• 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.

where oc is illegal, cc + political T-shirt?

texanego

New member
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
9
Location
, ,
imported post

suppose you lived in a state where OC was illegal (like mine, texas) but did have the opportunity to legally CC. would you CC and wear a T-shirt that obviously announced, front and back, that you had a handgun? (stop me if this idea is illegal)
for the nitpickers, suppose it simply said "I legally carry a concealed handgun." with a silhouette of a 1911 underneath.
this should bring some of the deterrence value back of OC, although you still suffer from slow draw, etc. from CC.
 

Orygunner

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
737
Location
Springfield, Oregon, USA
imported post

Interesting Idea. I started a thread some time ago about a "Law Abiding Citizen" Tshirt for wearing while OCing.

How about these shirts? :

guntt-705480.jpg


My favorite is this one from TacticalResponse Gear:
ssp%202.jpg

Available Here: http://www.tacticalresponsegear.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=2714

...Orygunner...
 

texanego

New member
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
9
Location
, ,
imported post

carpenters got the jump on us with that.

although i doubt it, if the stolen gun argument is true, then you can put your gun in a different position and then shoot whoever fondles your belly. =)
 

DopaVash

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2008
Messages
313
Location
Graham, Texas
imported post

texanego wrote:
suppose you lived in a state where OC was illegal (like mine, texas) but did have the opportunity to legally CC. would you CC and wear a T-shirt that obviously announced, front and back, that you had a handgun? (stop me if this idea is illegal)
for the nitpickers, suppose it simply said "I legally carry a concealed handgun." with a silhouette of a 1911 underneath.
this should bring some of the deterrence value back of OC, although you still suffer from slow draw, etc. from CC.

I'm pretty sure that wearing clothing that announces that you're carrying is illegal in Texas. Not a Lawyer.
 

texanego

New member
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
9
Location
, ,
imported post

wonder if that's a free speech test case the aclu would want to pick up.
*rolls eyes
 

protector84

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2007
Messages
624
Location
Arizona, U.S.
imported post

Maybe this is pushing things a bit but in a way concealed-carry-only states are violating free speech because forcing you to hide your gun is limiting your expression.
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
imported post

"..I'm pretty sure that wearing clothing that announces that you're carrying is illegal in Texas. Not a Lawyer..."

Why do people post things with "I don't know but I'm pretty sure that ___________ is illegal..." I'm sorry for being brusque, but it adds nothing but noise to the discussion. If you have a cite then give us the citation, for Pete's sake, anything less is just typing to see your words on a screen.

(There, I said it. Now I'm going to go have coffee and become a much more useful and polite member of this forum.)
 

rpyne

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
1,072
Location
Provo, Utah, USA
imported post

My recommendation is to carry an empty holster. That way if someone asks why it is empty you have an opportunity to educate them.
 

Tiny85

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2009
Messages
50
Location
, Maine, USA
imported post

Fallschirmjäger wrote:
"..I'm pretty sure that wearing clothing that announces that you're carrying is illegal in Texas. Not a Lawyer..."

Why do people post things with "I don't know but I'm pretty sure that ___________ is illegal..." I'm sorry for being brusque, but it adds nothing but noise to the discussion. If you have a cite then give us the citation, for Pete's sake, anything less is just typing to see your words on a screen.

(There, I said it. Now I'm going to go have coffee and become a much more useful and polite member of this forum.)
My question would then turn to who has a discussion without opinion? He isn't stating it as a legal fact but referencing it as what he thinks maybe true.

Yes linking facts would be great and they add a lot of credibility to your posts. However at the same time his opinion may also give you a good idea on what the general reaction maybe fromgeneral public and local LEO's.

Idk about the rest of you but i don't realy feel the need to be the deciding court case to clear up such grey areas, regardless of how the findings go. so with his thoughts in mind i may avoid a shirt like this baised on the idea that it maybe thought illegal by the police and thus result in alot of headach for me.


P.S. I'm only posting this because I see posts like this on this forum alot and I'm not sure what use they have, as a forum is meant for discussion not as a refrence library.
 

Phoenixphire

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2008
Messages
396
Location
Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
imported post

[align=justify] Chapter 46, Title 10, Sec.46.035 UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER. (a)A license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun.[/align][align=justify]
[/align][align=justify]GC 411.171
[/align][align=justify](3) "Concealed handgun" means a handgun, the presence of
which is not openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable
person.[/align][align=justify]
[/align][align=justify]These laws would seem to state that using any means to make a person aware of the fact that you have a firearm would violate the law.[/align][align=justify]
[/align][align=justify]EDIT: Sorry, these are Texas laws. Not sure about other states.[/align][align=justify]
[/align][align=justify]The tshirts would be awesome to wear anyhow, even if CC was not required... They are kinda cool, sort of like OC without actually seeing the firearm. Would definitely make someone think twice.
[/align]
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

protector84 wrote:
Maybe this is pushing things a bit but in a way concealed-carry-only states are violating free speech because forcing you to hide your gun is limiting your expression.

Do keep in mind that there is nothing enumerated in the Bill of Rights to guarantee freedom of expression. That is a perversion of the concept of interpretation which is an insidious extension of the earlier 20th century.

If we, and we should, follow the dictates of the Original Intent, such a right would revert to the states and the people respectively.
 

MichaelWDean

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2009
Messages
185
Location
Casper, Wyoming, USA
imported post

Again with the T-shirts..... Sigh.....

If you ever have to shoot someone in self-defense, do you want the jury to see a 5 foot x 5 foot blowup of a T-shirt you were wearing that basically says "I like to shoot people" while you're facing 20 years for murder in a righteous shoot?

This could be true of any "gun art" shirt, but especially of that second one, the one with the parody of the Serenity Prayer.

Does it occur to you that an ADA could spin that as premeditation, or at least that you were "looking for a fight"?


MWD


I-ANAL (I am not an lawyer.)
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

MichaelWDean wrote:
Again with the T-shirts..... Sigh.....

If you ever have to shoot someone in self-defense, do you want the jury to see a 5 foot x 5 foot blowup of a T-shirt you were wearing that basically says "I like to shoot people" while you're facing 20 years for murder in a righteous shoot?

This could be true of any "gun art" shirt, but especially of that second one, the one with the parody of the Serenity Prayer.

Does it occur to you that an ADA could spin that as premeditation, or at least that you were "looking for a fight"?


MWD


I-ANAL (I am not an lawyer.)

I suspect that Virginia law is quite a bit different than California law in these regards. Here justifiable homocide is an affirmative defense.

But I agree that T-shirt's spouting questionable, inflamatory, or provacative text and depictions is not advisable both from the defensive aspect AND the messaging one. We want to send out positive and mature messages to others who see us OC'ing, not ones which raise the ire of some people and may ultimately hurt our purpose.
 

MichaelWDean

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2009
Messages
185
Location
Casper, Wyoming, USA
imported post

SouthernBoy wrote:
I suspect that Virginia law is quite a bit different than California law in these regards. Here justifiable homocide is an affirmative defense.
Yup.

but I lived in both Arlington and Charlottesville, and had more hinky cop encounters than I have had living in Los Angeles for a longer period of time!

MWD
 

Kenosis

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
30
Location
Roanoke, Virginia, USA
imported post

Discretion is an amazing tool, and should be used in all scenarios.

Would that shirt be appropriate to wear to a barbeque with your close friends?
-and/or-
Would it be appropriate to wear to a children's soccer game? (with sheeple soccer moms to boot)

-Disclaimer- Not intended to speak towards freedom of expression, rather discretionary choices in differing scenarios.
 

protector84

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2007
Messages
624
Location
Arizona, U.S.
imported post

SouthernBoy wrote:
Do keep in mind that there is nothing enumerated in the Bill of Rights to guarantee freedom of expression. That is a perversion of the concept of interpretation which is an insidious extension of the earlier 20th century.

If we, and we should, follow the dictates of the Original Intent, such a right would revert to the states and the people respectively.

Wrong. The First Amendment states that the government shall not abridge the freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, to peacably assemble, etc. Expression is a form of speech. Speech is not just the words that come out of your mouth. As they say, "a picture is a thousand words." Passing laws restricting people from wearing clothing with certain words, images, etc., is an infringement on speech. As to forcing you to hide a gun if carrying in public, it is limiting your expression which is in turn limiting your speech. Carrying a firearm openly is telling criminals and other problem people to leave you alone without actually uttering the words. The government loves to try to find loop-holes in the Constitution to limit rights. For instance, "we support the right to keep and bear arms" but then they require you to have background checks, obtain permits, over-tax weapons and ammo, tell you how you can and cannot carry, where you can and cannot carry, etc. That is not freedom. Same with the First Amendment. "We support the right to freedom of speech" but then if you support or oppose certain views, you will be put on watch lists by the government, hassled by police at public demonstrations, and then they try to require licenses to have public gatherings, limit what things you can say and where you can say them, etc. If you don't think the government does this, look at public schools where children are forced to wear the same clothes as all the other kids, cannot say anything "offensive" or not "politically correct" and at the same time parents are forced to make their children attend these prisons.

You can dissect it however you want but the government continues to limit people's rights. The government needs to stay out of the private lives' of citizens. Whether I am inside my home or in a public place, as long as I am not clearly causing a disturbance to the peace, anything I do is not of the government's business whether it is packing a gun, wearing a political t-shirt, or smoking a joint. It isn't their business and it won't be their business because I won't take kindly to any government intrusion into my home should they have nothing better to do.
 
Top