TexasCHLforum.com

I support unlicensed open carry with the same restrictions that are currently applied to the Motorists Protection Act. That would pretty much solve the problem of "bad guys" carrying guns. Known gang members, people committing crime, those who can't own a firearm, etc, would then be disallowed from carrying.

The Texas constitution allows regulation of firearms with an eye toward preventing crime, so those restrictions seem exactly in line with our highest law of the state.

I met a guy the other day who doesn't have a CHL but he keeps a handgun in his truck. I asked him why he didn't just get a CHL so he could carry it, and he mentioned infringement, licensing, etc. He said he's waiting for unlicensed open carry so that he can finally carry his gun around. I support open carry precisely for people like this guy.

nitrogen wrote:I do not support the notion that every loonie in the state has a right to walk around with any book or say whatever is on their mind. Ergo, I reckon I support the notion that some sort of prequalification process; e.g., the first amendment licensing procedure be involved prior to being able to read or speak.

Thank you, nitrogen. Be sure to pick up that worship license next time you are at the courthouse. We can't let all of those people get away with that radical stuff.

Anygunanywhere

TheArmedFarmer wrote:I support unlicensed open carry with the same restrictions that are currently applied to the Motorists Protection Act. That would pretty much solve the problem of "bad guys" carrying guns. Known gang members, people committing crime, those who can't own a firearm, etc, would then be disallowed from carrying.

The Texas constitution allows regulation of firearms with an eye toward preventing crime, so those restrictions seem exactly in line with our highest law of the state.

I met a guy the other day who doesn't have a CHL but he keeps a handgun in his truck. I asked him why he didn't just get a CHL so he could carry it, and he mentioned infringement, licensing, etc. He said he's waiting for unlicensed open carry so that he can finally carry his gun around. I support open carry precisely for people like this guy.

I think you may have hit the nail on the head with your post here.........

It makes me think that the difference between Licensed Open Carry and Unlicensed Open Carry is only a MONEY thing.

Example if Unlicensed OC were to pass and become law, how would all of us who pay for a CHL feel?

I am surprised that the Motorist Protection Act passed without some MONEY (License) being required to carry your gun in your car!

I'm torn. I want to support unlicensed open carry. I just can't make myself commit to it right now.

I feel dirty every time I think that there are people I just don't want having access to guns. I tell myself over and over shall not be infringed! shall not be infringed!, but I still think back to the times I've been to public ranges, and been swept by people not paying attention to where they were pointing their loaded weapons. I think back to the number of Rambo-wannabes and the Gecko45's we've all encountered. Those are the people I'd really feel uncomfortable around if unlicensed OC becomes a reality.

I'm not naive enough to believe that only the responsible gun owners would take advantage of the opportunity. I know there would be droves of irresponsible individuals, and individuals who have never handled any kind of firearm going out to buy a nice shiny new blaster to slap on their hip just because they can.

That said, I still want to support it, but can't right now.

Just going to state how I feel --- I support open-carry in Texas ( with a proper training and shooting coarse taken and passed ) and hopes it passes, but I doubt it will.

After my last post, I want to clarify.

Personally, I think I agree with Oldgringo, I do NOT want any loony to be able to own a gun, just like I personally find some speech offensive and disgusting.

The issue is that the bill of rights doesn't say, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, except those religions Nitrogen doesn't like, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances UNLESS Nitrogen doesn't like the messsage."

The bill of rights doesn't say, " A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of only people that Nitrogen likes to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

This puts me in the position of defending the free speech of people I do not like, as well as defending the rights of people I might not like to own guns.

nitrogen wrote:This puts me in the position of defending the free speech of people I do not like, as well as defending the rights of people I might not like to own guns.

nitogen wrote:

Personally, I think I agree with Oldgringo, I do NOT want any loony to be able to own a gun, just like I personally find some speech offensive and disgusting.

Absolutely! There are time honored restrictions on who can own a firearm as there are on what constitutes freedom of speech, right of assembly, etc. Felons, juveniles, chemically dependent folk, dopers, etc. are not allowed to own (carry) guns. Likewise, one's freedom of speech does not allow slander, violating 10 year old daughter rule, defamation of character, making gun/bomb jokes at the airport, etc. Oops! Did I mention airports? I'm sorry, the founding fathers didn't have to deal with airports.

Open carry is fine and I have no problem with it for me...and maybe you. However, it's just not for everybody.

I do not support OC. It is really more trouble than its worth.

I still lean towards OC, with license. That's not apt to stop most criminals from trying to carry, but the vast majority of them are already well known to leo's and they would have to be really stupid to attempt that charade. They will continue to slink around with their "fotay" stuck down their underwear shining above their sag pants, or under their hoodie in 100 degree weather. There could possibly be more random checks for license, and most likely an adverse reaction from a lot of business owners. That's one issue that should be carefully investigated....how would owners of restruants, shops, entertainment establishments, etc., react to an open display of legally carried firearms?

Even though I still want the comfort of taking off a cover garment while sitting down in a restruant, or particularly be able to open carry while "in the field" doing my normal line of work, I would not make it a regular practice.

In "mr surveyor's perfect world", ALL of the good guys would ba allowed to open carry all the firepower they were man (or woman) enough to handle, and the bad guys would be put away for life for ANY criminal event involving a firearm or other weapon related violence. But, it just ain't that perfect world. So, even though I did vote "yes" to OC/with license, I still have some serious reservations about the unforeseen consequences.

surv

I would support either the licenced or unlicenced carry, assuming the person carrying isnt prohibited due to criminal activity. I have to support it, as I am a firm believer in the Second Ammendment. Personally, I wouldnt carry in the open, rather I would continue to be concealed. In states where open carry is legal, I havent heard of any problems. I dont see where we would have any here in Texas either. I remember when the legislature was debating CHL and some were saying that the streets would be be rivers of blood if it passed, and it didnt come true. Responsible, law abiding citizens in my opinion should be able to make their own choice about how they carry.
Also, and I know it goes a little against what I just said, Im a little bit leary of people who are not licensed carrying a weapon either concealed or not, only because I can imagine people who know little about firearms going to a store and buying a gun and holster and strapping it on without some kind of training. That would only lead to problems in my opinion. You should have at least a basic knowledge of your choice of firearm and the laws concerning its use. Why give the Brady Bunch any fodder to chew on?

I voted yes to unlicensed open carry, but maybe not for the same reasons as some others here voted that way. I am thinking that the BG is going to shoot the guy with the gun on his hip first, giving me time to either get the heck out of there or head for cover so I can return fire if need be. . I assume they will be handing out signs that say..."Shoot me first"...for the folks that want to open carry?

Seriously...there is no way I would open carry. I feel the element of surprise is too valuable to give up. I'm not much into doing the quick draw with some Home Boy fresh out of "hate school". But I do 100% believe folks that want to show off their wares should(correction...DO) have the right under the constitution to do so. Heck...while we are at it...what's with having to get a special license to exercise my right to carry at all? Concealed or otherwise.

The way the question is posed, someone who's worried about the "throw open the gates" issue CAN answer this question specifically to the 2011 legislative session... and support licensed carry as a first step. Just saying.

i'd likely only open carry when out at night walking the dogs, because throwing on a paddle holster is a lot more comfortable than putting on an IWB.

I voted for either licensed or unlicensed open carry, although to be honest I most likely won't open carry even if allowed. I tried open carry in Montana while I was there last year, and it was kinda nice wearing OWB with a t-shirt, but you definitely draw attention to yourself. I prefer to remain stealth.

I don't think it'll make much of a difference either way in terms of crime, but it would be nice to not have to worry about accidentally flashing a concealed gun

First let me say I am a strong beliver in our right to carry. Everyone should have at least one. However, I did vote no to open carry and here is why. Right now there are a lot of places that allow concealed carry primarlily because it is out of sight and out of mind. if no one knows you carry, no one cares. With open carry I see lots of places that are currently silent on it barring everything. The oppressed will protest loudly and the establishment will ban all weapons instead of just open carry.

If we can get all restrictings lifted on concealed carry, except for carrying in a bar, then I dont care what the open carry does. I just don't want those that want the open carry to affect the rights of those that carry concealed. I see that happening. I personally don't see open carry passing, but if it does, then it needs to be licensed, and the 30.06 signs need to be modified to give property owners the right to ban open carry but allow concealed.