TexasCHLforum.com

Keith: What do you think?

I think that since CHL is the currently legal way of bearing arms, it is protected by the 2d A.

pt145ss: You are making an unwarranted assumption that every CHL has a car that he or she can go lock the gun up in. Not everyone has a car.

bdickens wrote:Keith: What do you think?

I think that since CHL is the currently legal way of bearing arms, it is protected by the 2d A.

pt145ss: You are making an unwarranted assumption that every CHL has a car that he or she can go lock the gun up in. Not everyone has a car.

I'm making the assumption that everyone has a choice to patronize the business or not. No one is putting a gun to your head and saying that you can only do buiness with ABC company. If that were the case that I might agree with your side...but as long as I have a choice to go somewhere else...somewhere that does allows CHL....then there is not a infringment.

bdickens wrote:Keith: What do you think?

I think that since CHL is the currently legal way of bearing arms, it is protected by the 2d A.

Actually, growing up in a state that allows open carry (or should I say, doesn't have a law against it), I have mixed feelings. I personally feel that ownership and possession is what is protected by the 2nd. You should have the right to posses a firearm in a public location. Public location is a government owned property, not a business who can set rules as to who can and cannot be allowed to patronize them. To me, concealed carry is a bargained for addition that allows me more leeway in how/where I can carry, but ownership and basic possession are the bottom line of what the 2nd protects. If the rulings for the 2nd were established as they should be, open carry would be the protected method of bearing arms, and there would be brandishing laws in effect.

The views expressed here are my own, and not that of my employer, who actually bans possession on their property by employees.

This is one of those issues that will be around for a long long time. While my position is that as a chl holder I should be allowed to carry unrestricted with the exception of bars. Now having said that. Most on this forum believe in the RKBA. We must also respect the rights of others. A person who owns his/her own business has the right to ban the carry of weapons on their property.
The same document gives both sides their respective rights. As a CHL holder when I have encountered a business that bans firearms, I ask to speak with the owner. I ask the owner does he/she know the backgrounds of all of his/her patrons? The answer is always no. Then I ask would it not be better to know that the ones carry firearms legally can be a deterrent to those that don't. If they fail to see the light, I inform them that I will respect their rights not to permit firearms and that I will exercise my right not to spend money at their place of business and will exercise my right of free speech to inform 300,000 chl holders in the state, 50% of which live within 100 miles of their business of their policy.
I have had two businesses tear down the signs. I have been told twice "my kind" was not needed there. Of course those two folks were promptly told if I saw a perp hijacking them at gunpoint I would be sure and remember "my kind" were not needed..
Remember we have rights, they have rights. In the end you do not have to spend your money at those places that infringe on our rights. When you see those kind let everyone know who they are. Everyone else when you go by that place inform the owner you are a chl holder and their infrigingment of your rights just cost them money.

dac1842 wrote: While my position is that as a chl holder I should be allowed to carry unrestricted with the exception of bars.

Why should you be restricted from bars?

(Please don't digress into drinking and carrying. Just explain why a CHL shouldn't be able to carry through the door of a bar.)

The state should never make any private property statutorily off limits, whether churches, hospitals (we fixed those two), private schools, professional sporting events, race tracks, or bars.

KBCraig wrote:

dac1842 wrote: While my position is that as a chl holder I should be allowed to carry unrestricted with the exception of bars.

Why should you be restricted from bars?

(Please don't digress into drinking and carrying. Just explain why a CHL shouldn't be able to carry through the door of a bar.)

The state should never make any private property statutorily off limits, whether churches, hospitals (we fixed those two), private schools, professional sporting events, race tracks, or bars.

If there was a valid reason, peace officers would also be prohibited from carrying in bars except in the actual discharge of the officer's official duties.

Same thing with schools, sporting events, race tracks, polling places, government meetings, etc.