HB195 v. HB??/SB??: Are storm clouds gathering?

[The Annoyed Man]

While some might call you a pro-gun group, there are others who think your are an anti-gun group in disguise, based upon the damage you have done to the open-carry effort and the focus you have drawn to TPC §30.06. Once again you claim success when you haven't passed a single bill, nor have you killed an anti-gun bill.

I have a 35+ year history of working for gun owners and the Second Amendment and I'll put my record against your as often as you like.

Congratulations on being older than me.

It's not merely an age difference CJ, it's a world of difference in political/legislative experience, the years of service to gun owners and my ability to create relationships that get pro-gun bills passed. It's the difference between a man who has worked for the benefit of others and one who seeks only to gain fame for himself and get the law changed to avoid the consequences of his irresponsible acts. [BINGO!!! - TAM]

CJ, when you can claim Charles' consulting experience in Supreme Court litigation on behalf of gun rights, come back and make that assertion. Otherwise, this is pathetic.

The next time you attack me personally, be ready for your entire recent history and the truth about your legal problems to be fully aired here on the Forum.

My entire "legal history" involves TWO arrests - both for non-crimes and only ONE of which I was only charged for Resisting Arrest is not a crime? Who knew? - TAM. I have never been charged in the Austin arrest because I was never breaking a law. Again, you prove here that you aren't about rights, but power and rhetoric. Instead of noting that I was not breaking laws and merely exercising my legal rights, you focus just on the arrest. I've never had legal problems prior to that, so I have no problems with you airing my "legal problems." Maybe not legal problems, but certainly there's a history of psychiatric ones.... - TAM

You went way off the reservation CJ. I wasn't talking about these events and I didn't even know about them. I was talking about your arrest and conviction for interfering with the duty of a peace officer.

By the way, when did you ever work on my behalf in either of my cases? BWAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA! - TAM

Are you claiming I owed you a duty to represent you? The day will never come when I represent a hothead whose problems are of their own making. DING DING DING DING DING!!!! - TAM We want plaintiffs/clients who make a good impression on the court because it increases the likelihood of getting a favorable opinion that will benefit all gun owners. There an old saying in the law, bad facts make bad law. There's another equally accurate saying among lawyers, "don't violate the Fat Ugly Plaintiff Rule." Since I'm sure you will try to twist the meaning of this old saying, it's not referring to a party's size or beauty, it refers to a plaintiff/client that will not be well received by a jury.

I think your arrest was unlawful. Had you gone to jail quietly, you may well have had a great §1983 civil rights case against the officer and his agency. This is a result that would have greatly helped the open-carry cause. But no, you decided to resist arrest in spite of Tex. Penal Code §9.31(b)(2) that expressly states that you cannot resist even an unlawful arrest. EXACTLY! Discretion is the better part of valor. Faked outrage for the camera's benefit is just theatre, lacking all substance, and it is the refuge of those either who lack depth of understanding, or who are deliberately obtuse. - TAM

Here is an interesting link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissist ... y_disorder

Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) is a Cluster B personality disorder[1] in which a person is excessively preoccupied with personal adequacy, power, prestige and vanity, mentally unable to see the destructive damage they are causing to themselves and to others in the process. It is estimated that this condition affects one percent of the population.[2][3] First formulated in 1968, NPD was historically called megalomania, and is a form of severe egocentrism.[4]

Symptoms
People who are diagnosed with a narcissistic personality disorder are characterized by exaggerated feelings of self-importance. They have a sense of entitlement and demonstrate grandiosity in their beliefs and behavior. They have a strong need for admiration, but lack feelings of empathy.[5]

————SNIP————

DSM-5
Symptoms of this disorder, as defined by the DSM-5, include:[6]

B. Pathological personality traits in the following domain:

1. Antagonism, characterized by:
   1. Grandiosity: Feelings of entitlement, either overt or covert; self-centeredness; firmly holding to the belief that one is better than others; condescending toward others.
   2. Attention seeking: Excessive attempts to attract and be the focus of the attention of others; admiration seeking.

CJ, you really need to step down as head of OCT and seek counseling. So long as you are the head of OCT, then all of its actions and direction will be devoted to enabling your pathology. It will never be a serious gun rights group until it has responsible direction, provided by capable people for whom leadership is a service, and not an unrequitable and never ending quest to satisfy narcissism.

When you turn OCT over to leadership with stable personalities, it will then be able to flourish as a viable organization, and more importantly, it will begin having success in the legislative arena. But until you step down, none of this is going to happen.

You need help.

[RPBrown]

I have been watching this discussion since it's inception and now it's time to make a few comments of my own.

First to Mr. Grisham, Although I do not agree with everything the NRA or TSRA do, I am still a Life member of both and have been with NRA since the mid 60's. This is because as a whole these 2 groups have done more for the RKBA movement in both this great country but also this great state. I was in Arlington when your group was handing out flyers while having rifles slung over their shoulder. My first reaction was they are exercising their rights. However, when one of your group started knocking on my window to "intimidate" me to take one of his flyers, that turned me against your group (s). If fact, the young man was very lucky, using those tactics that someone did not draw on him. I was tempted but he did back off when I told him to. However, just my .02, that is the type of actions that can and has turned the court of public opinion against not only your group but our cause as well. Look at what has already happened with some stores. If these public displays were to continue, I am afraid not only would we not get OC passed in any form this session (or in the near future), I think we would start to see more and more 30.06 signs go up. I will also tell you that my wife and daughter both carry. They have a business that they are at every day. If one of your group were to walk into their business with a rifle slung over their shoulder, at the least he would be looking down the business end of a couple of weapons. No matter the intentions, the perception is what would be considered. Therefore your demonstrations are also a safety concern for your people as well as others around.

Now for Charles. I have been a forum member here almost since the beginning and have agreed with you on almost every issue you have posted on. This is no different. However, you are allowing a man/group to get under your skin. Remember to be slow to anger and slower to speak. Since Mr. Grisham will not truthfully answer the questions that you have placed before him, this tells me that he is not concerned about OC, but wants to be the center of attention. I really hate to see you waste your time on this debate as that time could be better spent elsewhere. Although this is a privately owned forum, I would suggest you let him play his hand. His posts are already showing what type of attention grabber he is. This will give him an avenue to spew his rhetoric and allow everyone here to see what his agenda really is. Mr. Cotton, your time could be better spent getting pro gun bills introduced and passed, yes even OC.

Again gentlemen, just my .02

[Charles L. Cotton]

Two Forum Members are being statesmen and are calling for an end to the war of words between CJ Grisham and myself. They are correct and I appreciate their counsel. I confess that I do not take lightly false attacks against NRA, TSRA or Alice Tripp and I’m not particularly fond of such attacks against me personally. I also know that when these false allegations come from certain corners, a full and complete response is required lest the person making those allegations feel emboldened and free to continue.

I want to return to the message of the original post. OCT/CJ Grisham has/have called for their members to say “no no no” to bills other than HB195. OCT has also vowed to oppose the reelection of any legislator that does not support unlicensed open-carry. This is a strong implication that any legislator that supports a licensed open-carry bill will be attacked by OCT. These are big steps toward defeating open-carry in 2015.

Anyone wanting open-carry to pass should support their preferred bill, but do not do anything to harm the chances of passing another open-carry bill. The only exceptions to this are open-carry bills that would apply TPC §30.06 to both open and concealed carry. These are bills that must not pass. By all means, do not threaten legislators! It does not work and it usually prompts a response against your bill or position. Legislators don’t like being threatened anymore than any of us.

We must also remember that concealed-carry was passed in 1995 and it wasn’t until 2007 that we were able to pass unlicensed car-carry. It took 12 years for the public and legislature to get used to the idea of citizens carrying handguns before public opinion had changed to the point that passage of the Motorist Protection Act (HB1815) was possible. My preference is unlicensed open-carry because it furthers our goal of the fewest restrictions for law-abiding Texans. However, that’s an unlikely first step in the open-carry arena.

Like Steve Rothstein, I’ve stated several times that I want to see all of Chp. 46 of the Penal Code repealed so we can focus on wrongful acts, rather than tools that can be used for good or evil. If that day ever comes, it will be after we have chiseled away the foundation of the theory that we can control man’s evil deeds by denying him the tools of his trade.

To CJ Grisham and Valente: If you want to post on the Forum, then discuss issues without the attacks on the NRA, TSRA, Alice Tripp or me; otherwise your posts will be deleted. I welcome discussion of issues without personal attacks; that is the cornerstone of the Forum; it’s why it was created almost 10 years ago. Come and exchange ideas and where necessary, agree to disagree but only in a statesmanlike manner. You can expect thoughtful discussion, sometimes lively discussion, but do not expect a crowd of "yes men." You are not entering a hostile environment, neither are you entering an open-carry echo chamber. Reasonable minds can differ on issues without becoming enemies, but a slap to the face usually earns one a punch in the nose. The welcome matt is out for you; don’t get it muddy.

Chas.

[canvasbck]

Two Forum Members are being statesmen and are calling for an end to the war of words between CJ Grisham and myself. They are correct and I appreciate their counsel. I confess that I do not take lightly false attacks against NRA, TSRA or Alice Tripp and I’m not particularly fond of such attacks against me personally. I also know that when these false allegations come from certain corners, a full and complete response is required lest the person making those allegations feel emboldened and free to continue.

I want to return to the message of the original post. OCT/CJ Grisham has/have called for their members to say “no no no” to bills other than HB195. OCT has also vowed to oppose the reelection of any legislator that does not support unlicensed open-carry. This is a strong implication that any legislator that supports a licensed open-carry bill will be attacked by OCT. These are big steps toward defeating open-carry in 2015.

Anyone wanting open-carry to pass should support their preferred bill, but do not do anything to harm the chances of passing another open-carry bill. The only exceptions to this are open-carry bills that would apply TPC §30.06 to both open and concealed carry. These are bills that must not pass. By all means, do not threaten legislators! It does not work and it usually prompts a response against your bill or position. Legislators don’t like being threatened anymore than any of us.

We must also remember that concealed-carry was passed in 1995 and it wasn’t until 2007 that we were able to pass unlicensed car-carry. It took 12 years for the public and legislature to get used to the idea of citizens carrying handguns before public opinion had changed to the point that passage of the Motorist Protection Act (HB1815) was possible. My preference is unlicensed open-carry because it furthers our goal of the fewest restrictions for law-abiding Texans. However, that’s an unlikely first step in the open-carry arena.

Like Steve Rothstein, I’ve stated several times that I want to see all of Chp. 46 of the Penal Code repealed so we can focus on wrongful acts, rather than tools that can be used for good or evil. If that day ever comes, it will be after we have chiseled away the foundation of the theory that we can control man’s evil deeds by denying him the tools of his trade.

To CJ Grisham and Valente: If you want to post on the Forum, then discuss issues without the attacks on the NRA, TSRA, Alice Tripp or me; otherwise your posts will be deleted. I welcome discussion of issues without personal attacks; that is the cornerstone of the Forum; it’s why it was created almost 10 years ago. Come and exchange ideas and where necessary, agree to disagree but only in a statesmanlike manner. You can expect thoughtful discussion, sometimes lively discussion, but do not expect a crowd of "yes men." You are not entering a hostile environment, neither are you entering an open-carry echo chamber. Reasonable minds can differ on issues without becoming enemies, but a slap to the face usually earns one a punch in the nose. The welcome matt is out for you; don’t get it muddy.

Chas.

VERY well put Charles. This is a testament to why you have been succesfull at swaying legislators.

[The Annoyed Man]

Statesmanship is the act of a sober mind, and it is not possible at all without it. I still maintain that OCT could be a force for good in the struggle, but it is not currently because its leadership has put personal issues ahead of the cause. If they step down, specifically CJ, because like it or not he has become a lightning rod for the left media AND for those of us who think the cause is more important than self—then OCT has a chance. The person who wants to be the head of something and cannot willingly relinquish if there are good reasons, is also the person who cannot be trusted with it. If he won't step down, then OCT is doomed.

This thread has been locked: viewtopic.php?f=133&t=75122;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; but in it an OCT insider has revealed that CJ's visit here was an orchestrated part of a fund-raising campaign for the OCT cool-aid drinkers. Pure cynicism. They really aren't interested in peace-making at all. They just want to ride the popularity of this forum to their own financial benefit. Character counts, and its lack is a drowning pool.

I reiterate my above post about the definition and symptoms of narcissism. OCT desperately needs new leadership. CJ Grisham needs to allow his group's more sober-minded members to cloister themselves to appoint a new president of OCT, and then he needs to step down and give that organization the opportunity to meet its potential with honor. If he can't do that, then he reinforces my point about narcissism, and relegates the future of OCT to that of a personality cult instead of a force for good in the expansion of our gun rights.

My mind is firmly made up.

[74novaman]

As I have said before on this board, my end goal is the total repeal of Penal Code Chapter 46, the GCA of 1968 and the NFA of 1934. Based on what I have seen so far, I will continue to work with the TSRA and the NRA on my goals. There are many other organizations working towards my goals, such as OCT, SAF, and JFPO. I am not putting any organization down, but I have to admit that the TSRA is the most successful lobbyist for my firearm rights in Texas and the NRA is the same at the national level. I certainly hope we can cut out the in-fighting and work together, but until that happens, I am going with the NRA and TSRA.

Well said, and I'm with this guy.

Gun rights organizations should be working to improve the laws. Sadly I see a lot of groups who consider themselves gun rights organizations that spend a lot more time attacking other organizations than working towards improving the law.

I'm a proud member of the NRA and TSRA and will continue to support them as long as they work hard to improve gun laws. I welcome other organizations to join us in the fight, but insulting or attacking the NRA/TSRA is not helping anyone.

Those who care only about who gets credit get no credit from me. Let's just work hard to get some more pro gun bills passed this session.

[Charles L. Cotton]

viewtopic.php?f=133&t=75111" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[abom2]

I am a very new member here and if this post is not helpful to the discussion please delete.

As a young kid in the Houston area guns were no big deal. Of course it could be because of the area I grew up in.

Pickups in the parking lot at school had the required gun rack with a rifle and shotgun in it. There was no school shootings or thefts of weapons. These were High Schools in the Spring Branch area.

I left for the military and returned nearly twenty five years later to what appeared to me a foreign landscape. No gun racks, people apprehensive at the site of firearm. Whether it was a civilian or an LEO.

It seems some ill wind or pestilence had descended upon the area. The apprehension in the populace was no different, from my view, than what I have seen at times when we entered towns and villages in the 3rd world nations I have traveled to.

How things changed in such a short time period.

One side of my family tree was tobacco farmers in Kentucky. There was always the family story about hemp growing in the tobacco rows. They never knew it was illegal until the Federal man told them. When told they quit allowing it to grow and quit using it for medicinal purposes. This was my Grandparents and Uncles. This happened before WWII.

I my growing years marijuana was illegal and 18 yr olds could drink and vote. I did drink, I did vote, and I have never had anything to do with marijuana. Except when on joint exercises where we helped locate it to be destroyed.

My how the winds are changing. Marijuana seems socially acceptable, some places legal, and nobody gets nervous about it. Similar to the viewpoints on weapons in public when I was young.

I have read up on the activities to get concealed carry and then the next step of MPA. It seems that this is becoming successful in quelling the unreasonable fear (my opinion) weapons in public.

The methodical re-introduction of responsible ownership and use of weapons to the American public. Just as the pro-marijuana group has been pushing since the 60's. I am sure many of the members here can remember the backlash their cause suffered in the 60's and early 70's from the general public with some of the "in you face" escapades.

In a hearts and minds campaign you do not stand a chance in winning the non-aggressor village by rolling up with your tanks through their compound walls and stationing armed control points at every corner. You scare the bejeezers out of woman and children. The woman bend the ears on men something terrible and every village member eyes you with suspicion. Fear will turn to scorn and contempt. This will eventually turn to hostile feeling and then hostile responses.

I was raised in a family that held two strong beliefs and these I have passed on to my children:

1. Freedom is a responsibility. The more responsible one is the more Freedoms on has.
2. Your rights extend only as far as to when they intrude on anothers rights.

[Charles L. Cotton]

viewtopic.php?f=133&t=75111&start=75" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Charles L. Cotton]

While CJ Grisham/OCT doesn't want Texas gun owners to know the answers to the three critical questions in the first post in this thread, Open Carry Tarrant County has made their position clear. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Open-Car ... 2461093911" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Look at the poster of Rep. Phillips and the OCTC caption. Look also at OCTC's Nov. 22nd call for a so-called "phone bomb" against Rep. Phillips.

Mr. Grisham, it's time to distance OCT from OCTC. Texas gun owners have a right to know OCT's position. Here is a link to the questions: viewtopic.php?f=133&t=75111" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So far, your silence speaks volumes!

Chas.

[Distinguished Rick]

I really hope these OCT knuckleheads don't end up ruining it for everybody. I was very disappointed nothing OC was passed during the last session. Even though I am in Afghanistan I am on this site every single day as this is quite important to me. No one at this point knows what, if anything, will get out of this session but it kinda looks promising. That is until you read the OCT propaganda. These loud mouth fools are doing more damage than any other group in this state. There are lots of things we are able to do in this state and yes I know carrying around a long gun is one of them, doesn't mean you should do it. When did common sense become out-dated and not the norm?

[Charles L. Cotton]

I really hope these OCT knuckleheads don't end up ruining it for everybody. I was very disappointed nothing OC was passed during the last session. Even though I am in Afghanistan I am on this site every single day as this is quite important to me. No one at this point knows what, if anything, will get out of this session but it kinda looks promising. That is until you read the OCT propaganda. These loud mouth fools are doing more damage than any other group in this state. There are lots of things we are able to do in this state and yes I know carrying around a long gun is one of them, doesn't mean you should do it. When did common sense become out-dated and not the norm?

Thanks for your service and stay safe! Happy Thanksgiving.

Chas.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Please answer my question. Do you agree that OCT will be successful in the 2015 Texas Legislative Session only if HB195 passes? Neither you nor CJ want to answer the question and everyone knows why."

Why does it matter Charles? I get the feeling you do not feel we effect change much, if that is the case then we are irrelevant and we will not have any credit for doing anything anyway.

You sound like Hillary Clinton when asked about Benghazi. Don't post again until you and CJ answer the questions I've asked. They are legitimate and you/CJ/OCT desperately do not want gun owners to know the answers. Anything you post other than answers will be deleted. You will not spread OCT propaganda on the Forum and refuse to answer important questions. I don't post on OCT's Facebook page and you will not abuse the privilege to join our discussions.

Chas.

[joe817]

Thank you Charles.