Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Fox 4 (TX) video news report on Open Carry campaign

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

    Post imported post


  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    RTM Rockford, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    316

    Post imported post

    Nice report with good exposure of the OCDO website. I thought the sudden injection of the naysayer seemed a bit forced, but I imagine it was their attempt at giving the "other side" a voice. Since he was in the gun shop/range himself, and based upon his wording, I expect he's not an anti, but just a cynic.

  3. #3
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043

    Post imported post

    Now, correct me if I am wrong, but the main reason for this OC petition in Texas is to ease or eliminate the excessive punishment that occurs for those who happen to unintentionally flash their firearms while CCing.

    A secondary and I would image, almost equally important reason is due to weather and clothing considerations. No one wants to have to wear a coat in any weather 70f or above.

    The whole focus on "visual deterrent" is arguable at best and probably should not be the primary focus reason for OC in Texas or elsewhere. Sadly, the one and only person they showed an interview for gives exactly that reasoning, and fails to state it very well.

    I would say, aside from the publicity for the site, the news report does very little to give "good exposure" to the OC movement.

    Then there is the "any free exposure is better than none" camp.

  4. #4
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    FMCDH wrote:
    Now, correct me if I am wrong, but the main reason for this OC petition in Texas is to ease or eliminate the excessive punishment that occurs for those who happen to unintentionally flash their firearms while CCing.
    Well, no, Texans just want the same open carry rights that you have in Washinghton, and those in most states do - to be able to open carry their handguns if they want to, no permit required.

    Having said that, obviously licensed concealed carriers want and deserve the right to choose to open carry when they want to and not be in fear of prosecution for exposing their handgun from time to time even when mainly concealing.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    233

    Post imported post

    The naysayer needs to live in El Paso or near Laredo-the MEXICAN DRUG CARTEL is thick and active!! People living there are scared because they know something is going to happen!! In Juarez last year there were 1536 innocent people that were killed. This is not good.It takes 16 hours to drive from Juarez to Dallas! So far the MEXICAN DRUG CARTEL has been across the border twice-there is a map on CNN.com under Mexican DRUG War.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509

    Post imported post

    FMCDH wrote:
    Now, correct me if I am wrong, but the main reason for this OC petition in Texas is to ease or eliminate the excessive punishment that occurs for those who happen to unintentionally flash their firearms while CCing.
    There is no punishment in Texas for unintentionally flashing or printing. The law requires that someone "intentionally fails to conceal" for there to be a violation.

    But the punishment is harsh, and needless. The point of the Texas OC movement is to eliminate any duty to conceal for a licensee, and to eliminate any need for a license to carry if one chooses to OC.


  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas, ,
    Posts
    20

    Post imported post

    FMCDH wrote:
    A secondary and I would image, almost equally important reason is due to weather and clothing considerations. No one wants to have to wear a coat in any weather 70f or above.
    Well said, with Mike's clarification. The coat is a dead give away when the temp is over 100, although that is only about three months out of the year.

  8. #8
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043

    Post imported post

    KBCraig wrote:
    FMCDH wrote:
    Now, correct me if I am wrong, but the main reason for this OC petition in Texas is to ease or eliminate the excessive punishment that occurs for those who happen to unintentionally flash their firearms while CCing.
    There is no punishment in Texas for unintentionally flashing or printing. The law requires that someone "intentionally fails to conceal" for there to be a violation.

    But the punishment is harsh, and needless. The point of the Texas OC movement is to eliminate any duty to conceal for a licensee, and to eliminate any need for a license to carry if one chooses to OC.
    Yea, your kind of splitting hairs here. There is a thin line between flashing and "failing to conceal" when an LEO or other complainant is looking to make it stick.

    BUT...that being said. I appreciate the clarification of your post.

    What is printing if I may ask?

  9. #9
    Lone Star Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    161

    Post imported post

    KBCraig wrote:
    FMCDH wrote:
    Now, correct me if I am wrong, but the main reason for this OC petition in Texas is to ease or eliminate the excessive punishment that occurs for those who happen to unintentionally flash their firearms while CCing.
    There is no punishment in Texas for unintentionally flashing or printing. The law requires that someone "intentionally fails to conceal" for there to be a violation.

    But the punishment is harsh, and needless. The point of the Texas OC movement is to eliminate any duty to conceal for a licensee, and to eliminate any need for a license to carry if one chooses to OC.

    Is it reasonable to consider if a person is seen flashing, unintentional or not, there will still be a 'man with a gun' call?



    Because if no one sees it, did he really flash? And if a tree falls in the woods, ....




  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    233

    Post imported post

    Printing can be an unsightly bulge where one is notsupposed to be such as at the waiste on the right side when the left has no bulge. Here in TEXAS, you can loose your CC license over this. You will have to prove that it was unintentional.

    So just do away with it-it is our right under the 2nd Amendment so allow that right to be utilized. Also in this state we have J.P.'s which usually only have a few months of required training and are totally POLITICAL, they can handle up to CRIMINAL if they so desire.

  11. #11
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    Shorts wrote:
    Is it reasonable to consider if a person is seen flashing, unintentional or not, there will still be a 'man with a gun' call?

    Because if no one sees it, did he really flash? And if a tree falls in the woods, ....
    I don;t think folks are using the term "flash" correctly - flash it seems to ne is mor elike brandishing, normally illegal by statute in many states, or at least actionable as a common law assault, absent justification.

  12. #12
    Lone Star Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Seattle-ish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    714

    Post imported post

    I think it's amazing that printing is considered illegal in TX. I thought cc was difficult enough (when necessary), but after reading some of the threads in the holster forum I realize we have it easy in WA.

    I don't fault the pro OC customer for his lack of polish. I think that the reporter could have found a more polished individual for the piece if she wanted to. The anti OC gentleman's arguments irked me a bit.

  13. #13
    Lone Star Veteran Gator5713's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Aggieland, Texas, USA
    Posts
    593

    Post imported post

    David817:
    It may only get over 100 3 months out of the year in D/FW... But in south and west Texas it is likely to be 95-105 or more much more than that!!! Remember, there is a WHOLE LOT of Texas South of you!!!
    But the point is still valid, throughout the state the average temp for the year is above 80 and that makes it really difficult to wear a coat and I think it looks a little sloppy to walk around with my shirt un-tucked, so our options here are very limited.
    A shoulder rig under my shirt (90% of the time I wear 'pearl snap' shirts) is probably the most concealable and readily accessible concealed option for me, but I work outside a lot and thus sweat a good deal so that position is bad for the gun...

    Back on topic, I think the OCer did all right, could have been more polished, but the naysayer seemed forced and I think that most people that saw it and gave it any thought would probably come to the conclusion that both of them were a little paranoid, but that the OCer was afraid of sommething that we should all actually fear, while the naysayer was afraid of Law Abiding Citizens which makes no sense...

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas, ,
    Posts
    20

    Post imported post

    Gator,

    Maybe I should have said that it is over 100 for three months, although it is possible anytime (it was 83 yesterday). Personally, I generally go with the untucked look. That works pretty well, even on the beach that used to be. My work takes me out west, but not down to your neck of the woods, or forest as it may be. I45 is a route that I took often, but for fun, not work. Gig 'em.

  15. #15
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    I don;t think folks are using the term "flash" correctly - flash it seems to ne is mor elike brandishing, normally illegal by statute in many states, or at least actionable as a common law assault, absent justification.
    I believe the term "flash" would be an un-intentional peek of a firearm in its holster, where "brandishing" is normally the intentional showing of a firearm out of its holster, for the intent to intimidate. I suppose this term could be used for showing the weapon in its holster too however.

    That is as I understand it as far as WA/OR state law is concerned. That is what I was taught by my EP instructors. Those definitions were based upon their common allowance of OC however.

    I know we still have occasional troubles with citizens and LEOs alike here in Washington getting those concepts confused. I imagine in Texas its exponentially worse since you don't even have the common law allowance of OC to protect you from MWAG calls.

    I completely understand and support your push for OC.



  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    233

    Post imported post

    Here in TEXAS you have a wide variety of climate changes. Such as in the morning it may be 20 degrees, by noon it will be about 85 degrees, then rain and freezing by sundown. It is a mess, this also adds to the delima of Concealed Carry, it may work in the morning but not at mid day and Vice Versa! Yesterday it was 62 degrees at night during the day yesterday it was 45, today it is 67 and the wind is constant at 20 mph from the WNW. Tonight it goes back to 27 degrees.

  17. #17
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    FMCDH wrote:
    Mike wrote:
    I don;t think folks are using the term "flash" correctly - flash it seems to ne is mor elike brandishing, normally illegal by statute in many states, or at least actionable as a common law assault, absent justification.
    I believe the term "flash" would be an un-intentional peek of a firearm in its holster,
    Definition of "flash" #32 at Dictionary.com: "to display suddenly and briefly: She flashed her ID card at the guard."

    I think the term conotates a brief but deliberate display - not inadvertant shirt rising over holster while reaching up for a can of peas.

    Alternatively: She flashed her badge at the check point to get professional courtesy. The gamgster flashed his gun to othger patrons while standing at the bar.

    "Flash" is not a good term for us folks.

  18. #18
    Lone Star Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    161

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    FMCDH wrote:
    Mike wrote:
    I don;t think folks are using the term "flash" correctly - flash it seems to ne is mor elike brandishing, normally illegal by statute in many states, or at least actionable as a common law assault, absent justification.
    I believe the term "flash" would be an un-intentional peek of a firearm in its holster,
    Definition of "flash" #32 at Dictionary.com: "to display suddenly and briefly: She flashed her ID card at the guard."

    I think the term conotates a brief but deliberate display - not inadvertant shirt rising over holster while reaching up for a can of peas.

    Alternatively: She flashed her badge at the check point to get professional courtesy. The gamgster flashed his gun to othger patrons while standing at the bar.

    "Flash" is not a good term for us folks.

    I see your point Mike.

    My post was tongue in cheek in general and meant to convey that any gun seen on any one's hip was going to alert someone. If it alerts the wrong someone, a call to the cops is made anyway. I figured the use of any word in any form (display, show, uncover, flash, failing to conceal, visible, can be seen, ...) was going to be hashed out here

  19. #19
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    "Flash" is not a good term for us folks.
    lol

    It does conjure up images that we really don't need associated with the movement.

    Still, I find it amazingly unfair that "printing" is considered to be some sort of crime. We really are spoiled in Washington in comparison. Education of our LEOs and a few politicians (cough...Nickels) is all we have to worry about for the most part.

    I hope you guys get the same! In fact, I would like to see Federal preemption on the subject much to the style of Alaska's laws. Probably a pipe dream, but something to wish for.



  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    233

    Post imported post

    We are now at 50460 signatures, not bad at all. And, yes "FLASHand PRINTING" are not good terms and should have never been used or even referred to.

  21. #21
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    Let's keep up the work recruting folks to sign the petition - every sig counts!

Posting Permissions

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