Constitutional Carry

[Middle Age Russ]

Liberty does not come without risk.

This is the sticking point for most political arguments these days. Different folks have different appetites for risk. I am in the same camp with TAM in believing that Liberty is extremely important as a foundational -- and everlasting -- principle for our experiment in self-rule. Equally important is the protection of the innate individual Rights of the citizens of our society, as enumerated in the Bill of Rights. These innate Rights pre-exist Government of any kind, but were enshrined in our first ten Amendments -- recognized as important enough to document so that future generations couldn't ignore them. Individual Liberty -- the Government not being allowed to meddle in our individual decisions and behaviors -- is something Politi-Critters have been chipping away at from the beginning of this nation, because some folks have a lower appetite for risk than others and becuase some folks can't seem to let others think and do as they please so long as they aren't hurting anyone else. Corporate (Government) education these days neglects the importance to founding ideals like Life, Liberty and Property, instead pushing equality (of ends) and other Progressive/Socialist/Collectivist ideals. Due to this neglect, and the aversion to risk being pushed, this experiment in self-rule is on life support and in grave danger of passing from this earth.

[extremist]

I know, although they may not admit it, that some opposed to Constitutional Carry are instructors not wanting to lose business if it passes. There I said it. But there can be a compromise to appease those instructors and have them get behind CC. Many states have both, we can still have both. There are now 18 States with Constitutional Carry.

Constitutional Carry and Shall Issue to Residents Only:
Alaska, West Virginia, Wyoming

Constitutional Carry and Shall Issue to Residents and Non-Residents:
Arizona, Kansas, Kentucky, Idaho, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia

Vermont has had Constitutional Carry for quite some time.

BUT, there has to be a hook - Licensees that go to the trouble of getting it must have enhanced privileges. CC still has restrictions on places to carry, and so should Texas - keep CC restrictions equivalent to what LTC is now. But offer LTC Enhanced licenses to allow carry where we cannot now.

Why can't everyone get behind that proposal?

[Jusme]

I know, although they may not admit it, that some opposed to Constitutional Carry are instructors not wanting to lose business if it passes. There I said it. But there can be a compromise to appease those instructors and have them get behind CC. Many states have both, we can still have both. There are now 18 States with Constitutional Carry.

Constitutional Carry and Shall Issue to Residents Only:
Alaska, West Virginia, Wyoming

Constitutional Carry and Shall Issue to Residents and Non-Residents:
Arizona, Kansas, Kentucky, Idaho, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia

Vermont has had Constitutional Carry for quite some time.

BUT, there has to be a hook - Licensees that go to the trouble of getting it must have enhanced privileges. CC still has restrictions on places to carry, and so should Texas - keep CC restrictions equivalent to what LTC is now. But offer LTC Enhanced licenses to allow carry where we cannot now.

Why can't everyone get behind that proposal?

Also Texas LTC holders, along with other State licensees, do not have to submit to a NICS background check at point of sale. I will keep my LTC, even if we pass Constitutional carry, so that I can carry in other states, and to bypass the NICS hassle.

[Tex1961]

I know, although they may not admit it, that some opposed to Constitutional Carry are instructors not wanting to lose business if it passes. There I said it. But there can be a compromise to appease those instructors and have them get behind CC. Many states have both, we can still have both. There are now 18 States with Constitutional Carry.

Constitutional Carry and Shall Issue to Residents Only:
Alaska, West Virginia, Wyoming

Constitutional Carry and Shall Issue to Residents and Non-Residents:
Arizona, Kansas, Kentucky, Idaho, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia

Vermont has had Constitutional Carry for quite some time.

BUT, there has to be a hook - Licensees that go to the trouble of getting it must have enhanced privileges. CC still has restrictions on places to carry, and so should Texas - keep CC restrictions equivalent to what LTC is now. But offer LTC Enhanced licenses to allow carry where we cannot now.

Why can't everyone get behind that proposal?

Also Texas LTC holders, along with other State licensees, do not have to submit to a NICS background check at point of sale. I will keep my LTC, even if we pass Constitutional carry, so that I can carry in other states, and to bypass the NICS hassle.

I find merit with the idea of enhanced LTC, my question is how would you be identified. It would put to much burden on establishments to tty to identify you. And NO, I will NOT wear a sash.

[extremist]

Also Texas LTC holders, along with other State licensees, do not have to submit to a NICS background check at point of sale. I will keep my LTC, even if we pass Constitutional carry, so that I can carry in other states, and to bypass the NICS hassle.

Ah yes, another advantage I forgot to mention that is exactly right. CC doesn't provide that exemption.

Excellent point.

[extremist]

I find merit with the idea of enhanced LTC, my question is how would you be identified. It would put to much burden on establishments to tty to identify you. And NO, I will NOT wear a sash.

Well, how are you identified now as a LTC holder? What would be different?

Mississippi's Enhanced LTC is just identified on the LTC Plastic itself.

Like the "Veteran", "Instructor" ids on the LTC now.

[srothstein]

I know, although they may not admit it, that some opposed to Constitutional Carry are instructors not wanting to lose business if it passes. There I said it. But there can be a compromise to appease those instructors and have them get behind CC. Many states have both, we can still have both. There are now 18 States with Constitutional Carry.

Constitutional Carry and Shall Issue to Residents Only:
Alaska, West Virginia, Wyoming

Constitutional Carry and Shall Issue to Residents and Non-Residents:
Arizona, Kansas, Kentucky, Idaho, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia

Vermont has had Constitutional Carry for quite some time.

BUT, there has to be a hook - Licensees that go to the trouble of getting it must have enhanced privileges. CC still has restrictions on places to carry, and so should Texas - keep CC restrictions equivalent to what LTC is now. But offer LTC Enhanced licenses to allow carry where we cannot now.

Why can't everyone get behind that proposal?

While I can support that as an interim step, I can't get behind that proposal for a long term answer because there should not be any restrictions on anyone carrying anything anywhere in the state of Texas (well, in the US at all). If you allow any restrictions, even if just for untrained people, you are still allowing the government to restrict a right. If you give government an inch, they will take a mile. This proposal effectively tells government that they can restrict the right and you are just debating now how much to restrict it.

It is kind of like the old joke about offering a woman a million dollars to go out on a date. When she agrees, make a second offer of one dollar. When she objects and asks what kind of a woman you think she is, tell her that is settled and you are just negotiating the price. (Moderators, please feel free to delete this if that is not cleaned up enough for the ten year old rule).

But, as I said, this is a reasonable proposal to move us towards true constitutional carry. I support it as a step along the path, just like unlicensed carry in a car was a step on the path back to true liberty.

[C-dub]

While I can support that as an interim step, I can't get behind that proposal for a long term answer because there should not be any restrictions on anyone carrying anything anywhere in the state of Texas (well, in the US at all). If you allow any restrictions, even if just for untrained people, you are still allowing the government to restrict a right. If you give government an inch, they will take a mile. This proposal effectively tells government that they can restrict the right and you are just debating now how much to restrict it.

We are now 25 years into CHL & what, 6 into LTC? It might seem a little soon to make any major changes, but ...

I would also be on board with Constitutional Carry & either grandfathering in all current LTC holders to the enhanced features of increased locations or a new separate enhanced license. Although, the new enhanced license idea sounds like it would cost quite a bit more money to implement and just saying the LTC is the enhanced license seems much easier and very little cost if any. I would also like to see the location restricted knife thing included in the newly no longer off limits places for an LTC holder in this scenario.

[Boxerrider]

These rights were not forfeited all at once, and I do not expect them to be reinstated all at once. I do intend to push for reinstatement in steps, all of the way to the protection stated in our constitution.

[The Annoyed Man]

I know, although they may not admit it, that some opposed to Constitutional Carry are instructors not wanting to lose business if it passes. There I said it. But there can be a compromise to appease those instructors and have them get behind CC. Many states have both, we can still have both. There are now 18 States with Constitutional Carry.

Constitutional Carry and Shall Issue to Residents Only:
Alaska, West Virginia, Wyoming

Constitutional Carry and Shall Issue to Residents and Non-Residents:
Arizona, Kansas, Kentucky, Idaho, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia

Vermont has had Constitutional Carry for quite some time.

BUT, there has to be a hook - Licensees that go to the trouble of getting it must have enhanced privileges. CC still has restrictions on places to carry, and so should Texas - keep CC restrictions equivalent to what LTC is now. But offer LTC Enhanced licenses to allow carry where we cannot now.

Why can't everyone get behind that proposal?

Also Texas LTC holders, along with other State licensees, do not have to submit to a NICS background check at point of sale. I will keep my LTC, even if we pass Constitutional carry, so that I can carry in other states, and to bypass the NICS hassle.

I find merit with the idea of enhanced LTC, my question is how would you be identified. It would put to much burden on establishments to tty to identify you. And NO, I will NOT wear a sash.