Distressed about lack of Constitutional Carry Support (Long)

[EP45]

I am a bit disturbed at the individuals who are against are Constitutional Rights, especially since many of these right precede the creation of the Unites States of America. I will specifically address the 2nd amendment.

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

I believe that Texas “somewhat” Constitutional equivalent is,

“Article 1, § 23 of the Texas Constitution states: "Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defense of himself or the State; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime."

These individuals include some law enforcement agencies, some LTC instructors, and much to my disappointment some members of this forum. What prompted this was the discussion in the thread : https://texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php ... 3754e41dbf.

I am not going to quote but essentially a USMC Retired Member does not support Constitutional Carry. Again you can read the post on page 4 of the topic above but the essential reasoning is: carrying a gun in public is without legal knowledge or training is irresponsible.

Another member did make note that USMC Retired was not interested in discussing the objection to Constitutional Carry. This other member did note the lack of willingness to engage in discussion and was disappointed (as am I).

I have had similar discussions with members at my place of worship (basically over 30.06/30.07 signage- no gun zones). Those individuals’ objection to LTC visitors carrying in our house of worship is they did not feel that they could be sure if the visitors truly had the training and responsibility to carry in our house of worship.

I hope to dispel some of the skewed thinking (in my opinion) against Constitutional Carry and at the same time to call foul to anyone who wants to make a statement and then say the discussion is finished and I do not want to talk about it.

1. It is Constitutional Carry. We are essentially asking for the state government to come to agreement with the Constitution.
2. As other members have stated, what makes Texans worthy of fewer 2nd amendment rights than Arizonans, Oklahomans, or other Constitutional Carry states.
3. Training and knowledge of the law are not requirements for many of our enumerated Constitutional rights. I also do not support training and knowledge of the law for your First Amendment Freedom of Speech, Press, Religion...
4. Rights have responsibilities. I agree with this 100%. Until you violate that responsibility you cannot take away that right.

If you truly believe that carrying a gun in public without legal knowledge or training is irresponsible then we should go back in time when it was illegal to carry a gun in your car in Texas without a license unless “traveling”. While in your car out in public you should not have the ability to have a gun (or at its basis protect yourself). The 2nd amendment should read,

…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms OUTSIDE OF THEIR HOMES WITH PROPER TRAINING AND LEGAL KNOWLEDGE, shall not be infringed.

I am concerned on individuals who make pronouncements and then stick their fingers in their ears, close their eyes, and state I do not want to talk about this. I see this behavior from children, leftists, and sadly some conservatives.

Finally, I want to recognize our current military members and Veterans and thank you for your service. I do find it distressing that I have never taken an oath to the Constitution (at least not in an official capacity) but can see that if you were in the military you promised to support the Constitution and did take an oath in an official capacity.

Respectfully submitting and hoping that I can change my mind where I am incorrect and ask for your discussion.

Thank you.

[cirus]

The only problem i have with constitutional carry is this. Several years ago while my wife and I were taking our chl class I observed 2 women on the line that could not load there own mags or chamber a round in their gun. They had no experience whatsoever. The worse part was the instructor helped them load the mags and chamber a round . That's the problem I have . I don't believe you should be required to have a license but should have to have some firearms training to show you know how to operate a handgun. Like hunters education. Just a one time class. Most the people I come across in everyday life don't instill me with confidence. Most are brainless zombies staring at their cell phones oblivious to their surroundings. That's why we have more car wrecks now. If the decision came down constitutional carry with no limitations vs. no constitutional carry at all I'll take it anyway I can get it. Let her rip!

[03Lightningrocks]

The only problem i have with constitutional carry is this. Several years ago while my wife and I were taking our chl class I observed 2 women on the line that could not load there own mags or chamber a round in their gun. They had no experience whatsoever. The worse part was the instructor helped them load the mags and chamber a round . That's the problem I have . I don't believe you should be required to have a license but should have to have some firearms training to show you know how to operate a handgun. Like hunters education. Just a one time class. Most the people I come across in everyday life don't instill me with confidence. Most are brainless zombies staring at their cell phones oblivious to their surroundings. That's why we have more car wrecks now. If the decision came down constitutional carry with no limitations vs. no constitutional carry at all I'll take it anyway I can get it. Let her rip!

Think of it like this. If they don't know how to load the mags or chamber a round, you don't have to worry about them being a hazard.

[cirus]

The only problem i have with constitutional carry is this. Several years ago while my wife and I were taking our chl class I observed 2 women on the line that could not load there own mags or chamber a round in their gun. They had no experience whatsoever. The worse part was the instructor helped them load the mags and chamber a round . That's the problem I have . I don't believe you should be required to have a license but should have to have some firearms training to show you know how to operate a handgun. Like hunters education. Just a one time class. Most the people I come across in everyday life don't instill me with confidence. Most are brainless zombies staring at their cell phones oblivious to their surroundings. That's why we have more car wrecks now. If the decision came down constitutional carry with no limitations vs. no constitutional carry at all I'll take it anyway I can get it. Let her rip!

Think of it like this. If they don't know how to load the mags or chamber a round, you don't have to worry about them being a hazard.

True!

[Paladin]

I look at it this way. It should NOT be illegal to exercise your constitutional rights. We all have the right to KEEP and BEAR arms.

So from that aspect we need to repeal laws preventing the law abiding people from exercising their constitutional rights. There are still a number of State AND Federal laws that need to be repealed so that honest people can use firearms for ALL LAWFUL PURPOSES.

That said, in an unprecedented moment America just added 12 MILLION new gun owners over the last year and Texas is the 3rd fastest growing state in the country. All those new gun owners and many out of staters have no firearms training & experience, or specific knowledge of Texas Laws.

I think we can all agree that firearms owners enhance everyone's safety when they have the proper knowledge, skills, and attitude.

Long experience and current numbers show that American's are reluctant to seek the training they need unless required to do so Beyond the One Percent.

We know what works from history:

"For a people who are free and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia is their best security."

"it proves more forcibly the necessity of obliging every citizen to be a soldier; this was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free State."

"I think the truth must now be obvious that our people are too happy at home to enter into regular service, and that we cannot be defended but by making every citizen a soldier, as the Greeks and Romans who had no standing armies; and that in doing this all must be marshaled, classed by their ages, and every service ascribed to its competent class."

"We must train and classify the whole of our male citizens, and make military instruction a regular part of collegiate education. We can never be safe till this is done."

--Thomas Jefferson

In order to promote freedom and save our Republic, the way forward is for government funded firearms training for law abiding citizens.

On the plus side, when the Anti's say gun owners need training, we just respond with our demand for millions of dollars of PRO-freedom funding. It allows the pro-second amendment community to constitutionally leverage government resources in the correct and proper way.

[srothstein]

The only problem i have with constitutional carry is this. Several years ago while my wife and I were taking our chl class I observed 2 women on the line that could not load there own mags or chamber a round in their gun. They had no experience whatsoever. The worse part was the instructor helped them load the mags and chamber a round . That's the problem I have . I don't believe you should be required to have a license but should have to have some firearms training to show you know how to operate a handgun. Like hunters education. Just a one time class. Most the people I come across in everyday life don't instill me with confidence. Most are brainless zombies staring at their cell phones oblivious to their surroundings. That's why we have more car wrecks now. If the decision came down constitutional carry with no limitations vs. no constitutional carry at all I'll take it anyway I can get it. Let her rip!

Compare it to another right. SCOTUS ruled unconstitutional the literacy tests for voting. But how can you vote responsibly if you cannot read the ballot? I understand the literacy tests were not fair and used to discriminate, but couldn't you do the same thing with some rule on knowledge of how to use a firearm or the laws on self-defense?

[EP45]

I just watched the following YouTube Video by Colonel West (from 12 days ago but I did not see it before). He makes the points much more eloquently with added information. I also appreciate Paladin’s and others' comments and discussion that gives food for thought. Hope for Constitutional Carry passage in Texas.

[chasfm11]

It would be interesting to hear the rank and file police officers chime in on the subject of unlicensed carry. My guess is that just like campus carry and open carry, CC passing would not change at all what they do daily.

The implied expectation for putting up the barrier of training for non-licensed carry is that the people who might take advantage of will shoot themselves and potentially others, posing a menace to society. But lets consider that criminals already carry without training. I'm sure that some of them practice but I doubt seriously that they go around taking classes in firearm use and safety. We have all seen the videos of some of the really stupid ones like the guy at hotel counter during a stick up with his finger on the trigger while he was counting the money and off-ed himself. But those see few compared to the number of criminals who use guns effectively against trained police officers. That poses a logical question: who do we think is smarter - criminals or people who want to defend themselves? If untrained criminals can effectively use guns, what is different about ordinary, law-abiding citizens.

The next question is why hasn't unlicensed carry in cars (which as been the law since 2007) have caused more problems. It is a given that maybe not a lot of people know about it and do it. On the other hand, why would it be different than Constitutional Carry? You have to be interested in the goings on in politics to even know what Constitutional Carry even means, in spite of the periodic evening news blitzes about it. I would suspect that a fair number of people have a healthy respect for the fact that you just cannot take a gun anywhere and there are more than a few LTC holders that I've talked to who are really uncomfortable about that, in spite of their class time. Unless you study it after the class, 90% of that material leaves your mind within 6 months.

Finally for me, there is no better example of government mandated training that driving. We all took the classes and the written exam. For some of us, that was a half a century ago. The car is a lethal weapon and we turn millions of people lose with it every day, some of whom probably shouldn't be riding even a bicycle on the public streets. They had the training. And it isn't like we don't have at least 18 clear examples already of States with fair sized populations who have had CC for years and the gun grabbers have been unable to find enough stories because of it to bring onto the evening news. You just know if they could make the case by example (think George Floyd) of what they don't like, they'd be doing it.

Am I in favor of firearms training? Absolutely. I think there out to be PSAs on the media about getting trained. But making it a barrier to carry a gun in public isn't much different than the poll tax to me. I submit that cops should be well trained and they have NDs,, too.

[MadMonkey]

I don't believe you should be required to have a license but should have to have some firearms training to show you know how to operate a handgun.

Now think about who gets to dictate the rules regarding said training.

[cirus]

I don't believe you should be required to have a license but should have to have some firearms training to show you know how to operate a handgun.

Now think about who gets to dictate the rules regarding said training.

I understand where you're coming from. Well, if we're gonna have cc with no training required then let's have it to where we can carry AR15's if we choose. If we're gonna do it let's take it all the way.

[ScottDLS]

I don't believe you should be required to have a license but should have to have some firearms training to show you know how to operate a handgun.

Now think about who gets to dictate the rules regarding said training.

I understand where you're coming from. Well, if we're gonna have cc with no training required then let's have it to where we can carry AR15's if we choose. If we're gonna do it let's take it all the way.

You CAN carry an AR-15, or other long rifle without a permit...

[cirus]

I don't believe you should be required to have a license but should have to have some firearms training to show you know how to operate a handgun.

Now think about who gets to dictate the rules regarding said training.

I understand where you're coming from. Well, if we're gonna have cc with no training required then let's have it to where we can carry AR15's if we choose. If we're gonna do it let's take it all the way.

You CAN carry an AR-15, or other long rifle without a permit...

I want to see you do it. Walk into a store with it and see what happens. It may be legal but that don't mean nothing.

[ScottDLS]

I don't believe you should be required to have a license but should have to have some firearms training to show you know how to operate a handgun.

Now think about who gets to dictate the rules regarding said training.

I understand where you're coming from. Well, if we're gonna have cc with no training required then let's have it to where we can carry AR15's if we choose. If we're gonna do it let's take it all the way.

You CAN carry an AR-15, or other long rifle without a permit...

I want to see you do it. Walk into a store with it and see what happens. It may be legal but that don't mean nothing.

How about concealed? There are a number of posters on this forum that have noted that they carry a foldable long gun in a backpack when it is illegal to carry a handgun.

There are any number of examples of people carrying long guns in Texas in public, though typically outdoors. It's not particularly practical, but it's not illegal either.

[cirus]

It may not be illegal but you won't get far carrying a AR into Walmart.

[ScottDLS]

It may not be illegal but you won't get far carrying a AR into Walmart.

How about a Keltec SUB2000 in my backpack?