• 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.

Summary of TSRA deliberations on open carry from annual meeting

Ian

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Nov 11, 2007
Messages
710
Location
Austin, TX
imported post

"with the potential to save more lives: being able to store your firearm at work"


Riiiight, cause a gun in a car in a parking lot sure can save your life! How can open carry not save lives?


For one it could save you the many thousands of dollars of going to court for using your gun in self defense by avoiding the entire situation all together!

BG: "This guy looks like a good victim"
BG: *Sees gun* :what:

BG: "I'll just rob the next person that comes along, I mean, I don't want to get SHOT!"
 

DrMark

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
1,559
Location
Hampton Roads, Virginia, USA
imported post

"...the consensus was that concealed carry is the best option, because criminals won’t know who’s armed."

I certainly respect that opinion, but opinions or discussion about best options miss the point.

The focus should be on freedom, on rights! All should have the right to carry openly, carry concealed, or not carry at all!

Give me all options, and I'll choose the best for myself!
 

markand

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
512
Location
VA
imported post

A right that is unexercised, or has been allowed to become a government granted and controlled privilege is a right that has been lost. Afraid of scaring soccer moms?? What's the matter with these guys? Sorry to be blunt, but somebody needs to grow a spine.
 

Saltydog

New member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
4
Location
, ,
imported post

Does that mean that soccer moms are scared by the police, deputies, constables, and DPS officers who frequently attend soccer events, who O.C.???
 

Article1section23

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2006
Messages
489
Location
USA
imported post

Mike,

OC is a winner in court...should be done in all the states that don't allow it. Plenty of work for you afteryour J.D. Degree.....Halbrook wrote a great article that was posted on here. I think you should raise money for a court action, not asking the legislature to change the law. Lets start with the constitution, supreme law of the land and see what all those article 6 fellows have to say about it. Of course, some of them don't really feel bound by it, do they?
 

Saltydog

New member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
4
Location
, ,
imported post

Here is my take on open carry. A criminal would not have aproblem with commiting a crime in a room with someone who is carrying concealed, because he doesn't know that person is armed. He would certainly think twice about commiting a crime in a room with some one who was obviously armed. The concept is prevention.

So, we find ourselves fighting not to gain a new right, but to restore that which was taken. Do we try to pass a new law to circumvent the first, that took our right away, or do we take legal action to overturn that unconstitutional law ????
 

Bullbuster

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2008
Messages
579
Location
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA
imported post

It would be nice to see a study done in which someone visited a variety of jails and prison's. Asked convicted felons who used a weapon to commit there crimeswhat there reaction would be to seeingsomeone OCing at a place they intended to commit the crime. Or which would deter them most an OC'r or CC'r.

A study of this kind could make a huge difference when fighting for our rights.
 

cato

Newbie
Joined
Oct 29, 2006
Messages
2,338
Location
California, USA
imported post

Sue the state AND open carry rifles (don't want to see rifles? then legalize the Right to carry a handgun openly uninfringed by permits)

even California has open carry (abridged):

Photo by Tami Veldura: San Diego 2-28-09
 

shooter_tx

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2007
Messages
43
Location
By God, Texas, ,
imported post

DrMark wrote:
"...the consensus was that concealed carry is the best option, because criminals won’t know who’s armed."

I certainly respect that opinion, but opinions or discussion about best options miss the point.

The focus should be on freedom, on rights! All should have the right to carry openly, carry concealed, or not carry at all!

Give me all options, and I'll choose the best for myself!
And if I choose wrong, well that's pretty self-regulating, isn't it?

Don't need a law for that. ;)
 

HariCarry

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2009
Messages
38
Location
, ,
imported post

cato wrote:
Sue the state AND open carry rifles (don't want to see rifles? then legalize the Right to carry a handgun openly uninfringed by permits)

even California has open carry (abridged):

Photo by Tami Veldura: San Diego 2-28-09
Now HERE'S an image that'll gain us a lot of support from the non-gun owners of America!!
 

PavePusher

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
1,096
Location
Tucson, Arizona, USA
imported post

HariCarry wrote:
cato wrote:
Sue the state AND open carry rifles (don't want to see rifles? then legalize the Right to carry a handgun openly uninfringed by permits)

even California has open carry (abridged):

Photo by Tami Veldura: San Diego 2-28-09
Now HERE'S an image that'll gain us a lot of support from the non-gun owners of America!!
Well built man in a kilt with an open carried sidearm... what the problem is?
 

KBCraig

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,886
Location
Granite State of Mind
imported post

Anyone care to comment on this?

http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_Forum/viewtopic.php?f=92&t=23344

"OpenCarry.org Lying about TSRA, Again..."

I'd comment there, but I can't. After a couple of years of being an active and productive member of that forum, I quit going there several months ago in response to the TSRA being the "gatekeeper of gun legislation". And sometime after that, I was banned for reasons unknown (I only found out last week).

I don't believe for a minute that the TSRA leadership hasn't discussed open carry. I can believe they haven't officially discussed it, as Mr. Cotton says, but he's a lawyer and picks his words carefully. But despite disclaimers about how he doesn't speak for TSRA, given his role in the organization, whenever he speaks about proposed legislation, that is the position of TSRA leadership.

His degree of venom and hostility toward Mike, John, and OCDO in general is quite amazing.
 

DKSuddeth

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
833
Location
Bedford, Texas, USA
imported post

KBCraig wrote:
Anyone care to comment on this?

http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_Forum/viewtopic.php?f=92&t=23344

"OpenCarry.org Lying about TSRA, Again..."
not really. It is what it is. TSRA seems to think that the state of TX does things a particular way. They have adapted to that 'way' and it's the only way that works. Our methods have been called 'scorched earth politics' because we have threatened the seats of supposedly pro gun legislators who do not work for us.

We all know how politics in legislation works. Nobody said anything publicly, but it didn't need to be. While TSRA has the membership numbers over OC, they get to 'rule the roost' so to speak. If we want to compete or take over, we need to raise our membership numbers.

that is all.
 

SlackwareRobert

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2008
Messages
1,338
Location
Alabama, ,
imported post

Wy carry at airports?
http://www.congoo.com/news/2009March22/killed-Sydney-Airport-biker-rampage


Bet the TSRA sweeps this evidence under the rug.
CC doesn't work if the BG knows how bad the state makes it to get one.
Kalifornia is the only place where OC would not be a deterrent, and
that is also the states fault. Although 3 or 4 OC'ing in different corners would
work.
Now if they make the rule that you can CC regardless of state law, posted signs,
and add in travel to and from airports also covered. We could look at it as a good
start.
 

DHCruiser

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 5, 2008
Messages
199
Location
Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

I spent my formative years in Texas and I consider myself a Texan at heart and always will. The TSRA can be as negative as they want towards us and anyone else not following "their way," but don't expect everyone to jump on board with their agenda when they aren't representing most people.

"Still others on OpenCarry.org are talking about filing suit against Texas to establish open-carry as a constitutional right. (This argument is apparently based upon the erroneous belief that the Heller case established a right to open carry. It did not.)"

Maybe he should read the decision again. I've read it front to back and it did indeed setup open carry as a Constitutional right. The Justice's wording specifically stated an individual had the right to keep and (carry) a firearm, but that concealed carry was not included as a protected right. How much more blatant can you be in a statement?

Page 2
"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited.
It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any
manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed
weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment
or state analogues."

I'm not happy about concealed carry not being included as a protected right, but that doesn't change that the statement was blatant.

There were many pages dedicated to breaking down the meaning of "keep and bear arms," so I'm not going to try to quote those sections.

Heller upheld that the Second Amendment protected an individual's right to keep AND bear arms. The decision specifically stated concealed carry was subject to prohibitions, which leaves openly carried as specifically protected.

Maybe the gentleman from TSRA is not a lawyer or hadn't actually read the decision fully.
 
Top