• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Licensed Open Carry

A

Arizonatexan

Guest
imported post

Just wanting your opinions/enlightenment on the subject of licensed open carry. This has been the topic of some discussion among TCDL members lately. Since open carry is a brand new concept to many Texans and since education is such an important aspect - many Texans are a little leery of going from concealed carry to over night having every yahoo out there being able to open carry. I'm not trying to stir up a hornets nest - more of a "think-tank" question as we plan our political moves for selling open carry to a populacethat didn't "grow up" with the privilege like other states.

Thanks for your thoughts.

Arizona Texan
 

jimwyant

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2006
Messages
342
Location
Mebane, North Carolina, USA
imported post

Good question, and while I feel that while we shouldn't have to ask the government's permission (get a permit) to do something that is a God-given right, and supposed to be protected by the Constitution, I think licensed OC could be a stepping stone towards the freedoms we in the Gold Star states already enjoy.

Here in VA, we're proud of our Gold Star OC status and our shall-issue CC law, but we continue to fight for a Castle Doctrine, a repeal of the restaurant ban, and eventually hope to enact an Alaska/Vermont "no permit required" system. Baby steps.

My $0.02.
 

BobCav

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
2,798
Location
No longer in Alexandria, Egypt
imported post

I completely understand what ArizonaTexan is saying. To get a CHP, you have to prove some form of training, butto OC, if otherwise eligible (no felonies, restraining orders, etc.) you need NOTHING. A 22 year citizen who has NEVER been around a gun before is entitled to OC. To me, that is inherently dangerous and can lead to they types of disasters that could potentially end OC as we know it. Unfortunately not everyone is as smart as we are and actually look up the laws and requirements before carrying a gun. (Otherwise, our membership would be through the roof!)

We're constantly stating that OC is about our rights and about educating the masses, butif we're doing the educating, who educated us? Does it not stand to reason that we should be educated first? You are? Then prove it. To me, that would bethe only merit in Licensed OC, the proof of training. No oneshould ever have to ask for permission to exercise that whichis already their right, and yettraining and education arealwaysgood things. Therein liesthe problem.

The problem is how to ensure that someone has had training without that verification process being under the guise of "licensing". There are a number of ways to receive the training, military experience, NRA classes, other classes, but the only way to consolidate that training into one verifiable document (Firearms Training Cert Card or something like that). That would still beaform of governmental control that is akin to asking permission.

For example...even if the lawwas"Shall Issue OC License upon Receipt of Proof of Training"and you showed proof of training at the court clerk's desk, there would still be a form that would have to be filled out and a standardized, recognizeable, controlled card that would have to be filled out and mailed back to you and the associated filing fees. The total time to process that would have to be calculated and a fee created based on that amount.Who will pay for all that? The county? Nope. The state? Nope. The citizen? Yep! But soon, that "filing fee" would be seen as having to PAY for that RIGHT that is inherently yours already. This is the problem.

Now here's the big question: Exceptfor not having a background check, how is that process any different from the concealed permit process? It isn't!! YOU still prove training, YOU still pay the fees, YOU still end up with a card in your wallet that says your legal and safe.

Perhaps someone with the time and resources could compile the data of all "bad things" associated with OC (ND's, collateral damage, misses, etc) as compared to all "good things" such as crimes averted, BG's eliminated, etc, and then extrapolate how many of each of those good and bad things occurred at the hands of the "untrained".Now this is mere conjecture, but you might find that the percentage of bad things that happened at the hands of the untrained that MAY have been averted through training are so insignificantly small, it's not worth the effort to prove training at all.

While Licensed Open Carry has the potential tosatisfy proof of training and potentially inherently be safer for everyone, it is a tradeoff and one that not everyone is willing to make.
 

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Arizonatexan wrote:
Just wanting your opinions/enlightenment on the subject of licensed open carry. This has been the topic of some discussion among TCDL members lately. Since open carry is a brand new concept to many Texans and since education is such an important aspect - many Texans are a little leery of going from concealed carry to over night having every yahoo out there being able to open carry.
But did not texas just pass a law 2 years ago creating a stautory presumption of being withion the ancient 'traveling exception" to the Texas handgun carry gun ban if the gun was inside a car and concealed?

And did the ACLU of TX not support this measure?

And there is no training or background check required, right?

And is it not true that most states do not ban OC and do not require a license to OC, at least on foot?

ANSWERS: Yes, Yes, Yes, & Yes!

So why can't Texans OC outside their vehicle without a license?

We know from the FBI report that bad guys don't wear holsters, and don't open carry.

Considering all of the above, TCDL members need tostand tall on Open Carry and demand reforms now to bring you to at least the rights of most states.

Sure, your first bill might be defeated - but eventually you will get a compromise measure move to forward.

Introduce a compromise measure now, and you will get nothing.
 

tattedupboy

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2006
Messages
518
Location
Gary, Indiana, USA
imported post

I've always wondered why people on this forum refer to Texas as a non open carry state. That is simply not completely true. Only the open carrying of handguns is illegal, but the open carrying of shotguns and rifles, whether loaded or unloaded, inside or outside a vehicle, (no permit required)has always been legal there. Yes, it would be nice to be able to openly carry a handgun but to refer to Texas as a non open carry state is a bit on the deceptive side.
 
A

Arizonatexan

Guest
imported post

Thank you very much for your input gentlemen! Excellent thoughts and discussion. This is just one of the many questions facing us as we move forward in Texas. We know what our rights "should" be and we know the "principles" behind it but the political strategy is important. I tend to agree with Mike that you shoot for the moon. If you fall a little short maybe you still haven't done half bad.

Arizona Texan
 

Dutch Uncle

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
1,715
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

I understand BobCav's concerns about untrained people walking around with guns, and the problems it could cause. I also assume our founding fathers considered that, and still felt our rights and liberties were more important than the disadvantages of occasional firearms accidents and tragedies.

One could easily make the argument that the right to vote is so critically important to the future of the republic that it shouldn't be extended to just any ignorant fool on the street. There is certainly some validity to this concern, but I rather doubt we will see "literacy tests" at the polls anytime soon!
 

BobCav

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
2,798
Location
No longer in Alexandria, Egypt
imported post

Dutch Uncle wrote:
I understand BobCav's concerns about untrained people walking around with guns, and the problems it could cause. I also assume our founding fathers considered that, and still felt our rights and liberties were more important than the disadvantages of occasional firearms accidents and tragedies.

One could easily make the argument that the right to vote is so critically important to the future of the republic that it shouldn't be extended to just any ignorant fool on the street. There is certainly some validity to this concern, but I rather doubt we will see "literacy tests" at the polls anytime soon!
Exactly my point! Training and education are always good and in a culture such as theirs where EVERYONE CARRIED, training and safety just weren't an issue. But today you have two sub-cultures; pro-gun and anti-gun. As a result, we have whole generations that have no clue what weapons safety is and it's now our task to educate them!
 

cloudcroft

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
1,908
Location
El Paso, TX (formerly Colorado Springs, CO)
imported post

Do not aid & abet the "the state" in infringing upon our right of SD. Do not agree with/condone ANY licensing of OC!

It's bad enough there is the illegal permit system for CC....don't add more.

It's more important NOT to go along with any licensing/permits than pursue "training" requirements.

As for "training," the cops supposedly have "training" yet they often do quite poorly using their handguns, so the "training" issue is insignificant and irrelevant.

Besides, often it is the least-trained citizen that is the most lethal to criminals, so I couldn't care less about any "training."

Keep it simple and uncomplicated...that's how it is in the real world on the street.

-- John D.
 

BobCav

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
2,798
Location
No longer in Alexandria, Egypt
imported post

cloudcroft, who is condoning any licensing of OC? I'm not in any way! I was explaining in that scenario that it would be futile, because it would become the same process as the CC permit and that's pointless and unnecessary just for the training. Training is always good, but not at the expense of freedoms. There's other ways to get trained!
 

tattedupboy

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2006
Messages
518
Location
Gary, Indiana, USA
imported post

BobCav wrote:
Dutch Uncle wrote:
I understand BobCav's concerns about untrained people walking around with guns, and the problems it could cause. I also assume our founding fathers considered that, and still felt our rights and liberties were more important than the disadvantages of occasional firearms accidents and tragedies.

One could easily make the argument that the right to vote is so critically important to the future of the republic that it shouldn't be extended to just any ignorant fool on the street. There is certainly some validity to this concern, but I rather doubt we will see "literacy tests" at the polls anytime soon!
Exactly my point! Training and education are always good and in a culture such as theirs where EVERYONE CARRIED, training and safety just weren't an issue. But today you have two sub-cultures; pro-gun and anti-gun. As a result, we have whole generations that have no clue what weapons safety is and it's now our task to educate them!

If you're going to mandate training before people can legally exercise RKBA, then where do training requirements stop? If training can legally be required to exercise that right, then it should also be required in order to exercise the first amendment rights of free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, right to assemble, and right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Nowhere does the constitution mandate a training requirement to exercise these rights, otherwise they would not be rights.

In every state and foreign country training and a license are required in order to drive, but that is okay by me because there is no constitutional right to drive. Driving is a priviledge and states are free to impose any restrictions they see fit upon that priviledge. Requiring training and licensing in order to exercise a right, on the other hand, is unconstitutional.
 

BobCav

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
2,798
Location
No longer in Alexandria, Egypt
imported post

tattedupboy wrote:
BobCav wrote:
Dutch Uncle wrote:
I understand BobCav's concerns about untrained people walking around with guns, and the problems it could cause. I also assume our founding fathers considered that, and still felt our rights and liberties were more important than the disadvantages of occasional firearms accidents and tragedies.

One could easily make the argument that the right to vote is so critically important to the future of the republic that it shouldn't be extended to just any ignorant fool on the street. There is certainly some validity to this concern, but I rather doubt we will see "literacy tests" at the polls anytime soon!
Exactly my point! Training and education are always good and in a culture such as theirs where EVERYONE CARRIED, training and safety just weren't an issue. But today you have two sub-cultures; pro-gun and anti-gun. As a result, we have whole generations that have no clue what weapons safety is and it's now our task to educate them!

If you're going to mandate training before people can legally exercise RKBA, then where do training requirements stop? If training can legally be required to exercise that right, then it should also be required in order to exercise the first amendment rights of free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, right to assemble, and right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Nowhere does the constitution mandate a training requirement to exercise these rights, otherwise they would not be rights.

In every state and foreign country training and a license are required in order to drive, but that is okay by me because there is no constitutional right to drive. Driving is a priviledge and states are free to impose any restrictions they see fit upon that priviledge. Requiring training and licensing in order to exercise a right, on the other hand, is unconstitutional.
I agree, it would be unconstitutional, that's not what I'm saying and I think you completely misunderstood me. I never statedanywhere that I was pro mandatory training before anyone can exercise their RKBA.I am PRO TRAINING, but absolutely ANTI MANDATORY TRAINING.

I was merely explaining in that scenario the futility of mandatory training by comparing it to the CC requirements. Training of any sort is now and always will be good forever. If I have a choice to stand in battle beside someone who is well trainied with their weapon or someone "just carryin cuz they can", I'll be beside the trainied individual and we'll both wake up tomorrow.

Actually,our elementery school education (training)does prepareus how to properly use the most powerful weapons we have, our written and spoken words. So you did receive training in how to write, speak and listen far before you even learned how to effectively use them to exercise your other rights. Is not a basic education in those skills is mandated by law? Yes it is and in every state.

I am NOT - REPEAT NOT recommending mandating training for OC, just saying that all training, any kind of training or education is a good thing and I don't care WHAT the topic is, be it guns, driving, science, religion, government, home repair, etc. America has been "dumbed down" enough and this coming generation is proof enough of that! And may God have mercy onus all!
 

44Brent

Regular Member
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
772
Location
Olympia, WA
imported post

ArizonaTexan:

I am not currently living in Texas but hope to move back there some day. I hope you start out asking for unlicensed open carry. If opponents force you into a "compromise" of licensed open carry, I would call that a huge win and be tickled pink.

I'm sorry I'm not in Texas right now to help you with this fight.
 

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

The other fall backs include a rural open carry options - like in CA,IL, and IA whereopen carry in unincorporated areas is legal, without any license.
 

cloudcroft

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
1,908
Location
El Paso, TX (formerly Colorado Springs, CO)
imported post

Problem with that is eventually there will be no more "rural" places...there'll be too many people (population growth) and cities will extend their control farther and farther out. We have to consider future generations and what they may face long after we're gone.

But for ME, the bottom-line is this: NO COMPROMISE on RIGHTS!

"Privileges" can be debated, but no debate or compromise re: RIGHTS.

And that's right up front.

-- John D.
 

tattedupboy

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2006
Messages
518
Location
Gary, Indiana, USA
imported post

Mike wrote:
The other fall backs include a rural open carry options - like in CA,IL, and IA whereopen carry in unincorporated areas is legal, without any license.
Actually, you're wrong about California. I do believe that open carry where allowed there still can't be done without a permit.
 

Wiley

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
57
Location
Marietta, Georgia, USA
imported post

In Georgia one must have a Georgia Firearms License to carry openly or concealed. The licensing system is not good.

I look forward to visiting VA and being able to open carry without having to get the permission of a Probate Judge who makes up rules and restrictions that are in complete violation of Georgia Code.

Philosophically I prefer open carry.
 

44Brent

Regular Member
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
772
Location
Olympia, WA
imported post

One more thing ArizonaTexan. Texas isn't Illinois or New York. People in Texas LIKE guns. I would be surprised if you don't get a "win" in the first year that you get a bill introduced into the legislature.

Texans are a proud group of people who think their state is "bigger and badder" than any other state in the country. Simply pointing out that some "Yankee" states have open carry, and the legislature might not only legalize open carry, but MANDATE all Texans openly carry a .50 caliber Desert Eagle just to show the Yanks that the Texans have outdone them.

Anyway, I'm not exaggerating one bit regarding the Texas pride angle. Keep pointing out how the "Yankees" have open carry and see what happens. Perhaps some native Texans can explain this better than I can.
 
Top