Hypothetical question and poll

[Charles L. Cotton]

This is purely a hypothetical question that presumes widespread opposition to open carrying of handguns by CHLs. The presumptions underlying this hypothetical are:

• 1) Public response to "open carry" results in many businesses posting 30.06 signs for the first time;
  
  2) The list of statutorily off-limits locations are significantly expanded; or
  
  3) Both 1) and 2).

Question: If this were the response to "open carry" in Texas, would you still support changing the law to allow "open carry" by CHLs?


The purpose of this poll is solely to determine how many people would support open carry, at any and all costs.

Please don't post something saying "it wouldn't happen here." That ignores the parameters of the hypothetical question.

Chas.

[shaggydog]

Given the parameters of the hypothesis, my answer is “No�.

[Kalrog]

Under the hypothetical that you provide... yes I would still support the legal ability to open carry.

With that said, I reject your assumptions that 1, 2, or 3 would happen. But I won't go any farther than that in this thread.

[TScottTX]

Given the parameters of the hypothesis, my answer is “No�.

Can't really see the advantage in open carry anyhow. More important things to address in our CHL laws.

[shaggydog]

Under the hypothetical that you provide... yes I would still support the legal ability to open carry.

Would be interested in your rational, again, WITHIN the strict confines of the question.

[Kalrog]

Under the hypothetical that you provide... yes I would still support the legal ability to open carry.

Would be interested in your rational, again, WITHIN the strict confines of the question.

Sometimes I get in trouble for taking a view of things that is too far reaching than is prudent. I admit that. It is why I often support 3rd party candidates who don't have a chance in THIS election in the hopes that it will give them more of a chance in the NEXT election with someone that I can actually support.

That is the long way of saying that even though there might be some backlash to the folks that Open Carry (OC) by some businesses and the like, I think that it would show to John Q. Public that guns are already everywhere and that any fear is irrational. It opens the door for many conversations to convert the undecided. And it helps to pass on the tradition to another generation (be honest - who is going to be the most likely to ask a question about your handgun? A youngster).

So I would put up with the hardships to myself in an effort to make it better for the next generation. And then when OC becomes common place, all of those fear mongering reactions go away.

[Rokyudai]

I voted "no" as well. It would seem that if the public reaction would/could be that widespread, we would simply be exchanging one list of headaches for another. Now, how would 30.06 apply to open carry if it's verbiage only prohibits licensed "concealed" handgun carriers?

[MBGuy]

I voted "no" as well. It would seem that if the public reaction would/could be that widespread, we would simply be exchanging one list of headaches for another. Now, how would 30.06 apply to open carry if it's verbiage only prohibits licensed "concealed" handgun carriers?

Seriuosly though, I was wondering the same thing. Maybe along with allowing OC, there would be new signage in the code that would prohibit OC but not apply to CC. Or they could naively put up a generic sign and we'd all walk in . But now we're getting out of the hypothetical realm established

[barres]

Although I wouldn't mind the option to open carry, even if I doubt I'd use it, I wouldn't give up some of the places I can legally carry concealed to get it. If the trade-off to getting OC passed is expanding the number of places statutorily off-limits, even slightly, then it is not worth it at all to me. We should be (and are) fighting to shrink the list of places off-limits to CCW; we don't need to take any steps backwards. IMHO, of course.

[shaggydog]

So I would put up with the hardships to myself and everyone else in an effort to possibly make it better for the next generation.

So YOU are willing to gamble away some of MY rights, as they currently exist, on the chance that the general population may, at some point, possibly, become more “rational� in their mindset towards OC?

Once again, remember that the question specifically stated that items 1 and 2 WOULD occur.

[Kalrog]

So I would put up with the hardships to myself and everyone else in an effort to possibly make it better for the next generation.

So YOU are willing to gamble away some of MY rights, as they currently exist, on the chance that the general population may, at some point, possibly, become more “rational� in their mindset towards OC?

Once again, remember that the question specifically stated that items 1 and 2 WOULD occur.

This is exactly what Heller is doing right now... Yes.

[shaggydog]

This is exactly what Heller is doing right now... Yes.

How so?

[Kalrog]

How so?

Currently, the 5th circuit has ruled that 2A is an individual right. If SCOTUS decides that it is a collective right, then we loose our (better) interpretation. Heller is risking our 2A rights in the effort to get a better interpretation for the majority of the country and those that come after us. I am in favor of Heller because I think it needs to be decided and because I like our chances. Same logic on OC.

[tbranch]

With that said, I reject your assumptions that 1, 2, or 3 would happen.

I have to disagree with you. I truly feel that open carry would increase the number of business owners who would post their businesses "off-limits" to weapons carry. As I've said before, I think most people do not care they we carry since they don't see it or know about it. Put the weapons in the open and I think the "sheep" would react. I'll keep mine neatly tucked away...

Tom