Licensed open-carry poll: 30.06

[JNMAR]

ummmmm....Yes

[Charles L. Cotton]

I am surprised you posted this poll dead last though.

it must be a conspiracy...... Some poll had to be last, and lets make it this one, rather than another one... on come on!

Sir,

Of course...it is not a conspiracy, however..Mr. Cotton is lawyer. I am not...but I am the progeny of three generations of lawyers....so I am quick to spot technique.

Please pay close attention when you see careful/calculated wording and a sequence to polls and questions.

Even Charles...will tell you, he does NOT stop being a lawyer when on-line. He can do this in his sleep.

No offence of any type intended, just stating the facts.

You can bet I'm offended. Please tell me what "technique" you see in the polls and what "careful/calculated working and sequence" you see.

Chas.

[flintknapper]

I am surprised you posted this poll dead last though.

it must be a conspiracy...... Some poll had to be last, and lets make it this one, rather than another one... on come on!

Sir,

Of course...it is not a conspiracy, however..Mr. Cotton is lawyer. I am not...but I am the progeny of three generations of lawyers....so I am quick to spot technique.

Please pay close attention when you see careful/calculated wording and a sequence to polls and questions.

Even Charles...will tell you, he does NOT stop being a lawyer when on-line. He can do this in his sleep.

No offence of any type intended, just stating the facts.

You can bet I'm offended. Please tell me what "technique" you see in the polls and what "careful/calculated working and sequence" you see.

Chas.

Charles I will be happy to explain, but not this evening. Better to let all cool down...I am sure you would agree.

My answer though requires that I know one thing. Because if I am wrong (and that is quite possible) then I need to retract those statements and issue a public apology to you, which I will do with all sincerity.

I guess I am just curious what the motive was for making the Hatfield & McCoy thread....and then follow it up with the various polls. Over the past two years...I have read the many threads on this OC subject and it doesn't seem to be one of your favorites. So...I was wondering the purpose of this one.

When the polls started showing up (at least one them seemingly carefully worded to insure an outcome) I was suspicious that it would end in an effort on your part to make a synopsis/summary from them concluding that OC is too risky to pursue or pointing to discord among members. Of course.. that is your right....but you must know that opposing views are likely to be expressed.

When I didn't see that summary....(or at least not yet), it occurred to me that I might have jumped the gun and that you are simply gathering information for some other purpose.

So....if you would care to share (no requirement of course) the purpose of all these threads, I will have better direction as how to proceed with my answer (an explanation to why I thought some of it was Crafted, or my apology.

In either case....it is my wish that there not be bad blood between us....on this or any other issue. It is discussion only...even if with passionate disagreement. I expect to hear your "say" about this too..and it won't hurt my feelings to be called out on the carpet...if you feel that is appropriate. I'm a big boy...so please bring "plain speak".

Thank you... and I hope our conversation will bring either resolution or at least greater understanding.

Flint.

[Purplehood]

It will for a while. After a bit most of them will come down.

[C-dub]

i think it would raise more 30.06 sign because employees at certain places would be more terrified seeing a gun on someones side and would tend to give them more courtesy, because of fear of thinking that everyone is a "robber". i tihnk OC would be great in texas becuase TEXAS is TEXAS, its the only well-known state to be able to OC instead of ARIZONA, texas IMHO should have been open carry before arizona idk the date they change the law in AZ but imo TX should be one of the first Oklahoma as well imo. i would definately OC my .500 SW mag .8 3/8 with my glock 27 on my weak side, i am all for open carry licensed in texas does anyone know how far along or if this law is even in progress of being passed in? when will we see some progress i dont keep up with the political portion all i know is what goes on on this forum

to ADD i think there would be a lot more theft/theives/carjacking/hold ups/ etc/ if the BG saw that 50% of the average american was open carrying. i do beleive it would and could cut down on crime. given the fact the IMHO maybe 50% od CHL holders in TX actually carry 24/7, if they carried 24/7 open carry i think that crime rate would drop with the BG being in the fear.....

G27, there are a couple of things that may be mistypings in your post. Most people are surprised to find out that Texas and Oklahoma are not OC. Did you mean that Texas is the only well known state to not have OC? In the second paragraph, did you also mean that you thought there would be less crime if a BG saw someone openly carrying? In one sentence you said it would go up and the next down. Were these mistypes?

[flintknapper]

glock27 Wrote:

i think it would raise more 30.06 sign because employees at certain places would be more terrified seeing a gun on someones side and would tend to give them more courtesy, because of fear of thinking that everyone is a "robber".

Good morning G27, ...let me see if I can help. I have not seen anyone approach the sign issue from quite this angle, but I do believe the possibility of increased signage exists. To what level...is open to debate, but it can not be discounted.

i tihnk OC would be great in texas becuase TEXAS is TEXAS, its the only well-known state to be able to OC instead of ARIZONA, texas IMHO should have been open carry before arizona idk the date they change the law in AZ but imo TX should be one of the first Oklahoma as well imo.

Many people from out of state are surprised to learn that Texas is not an OC State. It remains one of only 7 (I believe that number is correct) to not OC in some form. Arizona has always had permitless Open Carry, if memory serves.

i would definately OC my .500 SW mag .8 3/8 with my glock 27 on my weak side,

And I would support your right to do so, but would encourage you to exercise some amount of discretion depending upon locale and circumstance.

i am all for open carry licensed in texas does anyone know how far along or if this law is even in progress of being passed in?

At present there is no law for it, a bill must first be presented which goes through a legislative process. If successful...it would then go before the Gov. for signing (or not). There is currently no bill authored that I am aware of....and it is my opinion that this session would NOT be the time to try to pass it anyway. However, I do think gains could be made in terms of laying the groundwork for future sessions.

when will we see some progress i dont keep up with the political portion all i know is what goes on on this forum.

Depends upon what your definition of "progress" is. There is significant discussion about OC outside of this forum, but this source is a good one since the members here to seem to be fairly current on all the issues... and the leadership (Charles Cotton) brings many years of experience dealing with the politics involved.

to ADD i think there would be a lot more theft/theives/carjacking/hold ups/ etc/ if the BG saw that 50% of the average american was open carrying. i do beleive it would and could cut down on crime. given the fact the IMHO maybe 50% od CHL holders in TX actually carry 24/7, if they carried 24/7 open carry i think that crime rate would drop with the BG being in the fear.....

If I understand correctly, you are saying that OC might be a deterrent to crime. I have no doubt that would be true in some circumstances, but I don't think it will be a significant factor overall.

When you consider the relatively small number of folks who would OC, and then disperse them Statewide, it doesn't represent a large percentage of the population. So....by default, the effect would be small as well.

Having said that, if you were the one person involved in a situation "deterred" by the obvious presence of your weapon, then things suddenly look 100%, right?

Anyway, it is not a subject that will be settled this session.


Flint.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I guess I am just curious what the motive was for making the Hatfield & McCoy thread....and then follow it up with the various polls. Over the past two years...I have read the many threads on this OC subject and it doesn't seem to be one of your favorites. So...I was wondering the purpose of this one.

You were one of the loudest voices calling for TSRA to poll its Members, so seeing your attack on my motives for posting polls was more than a little surprising.

Hatfield v. McCoy post

The Hatfield & McCoy post was made because of an email that I received from a Member pointing out that some of the people on OpenCarry.org were blasting TexasCHLforum members about their positions on open-carry. He was correct; nothing has changed with them and their ineffective, militant approach to promoting OC. I stated the reason for the post; "To those here on TexasCHLforum who encourage us (who "us" is is unclear. Is it NRA, TSRA, TexasCHLforum, me?) to work with OCDO, here are some examples why this is unlikely if not impossible." Calling for "us," whoever that is, to work with OCDO folks in the face of continuing insults and outright lies is futile. The Hatfield and McCoy post had nothing to do with the polls.

Polls

I posted the polls primarily to gauge the opinions of TexasCHLforum members, but also somewhat in response to the folks who want TSRA to "poll" its membership. Each of the five polls were intended to address narrow and specific issues:

• 1) What is the Member's top priority issue in the 2011 Legislative Session;
  2) Does the Member support licensed OC; unlicensed OC, or neither;
  3) Does the Member think licensed OC will result in a large increase in 30.06 signs on business property;
  4) Does the Member think unlicensed OC will result in a large increase in 30.06 signs on business property; and
  5) Does the Member support OC even if OC would result in a large increase in 30.06 signs on business property.

None of the polls were worded to obtain a specific result. The one that caused OC supporters the most angst was the one based upon the hypothetical situation that OC did result in a large number of businesses posting 30.06 signs. That poll was clearly intended to see how many people would support OC regardless of the backlash and when I last looked, 21 people or 17% said they would!

These polls are not going to be used for any purpose, for the same reason the TSRA couldn't use any such polls. The response was minuscule even among TexasCHLforum Members who are far more interested in gun legislation than the average gun owner. If the polls do have any value, it will be in showing OCDO types that among TexasCHLforum Members responding, 1) employer parking lots and campus-carry are top priorities with only 7% making OC their top priority; 2) 64% believe licensed OC will, or probably will, result in a large increase in 30.06 signs on businesses; 3) 60% believe unlicensed OC will or probably will result in a large increase in 30.06 signs on businesses; 4) 50% support licensed OC, 37% support unlicensed OC, and 13% don't support OC; and 5) 83% do not support OC if it will result in a large increase in 30.06 signs being posted.

Militant OC supporters need to understand that they cannot bully people into believing what they believe, or blindly supporting OC. It is significant that of those responding, only 13% oppose OC, but based upon the other polls, it's likely that this opposition is based upon a concern about increasing numbers of 30.06 signs. Again, militant OC supporters aren't going to allay those concerns by insulting people and denigrating their position on the issue. Responsible supporters of OC had better do what they can to push the militants aside and be willing to work for OC in a respectful, careful, well-planned, and effective manner. I feel like a broken record saying this, but this needs to start 18 months before a legislative session, but 6 weeks before it. (It just dawned on me that half of our Members are too young to know what I mean by "broken record." Wow, I'm getting old!) The real irony is that people who really do oppose OC under any circumstances, of whom I am not one, can sit back and watch the insults coming from the OCDO types, see the division it causes, and smile -- confident that OC will again fail.

Chas.

[Aggie_engr]

Spot on in your last paragraph charles. Has everyone forgotten the huge stink oc made in the news once the sheeple of california became aware of it? It made headline news across the board for heavens sake and businesses certainly did not want any part of it. It even garnered political momentum in the california legislature to ban oc. If that is not extreme exposure due to a relatively small fraction of the state's population oc'ing then I don't know what is.

Edited to add that I am NOT against oc, it just needs to be done the RIGHT way at the RIGHT time.

[srothstein]

I agree with Aggie_engr. I support oc and want to see it. But I don't think it should be enacted or even tried for now. There are way too many much more pressing issues. The way to get our final position (well, my final position of repealing chapter 46) is the same way we got into this mess, a few small steps at a time.

And we are doing great with the way TSRA is handling things. Their tactics have gotten us CHLs, fewer restrictions (hospitals and churches, for example), and even car carry without a license. As time goes by and we have little or no problems, we will convince the legislature (and the anti's) that we can handle more. I don't agree with everything TSRA is doing, such as the high priority for the parking lot bill. But I will never work against them. I even asked them to help me with a different bill I anted passed and they said they could not do it. No problem, I can find someone else to help (hopefully) and no hard feelings. That is how mature adults do things.

As for the polls, I saw it a little differently from some on the board. I thought they were just an effort from Charles to get some honest opinions from us. He knows that not everyone on the board is a TSRA member and this is a good way to get information. The only question I thought was a little out there was about a specific hypothetical. He has said what he was looking for and it is a valid question that will get that answer. And, since he also posted a survey to see if we thought that hypothetical would come true, it gives validation to the first question. My hypothesis is that the number of people who supported open carry even if a lot more 30.06 is inversely proportional to the number who believe there will be a lot more signs. Charles method is about he only way to get that answer.

As for the order of the surveys, I would have to point out that the polls positioning changes based on which was answered last. The order can't mean much that way.

[Griz44]

Ok, this is now worded so that I can make a response that fits the profile of my own thoughts.

I am for the total abolishment of all weapons laws that conflict with the 2nd. That being said, and working with the laws the way they are currently, yes, it would result in many businesses posting 30.06 that otherwise would not. The reason is simple, the act of open carry would be disruptive to good business.

I have made the concealed argument productive to at least 2 businesses that in the past were posted. Explaining that the concealed process convinces the establishment that the person who would be carrying in the building is a good guy, trained and proven proficient. The bad guy that may be carrying, is going to carry anyway, regardless of any sign or a law. Logic works, and I have seen 2 signs come down because of it, one of them a bank. I do not think I would ever be able to make the same argument for open carry sound as logical or reasonable.

With concealed carry, "out of sight, out of mind" is good. I can carry pretty much every place I want to. Businesses that perceive open carry as disruptive will post signs to keep the shoppers - and money flowing smoothly. This is especially true of heavily populated cities and shopping centers.

My second concern is that the open carrying will result in a lot more thefts of firearms. Snatch and grabs for guns will result. Stalking to the vehicle and waiting for the owner to stash the gun to go into the store that prohibits open carry will also increase. IMHO - the fewer folks that know I am armed, the better.

My third and most important thought, if the bad guy is going to do something bad, and he cases the environment first, what's the first move on his part? Take out the guy with the gun showing. If my gun is concealed, then all he sees is a tired worn out looking old man eating a burger, or buying a new pair of shoes. He will dismiss me as mostly harmless. The advantage of surprise when he turns his head away is lost. The way it is now, 2 seconds of in-attention to me will get him neutralized with 2- .45" of fast moving copper jacketed fury. If he sees I am armed, that could very easily go the other way. I don't want anyone to know I'm armed.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I am for the total abolishment of all weapons laws that conflict with the 2nd.

Yet you support NRA F-Rated Lon Burnam's HB356 . . . interesting.

Chas.

[jamesb]

I would love to see OC come to Texas, but it must be done in progressive steps in the same manner that the rest of the 2nd Amendment rights movement has gone in most of the states. I would suggest that we wait and see if Florida has success in getting OC passed this year, and in our next legislative session we will then have yet another state to point to as having a successful transition from no OC to permit-only OC. I think I recall Oklahoma trying to pass OC as well.
We have seen other states make this same transition in a variety of ways in regards to firearms, and it seems to be the best way to make progress with the general public.
After all, we did not get legal concealed carry overnight. It took several years to get it passed, and several more years to get the general public accustomed to it.

I wish I could simply carry a copy of the Bill of Rights with me to use as a defense against bad laws and ignorant people, but alas that has yet to work.

Let's concentrate on passing the good bills (i.e. campus carry, parking lot carry, etc.) and defeating the bad bills this session and slowly ramp up the push for OC over these next two years IF it is something that carries meaning for you. That's how we've gotten where we are, by not being complacent nor being uncivil.

FWIW, I live in the Midland/Odessa area. In the time I've lived out here, I've seen two 30.06 signs. Open carry would make no difference (in terms of 30.06 signs) in these towns or even in this entire region of Texas. The problem areas, IMO, would be the Metroplex, Austin, Houston, etc.

James

[Griz44]

Yet you support NRA F-Rated Lon Burnam's HB356 . . . interesting.

Not really the conflict of ideologies it would seem. The entire sentence you referenced does explain,

I am for the total abolishment of all weapons laws that conflict with the 2nd. That being said, and working with the laws the way they are currently, yes, it would result in many businesses posting 30.06 that otherwise would not. The reason is simple, the act of open carry would be disruptive to good business.

I realize that we will not be able to just simply dismiss the current laws on the book. That is why I precluded my opinion including the awareness that current laws do exist and we will have to work within those current laws. As far as making it legal or not, it matters naught to me. The poll did not ask if I would vote for or against it, the poll asked if it would lead to increased postings of 30.06. My answer with the attached explanation simple states that it would be bad for business, so many stores would post.

As far as HB356, IF we are to have laws that regulate weapons here, let's make them as beneficial to TEXANS as possible, and not send our dollars for licenses and fees to other states. That way Texas can make sure that Texas citizens are at least exposed to Texas laws, not the laws of some other state. It would seem to be no benefit to Texas at all for a Texan to use solely an out of state license instead of a Texas license.

In case anyone has not noticed, I don't give a flip about what happens in Utah or New York or D.C. Let's take care of Texas first. I was born here, raised here, and have lived here my whole life. I am appalled at the creeping socialism and erosion of identity that has happened to my home state. I like the ring of "Republic of Texas". But that's another thread isn't it?

[canvasbck]

The reason is simple, the act of open carry would be disruptive to good business.

With concealed carry, "out of sight, out of mind" is good. I can carry pretty much every place I want to. Businesses that perceive open carry as disruptive will post signs to keep the shoppers - and money flowing smoothly. This is especially true of heavily populated cities and shopping centers.

My second concern is that the open carrying will result in a lot more thefts of firearms. Snatch and grabs for guns will result. Stalking to the vehicle and waiting for the owner to stash the gun to go into the store that prohibits open carry will also increase. IMHO - the fewer folks that know I am armed, the better.

My third and most important thought, if the bad guy is going to do something bad, and he cases the environment first, what's the first move on his part? Take out the guy with the gun showing.

I don't mean to start a message board arguement, but:

Do off duty LEO's or other states with OC have problems with snatch and grab incidents? I'm not saying it would "never" happen, but I would be supprised if there were data showing a signifigant increase due to OC.

You make many assertions that are not supported by any statistical data. It's similar to the antis claims that relaxed gun laws will result in old west style shootouts. These are "I'm afraid it will happen" arguments not supported by any facts.

It may be true that a few businesses will post initially after open carry passes, but just as we saw with 30.06 postings for CHL, the signs shoulc come down at some point as businesses realize that people carrying did not lead to blood running in the streets as was preached by anti gun groups.

I agree that from a tactical perspective, concealed is far superior to open. Is our goal really to gain a tactical advantage or would we prefer that the presence of law abiding citizens being armed will deter crimes from happening in the first place? One of my main reasons for carrying and encouraging others to do the same is a hope that enough people will carry to make the act of carrying a deterrent to crime. There is a reason that on duty LEO's open carry........it deters crime.

With that said, I agree with the earlier posts that we have more important issues to address such as campus carry and the parking lot issue. When the time is right, OC will have my full and complete support. If I thought there were a chance at passing all of the above, I would absolutely support it today.