Posted: 5/3/2013 11:42:07 AM EDT
|
In July of this year, Arkansas will become the fifth state in the United States to allow Constitutional carry. No licenses, no permits, concealed or unconcealed the good folks of Arkansas now recognize bearing arms as the 2nd Amendment intended. Vermont, Alaska, Arizona, and Wyoming are the other states. I'd say Louisiana is going to get there soon as well with their newly minted constitutional change will have a ripple effect. No reports of increased risk in these states. No horror stories of guns being taken away from open carry folks. No crime increase. I'd expect there'd be fewer folks going to jail for weapon violations in fact. We have some good bills that are getting squashed for CHL holders to open carry and even carry where LEOs are allowed to carry. Nothing as liberating though as constitutional carry on the horizon. NRA has sponsored a NASCAR event and is here at our doorsteps this weekend. I think it's a good time to ask. Why not Texas? |
|
Quoted:
1) A very ineffective gun-rights lobbying organization coupled with 2) pretty apathetic gun owners and 3) a legislative body that only meets for 120 days every other year. I understand what you are saying, but on the whole I thing the people are safer when the legislature is not in session. |
|
If constitutional carry is important to you then you need to start organizing now for the next session. Raise money (kickstarter might work), identify representatives that would be supportive, build up public support so on.
How much do I care about this: I'd toss in a $20 and write my representatives. I probably wouldn't volunteer time though. Kill 30.06 or put lane splitting for motorcycles on the books - big hell yeah from me. Those I'd eagerly get behind. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: 1) A very ineffective gun-rights lobbying organization coupled with 2) pretty apathetic gun owners and 3) a legislative body that only meets for 120 days every other year. I understand what you are saying, but on the whole I thing the people are safer when the legislature is not in session. agree 100% |
|
Quoted:
Also don't forget the revenue the state gets from licenses and instructor licenses. I live in AZ and am moving to TX. We have had constitutional carry for sometime now, and I would say many people still maintain their CCW. Constitutional Carry is fine and all, but the CCW makes purchasing a faster process (no waiting on the call). Some FFLs give discounted transfer fees for CCW holders, stuff like that so it is still worth it. I would suspect for some there was a decrease in new people seeking a permit, but I don't know anyone who let it lapse that had it. |
|
Quoted:
Also don't forget the revenue the state gets from licenses and instructor licenses. While I'm okay dealing with government red tag for CHL's..... You hit the nail on the head Chris!!!! $11 to change my address on my DL and something like $27 to change address on my CHL.... Just a money maker.... Oh, and BOTH change of address were done on-line at the same time and new CHL came in less than 5 days later.... Still no sign of my new DL |
|
Quoted:
Only 120 days, meeting every OTHER year? We seriously need to do something about this, but it is very true (as well as very sad) that we are safer the less they meet. We could be like California or new York were I think they meet all year every year. I'll take my 120 every other instead of making them career state politicians. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Also don't forget the revenue the state gets from licenses and instructor licenses. While I'm okay dealing with government red tag for CHL's..... You hit the nail on the head Chris!!!! $11 to change my address on my DL and something like $27 to change address on my CHL.... Just a money maker.... Oh, and BOTH change of address were done on-line at the same time and new CHL came in less than 5 days later.... Still no sign of my new DL How much does it cost the state to process a change, pay for the printing of the new license, etc? Since you claim it is a money maker you MUST have some insight into the associated costs. Please share. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Also don't forget the revenue the state gets from licenses and instructor licenses. While I'm okay dealing with government red tag for CHL's..... You hit the nail on the head Chris!!!! $11 to change my address on my DL and something like $27 to change address on my CHL.... Just a money maker.... Oh, and BOTH change of address were done on-line at the same time and new CHL came in less than 5 days later.... Still no sign of my new DL How much does it cost the state to process a change, pay for the printing of the new license, etc? Since you claim it is a money maker you MUST have some insight into the associated costs. Please share. $11 for a change of address on a Drivers License $27 for a change of address on a CHL Maybe you can explain why it's an additional $16 to change your address on a CHL? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Also don't forget the revenue the state gets from licenses and instructor licenses. While I'm okay dealing with government red tag for CHL's..... You hit the nail on the head Chris!!!! $11 to change my address on my DL and something like $27 to change address on my CHL.... Just a money maker.... Oh, and BOTH change of address were done on-line at the same time and new CHL came in less than 5 days later.... Still no sign of my new DL How much does it cost the state to process a change, pay for the printing of the new license, etc? Since you claim it is a money maker you MUST have some insight into the associated costs. Please share. $11 for a change of address on a Drivers License $27 for a change of address on a CHL Maybe you can explain why it's an additional $16 to change your address on a CHL? $16 is for the tier 1 upgrade. |
|
One reason, I see, for the lack of movement on broad constitutional carry is Texas historical strong emphasis on private property rights, and the well-ensconced portion of the Texas Bill of Rights that acknowledges the right to keep and bear arms, but also states the Government's interest in regulating the wearing of arms to prevent crime.
It is one thing to say that the government cannot prevent the free expression of a right on publicly-owned property; however, and I think a large number of folks would agree with this, a property owner has the right to control access to and make regulation regarding the use of their privately-owned property, and that the government cannot force them to act in a certain way if it is against their own interests. Without some mechanism for private property owners to restrict the carrying of firearms, in general (like 30.06 allows for now with regard to CHL holders), I don't see constitutional open carry, like AZ or AK, moving forward. I'll leave the argument whether shall-issue concealed carry licensing and the decrease in overall crime rate are related to another person. |
|
Quoted: Why not Texas? Because we have people on this very forum who proudly proclaim, "Open carry isn't a "right" I'm looking for anyway." Go back to the threads from this time in 2011 and you'll see who they are. They're all still around, still fighting against us, and still pretending to be gun rights supporters. ETA: I see a couple of them have already showed up in this thread. That was quick! |
|
Quoted:
One reason, I see, for the lack of movement on broad constitutional carry is Texas historical strong emphasis on private property rights, and the well-ensconced portion of the Texas Bill of Rights that acknowledges the right to keep and bear arms, but also states the Government's interest in regulating the wearing of arms to prevent crime. It is one thing to say that the government cannot prevent the free expression of a right on publicly-owned property; however, and I think a large number of folks would agree with this, a property owner has the right to control access to and make regulation regarding the use of their privately-owned property, and that the government cannot force them to act in a certain way if it is against their own interests. Without some mechanism for private property owners to restrict the carrying of firearms, in general (like 30.06 allows for now with regard to CHL holders), I don't see constitutional open carry, like AZ or AK, moving forward. I'll leave the argument whether shall-issue concealed carry licensing and the decrease in overall crime rate are related to another person. Very good point sir |
|
Quoted: Open Carry came close this time and "only" the second time up. Now is the time to ramp and push HARD for 2015.One reason, I see, for the lack of movement on broad constitutional carry is Texas historical strong emphasis on private property rights, and the well-ensconced portion of the Texas Bill of Rights that acknowledges the right to keep and bear arms, but also states the Government's interest in regulating the wearing of arms to prevent crime. It is one thing to say that the government cannot prevent the free expression of a right on publicly-owned property; however, and I think a large number of folks would agree with this, a property owner has the right to control access to and make regulation regarding the use of their privately-owned property, and that the government cannot force them to act in a certain way if it is against their own interests. Without some mechanism for private property owners to restrict the carrying of firearms, in general (like 30.06 allows for now with regard to CHL holders), I don't see constitutional open carry, like AZ or AK, moving forward. I'll leave the argument whether shall-issue concealed carry licensing and the decrease in overall crime rate are related to another person. |
|
Don't really give a shit about open carry. You do whatever you want, I'm certainly not against it, but it's not something I care about. It has no relevance to my daily life at all. I openly carry a gun every day at my office. When I hit "the street" I cover it up, it's really not a big deal to me. If it gets you all hot and bothered, go for it but to me it's not something to expend resources on.
Constitutional carry....a little more interested in it. One thing that gives me pause about it though is the fact that every CHL instructor that I talk to says that about 20-25% of the people who attend the class- never actually go ahead and get their CHL.....Why is that? I have an idea as to why. It's because after taking even the most basic and rudimentary class they decide that it just isn't for them- that they are not comfortable, capable and competent enough to carry a gun on the street. I can't say that's a bad thing. Carrying a gun is a highly personal decision and nobody but the individual can answer if it's the right thing for them. If they never had that experience- the class, would they carry without knowing how poorly prepared (physically, mentally etc...) they were? Probably so. Would they ever ask themselves the right questions? Probably not. For people who are as gun centered as most of us are I think that's something we overlook. |
|
Will, I think you make some valid points. This is a topic that I struggle with. I realize the classroom experience differs, but in general I think the Texas CHL course does a fairly good job at providing the basic understanding of the applicable laws, introduces the idea of mental preparedness, and determines that a student can handle, load, and fire a firearm with at least the rudimentary skills.
I have a neighbor who decided she was interested in getting her CHL. She had no previous experience with firearms. After talking through several issues we planned to schedule a visit to a local range together in the next few weeks. However, she stopped by a range and rented a gun by herself one night after work. She ended up cutting the web of her hand pretty badly and didn't seem to have much interest in pursuing the matter further. I found out later that she took the Utah CHL class since there is no range portion required. Would she have been better prepared if she had taken the TX course? I think so. Is she better off with the Utah licence and a gun, than nothing? I'm not sure. What if under Constitutional Carry she started carrying a gun with no instruction at all? Does protecting the right to carry outweigh any provision or education placed on it by the state? Yep, absolutely. Since the Anti organizations aren't interested in reasonableness or public benefit, compromises are an extremely bad idea. Therefore, do we push on for CC and absorb the consequences with the "non gun centered" people? *spelling grammar correction |
|
Quoted:
Don't really give a shit about open carry. You do whatever you want, I'm certainly not against it, but it's not something I care about. It has no relevance to my daily life at all. I openly carry a gun every day at my office. When I hit "the street" I cover it up, it's really not a big deal to me. If it gets you all hot and bothered, go for it but to me it's not something to expend resources on. Constitutional carry....a little more interested in it. One thing that gives me pause about it though is the fact that every CHL instructor that I talk to says that about 20-25% of the people who attend the class- never actually go ahead and get their CHL.....Why is that? I have an idea as to why. It's because after taking even the most basic and rudimentary class they decide that it just isn't for them- that they are not comfortable, capable and competent enough to carry a gun on the street. I can't say that's a bad thing. Carrying a gun is a highly personal decision and nobody but the individual can answer if it's the right thing for them. If they never had that experience- the class, would they carry without knowing how poorly prepared (physically, mentally etc...) they were? Probably so. Would they ever ask themselves the right questions? Probably not. For people who are as gun centered as most of us are I think that's something we overlook. I'm sure money is an issue for some. after the class fee you ha've license fee, handgun, holster, possible wardrobe changes, maybe a safe, etc. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Don't really give a shit about open carry. You do whatever you want, I'm certainly not against it, but it's not something I care about. It has no relevance to my daily life at all. I openly carry a gun every day at my office. When I hit "the street" I cover it up, it's really not a big deal to me. If it gets you all hot and bothered, go for it but to me it's not something to expend resources on. Constitutional carry....a little more interested in it. One thing that gives me pause about it though is the fact that every CHL instructor that I talk to says that about 20-25% of the people who attend the class- never actually go ahead and get their CHL.....Why is that? I have an idea as to why. It's because after taking even the most basic and rudimentary class they decide that it just isn't for them- that they are not comfortable, capable and competent enough to carry a gun on the street. I can't say that's a bad thing. Carrying a gun is a highly personal decision and nobody but the individual can answer if it's the right thing for them. If they never had that experience- the class, would they carry without knowing how poorly prepared (physically, mentally etc...) they were? Probably so. Would they ever ask themselves the right questions? Probably not. For people who are as gun centered as most of us are I think that's something we overlook. I'm sure money is an issue for some. after the class fee you ha've license fee, handgun, holster, possible wardrobe changes, maybe a safe, etc. That may be an issue- the $, but they have to know going in what the license fee is going to be, it's part of the packet you download prior to class.....I suppose some people borrow a gun etc... for class but I honestly do think it's an eye opener for many people. They never have really thought about what it means to carry a gun on the street and all of the ramifications of it. They start seeing penal code sections and they realize it's not as easy as "I'm afraid so I can shoot someone".....They shoot the VERY BASIC qual. and don't score all that well- and nobody is even shooting at them or threatening them in any way.....- I've seen MANY people fail to qual. on the stupidly simple course on the first firing....and it starts setting in that this is serious business..... If money really is the issue the only thing that changes with "Constitutional Carry" is that there is no class and no license fee. Well, if they've already taken the class- which is what we're talking about --the 20-25% of people who take the class and then don't follow through, you're only talking about the cost of the license which honestly, isn't that much. It's $125 for FIVE YEARS, that's less than $3 a month.... and there are many exemptions and discounts etc.....They're still going to have a gun, a safe, a holster etc ...if they're going to carry anyway...So I don't really think the money is the issue holding them back. I think the class shows them a sliver of reality and some things they hadn't considered and they decide that it's just not for them. As much as it pains me to say so, I'm Ok with that. Not everyone should be carrying a pistol on the street, just like not everyone should be a firefighter or a surgeon or an architect or a bull rider, we're all different with different abilities, different lenses that we view the world through that affect our decision making process etc...all that has a bearing on this. Could they probably be brought around with the right coaching etc.????....Sure, there's nothing magic about shooting etc.... ANYONE CAN do it but without a little help and thought, maybe not everyone SHOULD do it. |
|
Quoted:
How much does it cost the state to process a change, pay for the printing of the new license, etc? Since you claim it is a money maker you MUST have some insight into the associated costs. Please share. I bet it cost less than a dollar. Really? You think the vendor who manufactures the licenses charges the state less than a dollar? Really? I mean no insult, but you to be either disingenuous or naive. |
|
Quoted:
Will, I think you make some valid points. This is a topic that I struggle with. I realize the classroom experience differs, but in general I think the Texas CHL course does a fairly good job at providing the basic understanding of the applicable laws, introduces the idea of mental preparedness, and determines that a student can handle, load, and fire a firearm with at least the rudimentary skills. I have a neighbor who decided she was interested in getting her CHL. She had no previous experience with firearms. After talking through several issues we planned to schedule a visit to a local range together in the next few weeks. However, she stopped by a range and rented a gun by herself one night after work. She ended up cutting the web of her hand pretty badly and didn't seem to have much interest in pursuing the matter further. I found out later that she took the Utah CHL class since there is no range portion required. Would she have been better prepared if she had taken the TX course? I think so. Is she better off with the Utah licence and a gun, than nothing? I'm not sure. What if under Constitutional Carry she started carrying a gun with no instruction at all? Does protecting the right to carry outweigh any provision or education placed on it by the state? Yep, absolutely. Since the Anti organizations aren't interested in reasonableness or public benefit, compromises are an extremely bad idea. Therefore, do we push on for CC and absorb the consequences with the "non gun centered" people? *spelling grammar correction It should be up to the individual to decide what level of training they want. It should be highly encouraged, but not mandatory. Upon purchase the seller should stress the importance of being taught how to use it. With liberty comes responsibility. I haven't heard of a slew of NDs in states with recently adopted CC. |
|
Quoted:
It should be up to the individual to decide what level of training they want. It should be highly encouraged, but not mandatory. Upon purchase the seller should stress the importance of being taught how to use it. With liberty comes responsibility. I haven't heard of a slew of NDs in states with recently adopted CC. This. My CHL instructor stressed the point of if you're going to carry, get yourself trained. And so I did. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
How much does it cost the state to process a change, pay for the printing of the new license, etc? Since you claim it is a money maker you MUST have some insight into the associated costs. Please share. I bet it cost less than a dollar. Really? You think the vendor who manufactures the licenses charges the state less than a dollar? Really? I mean no insult, but you to be either disingenuous or naive. You sir/mam keep going on rebutting anyone who says this makes money for the state. Why is it that your not giving any of your famous insight?? I'm left assuming by your rational that when I changed the address on my CHL, the state was a "nice guy" and only charged me what they paid for it? No disrespect sir, but I believe it is you who is the naive one. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How much does it cost the state to process a change, pay for the printing of the new license, etc? Since you claim it is a money maker you MUST have some insight into the associated costs. Please share. I bet it cost less than a dollar. Really? You think the vendor who manufactures the licenses charges the state less than a dollar? Really? I mean no insult, but you to be either disingenuous or naive. You sir/mam keep going on rebutting anyone who says this makes money for the state. Why is it that your not giving any of your famous insight?? I'm left assuming by your rational that when I changed the address on my CHL, the state was a "nice guy" and only charged me what they paid for it? No disrespect sir, but I believe it is you who is the naive one. Nice try. Look at the DPS budget. Look at revenue. ;) |
|
Quoted: I'm left assuming by your rational that when I changed the address on my CHL, the state was a "nice guy" and only charged me what they paid for it? No disrespect sir, but I believe it is you who is the naive one. When CHL law was passed, one of the goals was to make it revenue neutral. That is why the costs are higher than for DL and/or other services. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How much does it cost the state to process a change, pay for the printing of the new license, etc? Since you claim it is a money maker you MUST have some insight into the associated costs. Please share. I bet it cost less than a dollar. Really? You think the vendor who manufactures the licenses charges the state less than a dollar? Really? I mean no insult, but you to be either disingenuous or naive. You sir/mam keep going on rebutting anyone who says this makes money for the state. Why is it that your not giving any of your famous insight?? I'm left assuming by your rational that when I changed the address on my CHL, the state was a "nice guy" and only charged me what they paid for it? No disrespect sir, but I believe it is you who is the naive one. Nice try. Look at the DPS budget. Look at revenue. ;) Well kindly provide a link for me then please. |
|
Let me Google that for you....
Texas DPS Budget Anticipated revenue FY2012 - $10.7 million USD from CHL fees ETA: It appears that the CHL folks are asking for an additional $500k per year for the next 2 to help decrease processing times. This would indicate that available revenue from licensing is exhausted, and the program is operating at a deficit. http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/Finance/documents/fy12-13_ExceptionalItems.pdf |
|
Quoted:
Let me Google that for you.... Texas DPS Budget Anticipated revenue FY2012 - $10.7 million USD from CHL fees ETA: It appears that the CHL folks are asking for an additional $500k per year for the next 2 to help decrease processing times. This would indicate that available revenue from licensing is exhausted, and the program is operating at a deficit. http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/Finance/documents/fy12-13_ExceptionalItems.pdf That question wasn't for you, IM inbound |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How much does it cost the state to process a change, pay for the printing of the new license, etc? Since you claim it is a money maker you MUST have some insight into the associated costs. Please share. I bet it cost less than a dollar. Really? You think the vendor who manufactures the licenses charges the state less than a dollar? Really? I mean no insult, but you to be either disingenuous or naive. You sir/mam keep going on rebutting anyone who says this makes money for the state. Why is it that your not giving any of your famous insight?? I'm left assuming by your rational that when I changed the address on my CHL, the state was a "nice guy" and only charged me what they paid for it? No disrespect sir, but I believe it is you who is the naive one. Nice try. Look at the DPS budget. Look at revenue. ;) Well kindly provide a link for me then please. I see someone did already. I heard these grumbles about "revenue" years ago. I know that DPS has a staff that has to be paid, investigators to enforce instructor compliance, and expense sending investigators into the county clerk's offices of applicants. Add the cost of license manufacture andnthe $25 fee to the FBI, andnI could not imagine how DPS could turn a profit. So I did research and learned facts. |