Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Could concealed-carry be replaced by open-carry?

  1. #1
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    Actually, I specifically said "open carry is a great compliment to concealed carry."

    --

    http://www.590klbj.com/News/Story.aspx?ID=97958

    Could concealed-carry be replaced by open-carry?
    8/19/2008

    Newsroom
    A group that wants Texans to be allowed to carry their handguns out in the open says it is gaining traction in the state. OpenCarry.org has placed a billboard along I-35 between Austin and San Antonio that urges Texans to sign a petition calling for residents to be able to carry licensed handguns in hip holsters, just like police officers.

    “The idea is to raise awareness enough that legislators take notice,” said Mike Stollenwerk with OpenCarry.org. “The message of the billboard is that there is an on-line petition to get open-carry rights restored.”

    Stollenwerk says they plan to put up more billboards around the state.


  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    US
    Posts
    3,156

    Post imported post

    licensed handguns

    what is meant my this? In order to OC you need to have a CCW permit? Or do you need a license to own a handgun? Or is it the typical BS spewed by people who don't know any better?

  3. #3
    Regular Member rodbender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Navasota, Texas, USA
    Posts
    2,524

    Post imported post

    Just typical dumbass reporter.
    The thing about common sense is....it ain't too common.
    Will Rogers

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Dallas, TX, ,
    Posts
    496

    Post imported post

    rodbender wrote:
    Just typical dumbass reporter.
    Not sure. There are three opinions on OC in TX:

    • keep things the way they are (or regress to no carry at all; the Brady Bunch haven't given up on that dream),
    • allow OC with a CHL orequivalent (Georgia has the GFL, andevery licensed OC state on the map west of the Eastern Seaboard uses the same license for concealed or open carry and is statutorily or practically shall-issue), and
    • allow unlicensed OC (precedents everywhere)

    The middle option here is exactly that; a compromise. There really are valid arguments for all three; whether you accept tham as applicable to Texans at large is your decision, but there is as much evidence that your average Joe should NOT be trusted with a gun as that they should. When you think about it, the CHL laws in '96 werea compromise too; we could have fought till we got Vermont-style carry, but what we knew we could get was a license requiring qualification. Now of course we on this forum feel there's no other way to go than to push for unlicensed OC, because if we settle for licensed OC we'll be stuck with it for a very long time, and hey, this is Texas.

    However, for others, the licensed compromise seems like a good way to go about it; many of the signatures on the petition come with a disclaimer that they support OC with a CHL. If we push for unlicensed, we lose people who support licensed. So, I think it was a tactful move on the reporter's part to say licensed, because it keeps the support of people who support licensed OC and can also convince people who are on the fence that we might just know what we're doing.

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Graham, Texas
    Posts
    313

    Post imported post

    I guess all news is good news.

  6. #6
    Regular Member rodbender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Navasota, Texas, USA
    Posts
    2,524

    Post imported post

    Liko81 wrote:
    rodbender wrote:
    Just typical dumbass reporter.
    Not sure. There are three opinions on OC in TX:

    • keep things the way they are (or regress to no carry at all; the Brady Bunch haven't given up on that dream),
    • allow OC with a CHL orequivalent (Georgia has the GFL, andevery licensed OC state on the map west of the Eastern Seaboard uses the same license for concealed or open carry and is statutorily or practically shall-issue), and
    • allow unlicensed OC (precedents everywhere)
    The middle option here is exactly that; a compromise. There really are valid arguments for all three; whether you accept tham as applicable to Texans at large is your decision, but there is as much evidence that your average Joe should NOT be trusted with a gun as that they should. When you think about it, the CHL laws in '96 werea compromise too; we could have fought till we got Vermont-style carry, but what we knew we could get was a license requiring qualification. Now of course we on this forum feel there's no other way to go than to push for unlicensed OC, because if we settle for licensed OC we'll be stuck with it for a very long time, and hey, this is Texas.

    However, for others, the licensed compromise seems like a good way to go about it; many of the signatures on the petition come with a disclaimer that they support OC with a CHL. If we push for unlicensed, we lose people who support licensed. So, I think it was a tactful move on the reporter's part to say licensed, because it keeps the support of people who support licensed OC and can also convince people who are on the fence that we might just know what we're doing.
    Nope just typical dumbass reporter. I take it to mean that the handguns will be registered which is not in any Texas laws that I've read. We don't have registration on any guns here.

    Edit: OK, you win. Yet.
    The thing about common sense is....it ain't too common.
    Will Rogers

  7. #7
    Regular Member CrossFire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Irving, Texas, USA
    Posts
    408

    Post imported post

    Yet

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •