TexasCHLforum.com

TexasGal wrote:Target's comments will not keep out CHLs unless they post a 30.06 sign.

They don't need any signs if they give oral notice.

How many people know that MDA have been kicked out of 2 establishments recently for inappropriate actions (wasn't covered by main stream media)? How many people know that OCT released a statement saying they changed their policy and were not carrying inside Target? Their statement says they happened to be in the parking lot of the establishment next door which is shared by target. Their new policy is not to OC in any establishment unless they are invited to by the establishment, to only carry unloaded firearms and strap them on their back. they also stated they would call law enforcement 24 hours prior to any event and to carry signs or banners during any or all events. They did apologize for their actions before. Their statement also says the pictures in the article were provided by MDA and are from previous events (some of which were not even in TX). They (MDA) are good at trying to elicit an emotional response aren't they? Do we think they aren't above lying? I don't really support how OCT is going about things and agree they have made some mistakes. I do believe we should pass the OC law so that the long guns can be retired (most doing these rally's say the whole point is to get the law passed so they can OC pistols instead of rifles). We are playing into the hands of the anti-gunners by being so quick to judge and react to the emotional response they are trying to elicit. They are looking to erode the second amendment one step at a time and you are incorrect if you believe they only want to ban rifles in public. Once they accomplish that they will come after the CHL and other gun laws. If you don't believe this read a few of their message boards. They have already posted pictures of CHL holders that were printing or temporarily showing and calling for an outright ban. Were the CHL holders wrong for printing or showing? I think that is a different discussion but it shows the anti-gunners thought process on the issue. What I find interesting is most states now have OC laws and don't have these issues. Why do we? Because MDA considers TX a battleground and will do anything and say anything not to lose.

gringo pistolero wrote:

TexasGal wrote:Target's comments will not keep out CHLs unless they post a 30.06 sign.

They don't need any signs if they give oral notice.

I have been to Target dozens of times and never once seen anyone standing there giving oral notice!!!!!

gljjt wrote:I have been to Target dozens of times and never once seen anyone standing there giving oral notice!!!!!

I never heard a 30.06 sign or 51% sign anywhere I go.

gringo pistolero wrote:

gljjt wrote:I have been to Target dozens of times and never once seen anyone standing there giving oral notice!!!!!

I never hear a 30.06 sign or 51% anywhere I go.

Hah, you got me! Didn't see them or hear them. If you are deaf, is it still oral notice???? I'm not deaf (yet), just curious!!!

CoolBreeze wrote:How many people know that MDA have been kicked out of 2 establishments recently for inappropriate actions (wasn't covered by main stream media)? How many people know that OCT released a statement saying they changed their policy and were not carrying inside Target? Their statement says they happened to be in the parking lot of the establishment next door which is shared by target. Their new policy is not to OC in any establishment unless they are invited to by the establishment, to only carry unloaded firearms and strap them on their back. they also stated they would call law enforcement 24 hours prior to any event and to carry signs or banners during any or all events.

Doing anything now is harmful to the effort to pass open-carry and they are aware of this fact. So much harm has been done that the only action that can help is to stop all demonstrations. This isn't my opinion, it's straight from the people who are going to vote on an open-carry bill, if we can still get a sponsor. Even the filing of a bill is now questionable. So it doesn't matter what, how, or where they are demonstrating; doing anything other than staying home is harmful.

CoolBreeze wrote: We are playing into the hands of the anti-gunners by being so quick to judge and react to the emotional response they are trying to elicit.

We aren't reacting to anti-gunners; we're reacting to the destructive actions of supposedly pro-gun people who are making it very difficult if not impossible to pass open-carry. The information I and Alice Tripp have provided about the reaction in Austin is not our opinion, they are the opinions held by Texas Senators and House Members. We aren't reacting, we're reporting and the message is falling on deaf ears.

Are the MDA misleading and outright lying about open-carry events? Are the media complicit in this deception? The answer to both questions is "yes," but that is irrelevant. Their efforts are working to turn the general public against not only the demonstrators but the concept of open-carry. These are people who previously had no opinion one way or the other about open-carry.

CoolBreeze wrote:They are looking to erode the second amendment one step at a time and you are incorrect if you believe they only want to ban rifles in public. Once they accomplish that they will come after the CHL and other gun laws.

You're correct, there is a faction in Texas that wants to destroy all gun rights, but they will fail on every front. Due to the in-your-face tactics that have made the news nationwide, their best chance is a bill to prohibit the carrying of long guns on private property. The bill will fail, but we'll have to spend political capital defeating it.

Everyone knowledgeable about passing bills in Texas knows that open-carry demonstrations are not only unnecessary they lessen the chance of passing open-carry. They will also result in the filing of anti-gun bills that we will have to fight and demonstrating with long guns will make it much harder to repeal TPC §42.01(a)(8). Everyone will have to decide for themselves why any person or organization would continue to thrust themselves into the public eye when doing so hurts their stated goal.

Chas.

What's it going to take to shut these OCT folks up? The passage of a "Freedom from Gun Protest Act" which will effectively outlaw the open carry of long guns anywhere except the hunting fields? To think that just a few months ago, we were on track to possibly getting OC passed in 2015, with the support of TSRA and NRA, and good support in the legislature for it......and NOW, just a few months later, thanks to a bunch of boneheaded egotists who simply refuse to understand political realities for what they are, we are not only NOT going to get OC for handguns, but we stand to LOSE OC for long guns.

It makes me want to slap somebody. How STUPID do they have to be?a

The Annoyed Man wrote:What's it going to take to shut these OCT folks up? The passage of a "Freedom from Gun Protest Act" which will effectively outlaw the open carry of long guns anywhere except the hunting fields? To think that just a few months ago, we were on track to possibly getting OC passed in 2015, with the support of TSRA and NRA, and good support in the legislature for it......and NOW, just a few months later, thanks to a bunch of boneheaded egotists who simply refuse to understand political realities for what they are, we are not only NOT going to get OC for handguns, but we stand to LOSE OC for long guns.

It makes me want to slap somebody. How STUPID do they have to be?a

What's that old saying, "...it only takes one bad apple to spoil the bushel"?

The Annoyed Man wrote:What's it going to take to shut these OCT folks up? The passage of a "Freedom from Gun Protest Act" which will effectively outlaw the open carry of long guns anywhere except the hunting fields? To think that just a few months ago, we were on track to possibly getting OC passed in 2015, with the support of TSRA and NRA, and good support in the legislature for it......and NOW, just a few months later, thanks to a bunch of boneheaded egotists who simply refuse to understand political realities for what they are, we are not only NOT going to get OC for handguns, but we stand to LOSE OC for long guns.

It makes me want to slap somebody. How STUPID do they have to be?a

I agree with you but if they take away open carry of rifles for a few people open carrying then you aren't losing your right. You never really had the right in the first place. IMO

Unless 30.06 gets repealed or limited, which it wont based on my reading here, I am totally happy if OC in Texas dies.

Without 30.06 repeal, all OC Texas will do is scare sheep and get more 30.06 signs put up so I cant legally carry in those establishments. Yay! Im less safe for the benefit of OC.

What a joke.

I have a CHL for dire emergencies that allow for the articulated use of legal lethal force. In case of fire, break glass.

I train with the top 1% of FoF instructors and legal including Ayoob.

Without some form of repeal or strict limitations on 30.06, I want nothing to do with OC and the plethora of 30.06 signs that will crop up.

CoolBreeze wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:What's it going to take to shut these OCT folks up? The passage of a "Freedom from Gun Protest Act" which will effectively outlaw the open carry of long guns anywhere except the hunting fields? To think that just a few months ago, we were on track to possibly getting OC passed in 2015, with the support of TSRA and NRA, and good support in the legislature for it......and NOW, just a few months later, thanks to a bunch of boneheaded egotists who simply refuse to understand political realities for what they are, we are not only NOT going to get OC for handguns, but we stand to LOSE OC for long guns.

It makes me want to slap somebody. How STUPID do they have to be?a

I agree with you but if they take away open carry of rifles for a few people open carrying then you aren't losing your right. You never really had the right in the first place. IMO

First of all, it's not a "right" until and unless the U.S. Supreme Court says it's a "right." That's the only opinion of the Constitution that matters.

In the history of Texas both as a Republic and a State, it has never been unlawful to carry a long gun anywhere outside the very few places that are off-limits per state or federal statute. Ill-advised open-carry demonstrations and demonstrators could change that, so you bet we'd be losing something!!

Here's the sad truth. Most supporters of open-carry are responsible and have not taken part in destructive tactics. Unfortunately, there is a small publicity-hungry segment who the media love to portray as examples of all supporters and they don't care how much damage they are doing. Read and listen to some of the comments these people have made and it's clear that they care solely about one subcategory of gun ownership -- the ability to carry openly.

Some, including their leadership, have expressly stated that they will vote out any and all Senators and House Members that do not support open-carry, regardless of their support of other pro-gun bills. Not only is that clear evidence of delusions of grandeur, it proves that they don't care at all about other gun owners and their ability to carry and use firearms. They denigrate anyone and everyone who does not support not only the open-carry cause, but their in-your-face tactics as well. They accuse anyone who calls for an end to destructive tactics of "throwing them under the buss." They make themselves and their tactics the issue and the focus of debate, rather than passage of open-carry. "Throwing someone under the buss" is a phrase that connotes pointing an accusatory finger at someone else to take the blame off yourself. Responsible gun owners and political activists have done no wrong and they/we are not trying to divert attention from our own conduct. They/we are calling for an end to irresponsible actions that are killing the chance of passing open-carry. Even Larry Pratt, GOA President has said carrying long guns in demonstrations is a mistake. (Hear the open-carry discussion beginning at about 24:30: http://www.kprcradio.com/media/podcast- ... -24833458/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; )

Chas.

gljjt wrote:

gringo pistolero wrote:

TexasGal wrote:Target's comments will not keep out CHLs unless they post a 30.06 sign.

They don't need any signs if they give oral notice.

I have been to Target dozens of times and never once seen anyone standing there giving oral notice!!!!!

I haven't seen any 30.06 signs at Target either. However, he makes a good point that oral notice is just as good as a 30.06 sign.

One thing I wonder is whether a recording is valid oral notice. I'm thinking something along the lines of "The Red Zone is for loading and unloading only" but addressing firearms rather than parking. I doubt there's any gun-specific case law but is there anything in simple trespass case law one way or the other? Does oral notice have to be live or is Memorex good enough?

tbrown wrote:

gljjt wrote:

gringo pistolero wrote:

TexasGal wrote:Target's comments will not keep out CHLs unless they post a 30.06 sign.

They don't need any signs if they give oral notice.

I have been to Target dozens of times and never once seen anyone standing there giving oral notice!!!!!

I haven't seen any 30.06 signs at Target either. However, he makes a good point that oral notice is just as good as a 30.06 sign.

One thing I wonder is whether a recording is valid oral notice. I'm thinking something along the lines of "The Red Zone is for loading and unloading only" but addressing firearms rather than parking. I doubt there's any gun-specific case law but is there anything in simple trespass case law one way or the other? Does oral notice have to be live or is Memorex good enough?

I don't hear so well.

tbrown wrote:

gljjt wrote:

gringo pistolero wrote:

TexasGal wrote:Target's comments will not keep out CHLs unless they post a 30.06 sign.

They don't need any signs if they give oral notice.

I have been to Target dozens of times and never once seen anyone standing there giving oral notice!!!!!

I haven't seen any 30.06 signs at Target either. However, he makes a good point that oral notice is just as good as a 30.06 sign.

One thing I wonder is whether a recording is valid oral notice. I'm thinking something along the lines of "The Red Zone is for loading and unloading only" but addressing firearms rather than parking. I doubt there's any gun-specific case law but is there anything in simple trespass case law one way or the other? Does oral notice have to be live or is Memorex good enough?

IANAL, but I suspect a Memorex moment qualifies, IF you HEAR it. It would have to be near continuous to ensure "effective notice". "Remember no guns allowed at ABC Company......Blue light special on aisle 3......Remember no guns allowed at ABC Company......Cleanup on aisle 7.....Remember no guns allowed at ABC Company......Remember no guns allowed at ABC Company......Manager to cashier 7.....Remember no guns allowed at ABC Company......Remember no guns allowed at ABC Company....."

jmra wrote:I don't hear so well.

Tell it to the judge.