding open carry on the premises or walkways of an institute of higher education. Maybe we can knock that one out next time, presuming campus carry passes in this session also. TX does things in baby steps. We'll get to full constitutional carry eventually, but I'll take small wins over no wins any way. RE: 1/1/16 effective date ammendment. It will be interesting to see if there will be an accepted effective date in HB 910. If not, I believe the default effective date is 9/1/15. If that be the case, the effective date of the final combined bill would need to be reconciled. In other words, there is still the possibility to have the effective date changed. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 12:41:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: GeneralPurpose]
[#26]
Since SB17 was passed by the Senate and referred to the House, doesn't the House now vote on SB17 rather than the HB910?
ETA: I think I answered my own question with a link MateFrio posted in another thread: http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/pubslegref/gtli.pdf#page=20 My understanding of that diagram is that the companion bill in the House will now simply die in committee and the House will instead consider SB17, as amended so there are fewer conflicts later in the process. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 1:12:23 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By lokt:
This bill is a step in the right direction, and I look forward to constitutional carry. Indeed, In Texas like many other states you can carry a handgun in your vehicle without a permit. There are no training requirements, nothing other than being a law abiding citizen that's legally able to own a handgun. You don't see running gun battles going down the roads, blood in the streets etc like the anti gunners claimed there would be when the law was changed. Same thing when Texas allowed concealed carry with a license, there was an outcry from the anti gunners then. The idea of being licensed to carry is bs , there are thousands of law abiding citizens already doing it driving on the streets and roads right now. Any responsible gun owner will already know the laws, how to safely handle a weapon and be responsible. There are laws and penalties for those that don't act responsibly . No matter what laws are passed, or what is allowed permit or not, the criminals and crazies don't care. The law abiding should not need permission to exercise their right to carry. Even if OC is allowed with a permit, there is still no other option for those that choose not to ask permission to exercise that right but to still carry long guns openly. That needs to change. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 2:08:33 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RCK1999: RE: 1/1/16 effective date ammendment. It will be interesting to see if there will be an accepted effective date in HB 910. If not, I believe the default effective date is 9/1/15. If that be the case, the effective date of the final combined bill would need to be reconciled. In other words, there is still the possibility to have the effective date changed. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RCK1999: Originally Posted By AlamTX: Originally Posted By BobTheGreat: Originally Posted By AlamTX: What kind of amendments were added to the bill? I couldn't find any details. https://legiscan.com/TX/drafts/SB17/2015 ETA: Found em. http://www.legis.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Amendments.aspx?LegSess=84R&Bill=SB17 I get the first two: The start date is January 1, 2016 and a retention holster is required. What's the skinny on the third one? Is it just limiting carrying on a campus? http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/84R/amendments/html/SB00017S2F1.HTM http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/84R/amendments/html/SB00017S2F2.HTM http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/84R/amendments/html/SB00017S2F21.HTM Retention holsters are not required. The amendment added a requirement to have retention instruction in the CHL (soon to be LCH) class, but does not require that licensees use a retention holster when they open carry. The only requirements in the bill on holster type for OC is that it must be a shoulder or belt holster (I guess people who want to ankle carry in shorts are out of luck). Pushing the start date back to Jan 1st is annoying, but not fatal. IMO, the bill should go into effect the minute the governor signs it, since it's just a modification of an existing license framework, but oh well. The only truly negative amendment was the one forbidding open carry on the premises or walkways of an institute of higher education. Maybe we can knock that one out next time, presuming campus carry passes in this session also. TX does things in baby steps. We'll get to full constitutional carry eventually, but I'll take small wins over no wins any way. RE: 1/1/16 effective date ammendment. It will be interesting to see if there will be an accepted effective date in HB 910. If not, I believe the default effective date is 9/1/15. If that be the case, the effective date of the final combined bill would need to be reconciled. In other words, there is still the possibility to have the effective date changed. That's good to know. I'm guessing this has the potential to be wrapped up next week. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/20/2015 9:28:26 AM EDT
[#29]
I find the date of going into effect odd. Why wait an additional 9 months? I hope the house does indeed come back with an effective start date of either immediately or September like most other bills go into effect. I've waited this longso a few more months won't hurt but I'm still wanting to scratch that itch ASAP!
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/20/2015 9:41:09 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By pumbaajk:
I find the date of going into effect odd. Why wait an additional 9 months? I hope the house does indeed come back with an effective start date of either immediately or September like most other bills go into effect. I've waited this longso a few more months won't hurt but I'm still wanting to scratch that itch ASAP! If it is indeed true that a DPS request is the reason for the delayed implementation date, then I could think of a few reasons why. For one, to give DPS time to develop guidance for CHL instructors concerning the new retention topic in classes. For another, to develop and disseminate guidance to law enforcement agencies across the state in regards to what the revised penal code provisions do and don't do, and what that means for peace officers who encounter citizens openly displaying a holstered sidearm. I'm not a fan of the January date myself, but if it means that law enforcement has time to wrap their minds around the law before the rollout date, then I guess I can wait another 3 months or so. Hell, I've been waiting years for open carry as it is. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/20/2015 12:29:07 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By pumbaajk: I find the date of going into effect odd. Why wait an additional 9 months? I hope the house does indeed come back with an effective start date of either immediately or September like most other bills go into effect. I've waited this longso a few more months won't hurt but I'm still wanting to scratch that itch ASAP! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/20/2015 3:43:03 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By yugosksfan: If it is indeed true that a DPS request is the reason for the delayed implementation date, then I could think of a few reasons why. For one, to give DPS time to develop guidance for CHL instructors concerning the new retention topic in classes. For another, to develop and disseminate guidance to law enforcement agencies across the state in regards to what the revised penal code provisions do and don't do, and what that means for peace officers who encounter citizens openly displaying a holstered sidearm. I'm not a fan of the January date myself, but if it means that law enforcement has time to wrap their minds around the law before the rollout date, then I guess I can wait another 3 months or so. Hell, I've been waiting years for open carry as it is. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By yugosksfan: Originally Posted By pumbaajk: I find the date of going into effect odd. Why wait an additional 9 months? I hope the house does indeed come back with an effective start date of either immediately or September like most other bills go into effect. I've waited this longso a few more months won't hurt but I'm still wanting to scratch that itch ASAP! If it is indeed true that a DPS request is the reason for the delayed implementation date, then I could think of a few reasons why. For one, to give DPS time to develop guidance for CHL instructors concerning the new retention topic in classes. For another, to develop and disseminate guidance to law enforcement agencies across the state in regards to what the revised penal code provisions do and don't do, and what that means for peace officers who encounter citizens openly displaying a holstered sidearm. I'm not a fan of the January date myself, but if it means that law enforcement has time to wrap their minds around the law before the rollout date, then I guess I can wait another 3 months or so. Hell, I've been waiting years for open carry as it is. |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 3/20/2015 4:22:46 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlamTX:
Does that mean we'll be approached by LEO for open carrying a pistol? Of course this is Texas, you're gonna also get harassed just like when you open carry a long arm. You got to realized that most of the cops, at least the young ones, have been reared to believe anyone with a gun is most likely a bad guy. I don't like it but it is what it is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/20/2015 4:31:15 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlamTX:
LEO training sounds like a logical reason. I have been wondering how they will know if you are allowed to carry without asking for your CHL. Does that mean we'll be approached by LEO for open carrying a pistol? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlamTX:
Originally Posted By yugosksfan:
Originally Posted By pumbaajk:
I find the date of going into effect odd. Why wait an additional 9 months? I hope the house does indeed come back with an effective start date of either immediately or September like most other bills go into effect. I've waited this longso a few more months won't hurt but I'm still wanting to scratch that itch ASAP! If it is indeed true that a DPS request is the reason for the delayed implementation date, then I could think of a few reasons why. For one, to give DPS time to develop guidance for CHL instructors concerning the new retention topic in classes. For another, to develop and disseminate guidance to law enforcement agencies across the state in regards to what the revised penal code provisions do and don't do, and what that means for peace officers who encounter citizens openly displaying a holstered sidearm. I'm not a fan of the January date myself, but if it means that law enforcement has time to wrap their minds around the law before the rollout date, then I guess I can wait another 3 months or so. Hell, I've been waiting years for open carry as it is. It is illegal to drive a car on a public roadway without a driver's license. Police cannot pull you over just to check if you have a license. This is exactly the same. A cop is of course welcome to approach you and ask if you have a license, but there's no reason you have to talk to him. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/20/2015 4:37:12 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlamTX:
LEO training sounds like a logical reason. I have been wondering how they will know if you are allowed to carry without asking for your CHL. Does that mean we'll be approached by LEO for open carrying a pistol? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlamTX:
Originally Posted By yugosksfan:
Originally Posted By pumbaajk:
I find the date of going into effect odd. Why wait an additional 9 months? I hope the house does indeed come back with an effective start date of either immediately or September like most other bills go into effect. I've waited this longso a few more months won't hurt but I'm still wanting to scratch that itch ASAP! If it is indeed true that a DPS request is the reason for the delayed implementation date, then I could think of a few reasons why. For one, to give DPS time to develop guidance for CHL instructors concerning the new retention topic in classes. For another, to develop and disseminate guidance to law enforcement agencies across the state in regards to what the revised penal code provisions do and don't do, and what that means for peace officers who encounter citizens openly displaying a holstered sidearm. I'm not a fan of the January date myself, but if it means that law enforcement has time to wrap their minds around the law before the rollout date, then I guess I can wait another 3 months or so. Hell, I've been waiting years for open carry as it is. Initially, I fully expect police departments with anti-gun leadership (like HPD) to use that excuse. But after that settles down, I think most PD's will realize that stopping every OC'er to check his license is every bit as dumb as stopping every car you see to make sure the driver is carrying his driver's license. The way it should work is that the officer needs to have some particular reason to suspect that you are carrying a pistol without a license in order to stop you and check. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/20/2015 5:17:24 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BobTheGreat:
Initially, I fully expect police departments with anti-gun leadership (like HPD) to use that excuse. But after that settles down, I think most PD's will realize that stopping every OC'er to check his license is every bit as dumb as stopping every car you see to make sure the driver is carrying his driver's license. The way it should work is that the officer needs to have some particular reason to suspect that you are carrying a pistol without a license in order to stop you and check. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BobTheGreat:
Originally Posted By AlamTX:
Originally Posted By yugosksfan:
Originally Posted By pumbaajk:
I find the date of going into effect odd. Why wait an additional 9 months? I hope the house does indeed come back with an effective start date of either immediately or September like most other bills go into effect. I've waited this longso a few more months won't hurt but I'm still wanting to scratch that itch ASAP! If it is indeed true that a DPS request is the reason for the delayed implementation date, then I could think of a few reasons why. For one, to give DPS time to develop guidance for CHL instructors concerning the new retention topic in classes. For another, to develop and disseminate guidance to law enforcement agencies across the state in regards to what the revised penal code provisions do and don't do, and what that means for peace officers who encounter citizens openly displaying a holstered sidearm. I'm not a fan of the January date myself, but if it means that law enforcement has time to wrap their minds around the law before the rollout date, then I guess I can wait another 3 months or so. Hell, I've been waiting years for open carry as it is. Initially, I fully expect police departments with anti-gun leadership (like HPD) to use that excuse. But after that settles down, I think most PD's will realize that stopping every OC'er to check his license is every bit as dumb as stopping every car you see to make sure the driver is carrying his driver's license. The way it should work is that the officer needs to have some particular reason to suspect that you are carrying a pistol without a license in order to stop you and check. That may be one thing DPS wants to clarify. PC might be complicated. |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 3/20/2015 7:54:24 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By pepperbelly:
That may be one thing DPS wants to clarify. PC might be complicated. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By pepperbelly:
Originally Posted By BobTheGreat:
Originally Posted By AlamTX:
Originally Posted By yugosksfan:
Originally Posted By pumbaajk:
I find the date of going into effect odd. Why wait an additional 9 months? I hope the house does indeed come back with an effective start date of either immediately or September like most other bills go into effect. I've waited this longso a few more months won't hurt but I'm still wanting to scratch that itch ASAP! If it is indeed true that a DPS request is the reason for the delayed implementation date, then I could think of a few reasons why. For one, to give DPS time to develop guidance for CHL instructors concerning the new retention topic in classes. For another, to develop and disseminate guidance to law enforcement agencies across the state in regards to what the revised penal code provisions do and don't do, and what that means for peace officers who encounter citizens openly displaying a holstered sidearm. I'm not a fan of the January date myself, but if it means that law enforcement has time to wrap their minds around the law before the rollout date, then I guess I can wait another 3 months or so. Hell, I've been waiting years for open carry as it is. Initially, I fully expect police departments with anti-gun leadership (like HPD) to use that excuse. But after that settles down, I think most PD's will realize that stopping every OC'er to check his license is every bit as dumb as stopping every car you see to make sure the driver is carrying his driver's license. The way it should work is that the officer needs to have some particular reason to suspect that you are carrying a pistol without a license in order to stop you and check. That may be one thing DPS wants to clarify. PC might be complicated. Why dont we look at the other states that allow licensed OC? Are they constantly stopped for and ID check? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/20/2015 9:20:19 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chas_martel:
Of course this is Texas, you're gonna also get harassed just like when you open carry a long arm. You got to realized that most of the cops, at least the young ones, have been reared to believe anyone with a gun is most likely a bad guy. I don't like it but it is what it is. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chas_martel:
Originally Posted By AlamTX:
Does that mean we'll be approached by LEO for open carrying a pistol? Of course this is Texas, you're gonna also get harassed just like when you open carry a long arm. You got to realized that most of the cops, at least the young ones, have been reared to believe anyone with a gun is most likely a bad guy. I don't like it but it is what it is.
Actually, we all think OC carriers of long guns are nutjobs with an attention-starved personality disorder. No one think of OC pistol carriers at all. There haven't been any. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/20/2015 10:36:05 PM EDT
[#39]
One has to wonder, unless you are open carrying something bright and shiny, how many will actually notice it?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/20/2015 10:39:48 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Gopher:
One has to wonder, unless you are open carrying something bright and shiny, how many will actually notice it? Very few honestly. Oh, there will be a couple months of the "look at me" crowd, but after they realize just how big a pain in the ass carrying a full size pistol is it'll all die down and go back to situation normal. |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 3/20/2015 11:11:02 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By pepperbelly:
PC might be complicated. complicated? How so? How about only stopping people brandishing them or breaking the law in some other way. Kinda like how everyone else should be treated. QED, right? |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 3/20/2015 11:15:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: chas_martel]
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By John-in-austin:
Actually, we all think OC carriers of long guns are nutjobs with an attention-starved personality disorder. No one think of OC pistol carriers at all. There haven't been any. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By John-in-austin:
Originally Posted By chas_martel:
Originally Posted By AlamTX:
Does that mean we'll be approached by LEO for open carrying a pistol? Of course this is Texas, you're gonna also get harassed just like when you open carry a long arm. You got to realized that most of the cops, at least the young ones, have been reared to believe anyone with a gun is most likely a bad guy. I don't like it but it is what it is.
Actually, we all think OC carriers of long guns are nutjobs with an attention-starved personality disorder. No one think of OC pistol carriers at all. There haven't been any. I'm curious, how old are you and were you raised in Texas? Reason I ask is because this problem with open carry of long arms is a VERY recent phenomena. During the 60's and 70's NO cop in Texas would say anything to someone merely carrying a rifle ESPECIALLY in more rural areas. Not so much these days. Did you carry rifles and shotguns to high school when you were growing up? I, and many others, certainly did with never a word said. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/20/2015 11:22:02 PM EDT
[#43]
I'm gonna guess that some of the more ill-informed non-licensed citizens will try to carry a gun tucked in their pants and without a holster.
I'll be amazed if someone doesn't do that. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/20/2015 11:33:41 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chas_martel:
complicated? How so? How about only stopping people brandishing them or breaking the law in some other way. Kinda like how everyone else should be treated. QED, right? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chas_martel:
Originally Posted By pepperbelly:
PC might be complicated. complicated? How so? How about only stopping people brandishing them or breaking the law in some other way. Kinda like how everyone else should be treated. QED, right? Since the law as written states that a person may open carry only if they hold a CHL the police will have no way to know who is licensed or just carrying illegally. This will be touchy for a while. It hasn't been legal to openly carry a sidearm since sometime back in the 1800's, so generations of cops have been trained to view a weapon as a threat. There will be an adjustment period. I wonder if there will be an AG opinion on how the police can determine if someone is legally carrying- whether or not open carry of a handgun is or is not PC for them to check. I also think Austin and Houston will be the most problematic places to open carry. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/21/2015 12:25:46 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By pepperbelly:
Since the law as written states that a person may open carry only if they hold a CHL the police will have no way to know who is licensed or just carrying illegally. This will be touchy for a while. It hasn't been legal to openly carry a sidearm since sometime back in the 1800's, so generations of cops have been trained to view a weapon as a threat. There will be an adjustment period. I wonder if there will be an AG opinion on how the police can determine if someone is legally carrying- whether or not open carry of a handgun is or is not PC for them to check. I also think Austin and Houston will be the most problematic places to open carry. Just like they have no way to know if someone who is driving a car is licensed or just driving illegally. I agree that there will be an adjustment period though, and I fully expect places like Houston and Austin to have a spat of wrongful arrests and general buffoonery aimed at anyone OC'ing until they are forced to admit that it is legal, either by expensive lawsuits or an AG opinion. As you said, we're coming off of more than a century of Jim Crow-era prohibition, and that will not be easily set aside by local governments. In the end, though, it should be supremely simple and borderline self-evident to show that merely seeing a person peacefully carrying a firearm does not create reasonable suspicion that he is doing so illegally. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/21/2015 12:40:05 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By John-in-austin: Actually, we all think OC carriers of long guns are nutjobs with an attention-starved personality disorder. No one think of OC pistol carriers at all. There haven't been any. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By John-in-austin: Originally Posted By chas_martel: Originally Posted By AlamTX: Does that mean we'll be approached by LEO for open carrying a pistol? Of course this is Texas, you're gonna also get harassed just like when you open carry a long arm. You got to realized that most of the cops, at least the young ones, have been reared to believe anyone with a gun is most likely a bad guy. I don't like it but it is what it is. Actually, we all think OC carriers of long guns are nutjobs with an attention-starved personality disorder. No one think of OC pistol carriers at all. There haven't been any. In my opinion, which is one man's opinion, carrying a long gun, even an AR15, is superior to carrying pistol open or concealed. The ONLY reason that I don't do it is because I think it would cause people to freak out. That said, there is no argument that an AR-15 is superior to any handgun and no one who has been in a gun fight has ever wished for a smaller gun. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/21/2015 12:42:52 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chas_martel: I'm curious, how old are you and were you raised in Texas? Reason I ask is because this problem with open carry of long arms is a VERY recent phenomena. During the 60's and 70's NO cop in Texas would say anything to someone merely carrying a rifle ESPECIALLY in more rural areas. Not so much these days. Did you carry rifles and shotguns to high school when you were growing up? I, and many others, certainly did with never a word said. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chas_martel: Originally Posted By John-in-austin: Originally Posted By chas_martel: Originally Posted By AlamTX: Does that mean we'll be approached by LEO for open carrying a pistol? Of course this is Texas, you're gonna also get harassed just like when you open carry a long arm. You got to realized that most of the cops, at least the young ones, have been reared to believe anyone with a gun is most likely a bad guy. I don't like it but it is what it is. Actually, we all think OC carriers of long guns are nutjobs with an attention-starved personality disorder. No one think of OC pistol carriers at all. There haven't been any. I'm curious, how old are you and were you raised in Texas? Reason I ask is because this problem with open carry of long arms is a VERY recent phenomena. During the 60's and 70's NO cop in Texas would say anything to someone merely carrying a rifle ESPECIALLY in more rural areas. Not so much these days. Did you carry rifles and shotguns to high school when you were growing up? I, and many others, certainly did with never a word said. You want to know what the problem is? Texas, due to explosive population growth, has imported a lot of Yankee cops. It is my understanding that Texas has targeted NYC cops because they have a high level of training and experience in policing urban environments. Also, the salary that can't get you a bucket of chicken in NYC gets you a comfortable suburban life in DFW. BUT, they bring their anti-gun mentality with them. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/21/2015 1:22:28 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chas_martel:
I'm curious, how old are you and were you raised in Texas? Reason I ask is because this problem with open carry of long arms is a VERY recent phenomena. During the 60's and 70's NO cop in Texas would say anything to someone merely carrying a rifle ESPECIALLY in more rural areas. Not so much these days. Did you carry rifles and shotguns to high school when you were growing up? I, and many others, certainly did with never a word said. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chas_martel:
Originally Posted By John-in-austin:
Originally Posted By chas_martel:
Originally Posted By AlamTX:
Does that mean we'll be approached by LEO for open carrying a pistol? Of course this is Texas, you're gonna also get harassed just like when you open carry a long arm. You got to realized that most of the cops, at least the young ones, have been reared to believe anyone with a gun is most likely a bad guy. I don't like it but it is what it is.
Actually, we all think OC carriers of long guns are nutjobs with an attention-starved personality disorder. No one think of OC pistol carriers at all. There haven't been any. I'm curious, how old are you and were you raised in Texas? Reason I ask is because this problem with open carry of long arms is a VERY recent phenomena. During the 60's and 70's NO cop in Texas would say anything to someone merely carrying a rifle ESPECIALLY in more rural areas. Not so much these days. Did you carry rifles and shotguns to high school when you were growing up? I, and many others, certainly did with never a word said. I'm 57. Born in South Texas. I'm also not so goddamn stupid as to carry a rifle into a Starbucks or claim that a liberal democrat woman governor's candidate is "pro-gun" and will win in a landslide. What idiots cannot get straight is that the gun is not the problem. It's the water-headed fucknut carrying it, dragging other folks into their attention whoring drama. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/21/2015 1:27:13 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By motown_steve:
You want to know what the problem is? Texas, due to explosive population growth, has imported a lot of Yankee cops. It is my understanding that Texas has targeted NYC cops because they have a high level of training and experience in policing urban environments. Also, the salary that can't get you a bucket of chicken in NYC gets you a comfortable suburban life in DFW. BUT, they bring their anti-gun mentality with them. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By motown_steve:
Originally Posted By chas_martel:
Originally Posted By John-in-austin:
Originally Posted By chas_martel:
Originally Posted By AlamTX:
Does that mean we'll be approached by LEO for open carrying a pistol? Of course this is Texas, you're gonna also get harassed just like when you open carry a long arm. You got to realized that most of the cops, at least the young ones, have been reared to believe anyone with a gun is most likely a bad guy. I don't like it but it is what it is.
Actually, we all think OC carriers of long guns are nutjobs with an attention-starved personality disorder. No one think of OC pistol carriers at all. There haven't been any. I'm curious, how old are you and were you raised in Texas? Reason I ask is because this problem with open carry of long arms is a VERY recent phenomena. During the 60's and 70's NO cop in Texas would say anything to someone merely carrying a rifle ESPECIALLY in more rural areas. Not so much these days. Did you carry rifles and shotguns to high school when you were growing up? I, and many others, certainly did with never a word said. You want to know what the problem is? Texas, due to explosive population growth, has imported a lot of Yankee cops. It is my understanding that Texas has targeted NYC cops because they have a high level of training and experience in policing urban environments. Also, the salary that can't get you a bucket of chicken in NYC gets you a comfortable suburban life in DFW. BUT, they bring their anti-gun mentality with them. No, no one has "targeted" New York cops. Their training to be honest is pretty damn pitiful or even non-existent They are applying in Texas along with every other state's LE. They go where the jobs are, just like anywhere else. Heck, I know of a current officer from the Virgin Islands. For that matter, so are vets. Police academies these days are overwhelmingly military vets. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/21/2015 2:14:24 AM EDT
[#50]
I am as pro gun as they come but I don't get this open carry stuff. On one hand any loosening of gun laws is good but on the other why in the hell would anyone want to carry openly? I carry concealed for my protection. I tend to think if the shit hits the fan I might have the element of surprise in my favor. If you were carrying openly I would think you would be the first one a bad guy would target. Not to mention I am not an attention whore and I don't need to parade around the mall with my gun on my hip acting like billy bad ass.
I just don't really understand all the motivation behind passing this. |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
