Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 35

Thread: Are Texas gun laws constitutional?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    9

    Post imported post

    Texas amended it's own constitution in 1876 to limit the legislature from restricting our rights on a whim. They can't regulate keep or bear only the wearing of arms and only with a view to prevent crime. The amendment was intended to repeal the gun ban of 1871 that's still on the books. I believe a case can be made that the ban on open carry is unconstitutional under the Texas constitution.

    Now we have the Heller case and the Nordyke case. The fifth circuit court of appeals will most likely incorporate the 2nd amendment. In the same case, the open carry law and or CHL laws could be challenged under the US constitution for the first time. How long will we continue to play the politics of appeasement in the legislature?

  2. #2
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Ellis County, Texas, USA
    Posts
    275

    Post imported post

    BBB wrote:
    Texas amended it's own constitution in 1876 to limit the legislature from restricting our rights on a whim. They can't regulate keep or bear only the wearing of arms and only with a view to prevent crime. The amendment was intended to repeal the gun ban of 1871 that's still on the books. I believe a case can be made that the ban on open carry is unconstitutional under the Texas constitution.

    Now we have the Heller case and the Nordyke case. The fifth circuit court of appeals will most likely incorporate the 2nd amendment. In the same case, the open carry law and or CHL laws could be challenged under the US constitution for the first time. How long will we continue to play the politics of appeasement in the legislature?
    We are getting our way -- concealed carry is getting better each session -- and my guess is that working with the Lege will be quicker than anything that is going to come from the 5th Circuit. Suits take a looooong time and tend to be fact specific. Nordyke and Heller both demonstrate this.

    I agree that with the 5th Circuit's conservative bent it will probably incorporate the 2nd, but even when it does, the holding in Heller is so narrow that I doubt any Texas statutes would be declared unconstitutional.

    I do agree that there are some statutes that are unconstitutional under the Texas Constitution such as the Prohibited Weapons section. Given the "wearing of arms" language, what makes them think they can ban NFA weapons (yes, there is a "defense to prosecution" that it is registered, but you can still be arrested)? Similarly, there is the Prohibited Placessection where not just handguns (which are worn), but long arms are banned, too. Under what authority was that passed? There is also a section dealing with a particular lake or river (don't have the cite handy but could dig it up if need be) that makes the possession of a gun prima facia evidance of poaching. WTF?!

    As for open carry, I don't think we'll have a real federal case unless and until the federal courts expand on the base that Heller has laid. Heller was primarily a "keep arms" case, not a "bear arms" one. If the state of federal law ever gets to the point where the 2A is read to provide a certain, minimum right to bear arms in public without state approval, then Texas's CHL-only approach may be in danger. Not until.

    We still have a pretty conservative, pro-2A legislature. Heller and Nordyke can be most useful in pursuading members to vote for open carry and relaxed concealed carry.

    SA-TX

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    37

    Post imported post

    Article I, Section 23 of the Texas State Constitution:

    "Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defense of himself or the State; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime."

    So then Texans may wear arms. The "wearing" part may be regulated. The point of such regulation is "to prevent crime." So far this all makes sense.

    Now to the actual Legislature. Concealed Carry is banned to the general public, except under the regulation of a license(CHL), which is not too harsh. Open Carry is also banned to the general public, except under regulation of a license(LEO, Dog Catcher, District Attorney, Judge, etc.).

    I would find the law quite in line with the State Constitution, if the law simply said that felons and the like may not possess firearms in public except in the case of a court order.

    This is not the case, however. Texas law clearly bans Open Carry to all but the privileged in government or law enforcement positions. I am still mad at my legislators for letting this bull-manure stand between me and my own safety. Someone needs to shovel this crap into the nearest dumpster.

    My biggest pet peeve is when a law contradicts its own constitution, and it is even worse when the only reason to do so is because some 12-year-old-minded politician thinks it would be best.

    This just makes me want to run for State Congress.

    Oh, and the constitution does not provide for the Legislature to regulate WHERE you can carry your arm.


    So in short, I declare sections 46.02 and 46.03 of Title 10 of the Penal Code to be unconstitutional, in their entirety.

    cheers

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    9

    Post imported post

    SA-TX wrote
    We are getting our way -- concealed carry is getting better each session -- and my guess is that working with the Lege will be quicker than anything that is going to comefrom the 5th Circuit. Suits take a looooong time and tend to be fact specific. Nordyke and Heller both demonstrate this.
    I don't agree. We are subject to the whim of the state legislatures, state courts, and popular opinion. Just look at the right to keep and bear arms in the Texas constitutions in 1832, 1845, then 1868 and 1876. Compare that with all the amendments to the 2nd amendment. There's no national standard against the 2nd amendment that's required under the 14th amendment. We're in completely new territory now. I would think that starting now on these Texas laws is better than later.
    I agree that with the 5th Circuit's conservative bent it will probably incorporate the 2nd, but even when it does, the holding in Heller is so narrow that I doubt any Texas statutes would be declared unconstitutional.
    Heller left the standard for scrutiny against the 2nd amendment as a fundamental individual right for self defense completely wide open. They hinted at what would stand, and ruled that the DC ordinances wouldn't stand under any standard. The standard for individual self defense under the 2nd amendment is otherwise undefined.

    I do agree that there are some statutes that are unconstitutional under the Texas Constitution such as the Prohibited Weapons section. Given the "wearing of arms" language, what makes them think they can ban NFA weapons (yes, there is a "defense to prosecution" that it is registered, but you can still be arrested)? Similarly, there is the Prohibited Places section where not just handguns (which are worn), but long arms are banned, too. Under what authority was that passed? There is also a section dealing with a particular lake or river (don't have the cite handy but could dig it up if need be) that makes the possession of a gun prima facia evidance of poaching. WTF?!
    See what I mean? We're not getting our way.

    As for open carry, I don't think we'll have a real federal case unless and until the federal courts expand on the base that Heller has laid. Heller was primarily a "keep arms" case, not a "bear arms" one. If the state of federal law ever gets to the point where the 2A is read to provide a certain, minimum right to bear arms in public without state approval, then Texas's CHL-only approach may be in danger. Not until.
    And when will that ever happen if we don't file cases to challenge these specific laws and also policies in federal court? Heller was primarily a 2nd amendment case. It covered way more ground than just the specific DC ordinance. Just read the Nordyke decision, see how many times it was cited, and ask yourself how many times any of the cites had anything to do with the specifics of the DC case. It defined the 2nd amendment as a fundamental and individual right to self defense. That is ground breaking. Why shouldn't Texas lead the way?

    We still have a pretty conservative, pro-2A legislature. Heller and Nordyke can be most useful in pursuading members to vote for open carry and relaxed concealed carry.
    That's true, and the more significant cases that are filed, the more money the state has to spend defending them, and the more they lose, will only increase that persuasiveness.

    Federal cases are filed all the time on other Bill of Rights issues. Why should we tolerate these issues in Texas without filing the Federal cases. Why are we avoiding the Federal courts on only gun rights issues? How long do you think it would take for a federal case to be filed if the legislature passed the same kind of onerous requirements limiting free speech? What if they passed a law that required training, registration, and background checks before you could become a preacher, banning all others from preaching? How long do you think it would take before someone was down at the courthouse with a lawsuit?



  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    9

    Post imported post

    orthzar wrote:
    Texas law clearly bans Open Carry to all but the privileged in government or law enforcement positions. I am still mad at my legislators for letting this bull-manure stand between me and my own safety. Someone needs to shovel this crap into the nearest dumpster.

    My biggest pet peeve is when a law contradicts its own constitution, and it is even worse when the only reason to do so is because some 12-year-old-minded politician thinks it would be best.
    The legislature and voters who instituted the 1876 constitutional amendment intended that the amendment would repeal the gun ban of 1871. The constitutional amendment in 1868 that gave the legislature the power to restrict keep and bear at their whim was a disaster to all liberties through 1873 and ended only with with the armed removal of a despot reconstructionist governor from the state capital. They knew all to well what a disaster the 1868 amendment was along with the 1871 gun ban, and they intended to repeal both. Instead, the 1871 gun ban is still on the books and even though they specifically deleted the power to restrict keep and bear in the 1876 amendment, regulation of wearing with a view to prevent crime, has now become virtually synonymous to the wording they specifically deleted in 1876.

    A state case challenging these laws against the state constitution would be just Texas peachy in my book.

  6. #6
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Ellis County, Texas, USA
    Posts
    275

    Post imported post

    orthzar wrote:
    Article I, Section 23 of the Texas State Constitution:

    "Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defense of himself or the State; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime."

    So then Texans may wear arms. The "wearing" part may be regulated. The point of such regulation is "to prevent crime." So far this all makes sense.

    Now to the actual Legislature. Concealed Carry is banned to the general public, except under the regulation of a license(CHL), which is not too harsh. Open Carry is also banned to the general public, except under regulation of a license(LEO, Dog Catcher, District Attorney, Judge, etc.).
    Not true. LEOs have no license. Neither do judges, DAs, etc. They are simply exempt from the UCW statute. So are you, under certain circumstances. Are you on your ownpremises orone under your control? Are you traveling? Are you going to or from a place of shooting activity? If so, you too can carry any way you want.

    Don't misunderstand -- I want open carry too. I'm simply saying that the Texas courts, including the Supreme Court, have ruled that the 2nd Amendment doesn't void Texas gun laws. Even with Heller and Nordyke I doubt you will see a change in that opinion. Lawsuits are costly, long, and there is no assurance of victory at the end of the day.

    Unless you run for a seat in the Legislature and win, the most productive thing we can do, in my opinion, is work with TSRA and the Legislature to get more and more freedom. This is happening. Progress is slow, but we are much better off now than we were 10 years ago. Yes, some states are better, but Texas is now pretty good. Our CHL is honored by many states and we can carry in restaurants no matter if they serve alcohol or not. Heck, we can even have a beer or glass of wine with dinner and carry (just don't be intoxicated). Many states that have OC do not allow either (like Virginia and New Mexico).

    One final thought, if you REALLY want to open carry a handgun in Texas, get a pre-1899 revolver. The state of the law is unsettled, but it is thought that pre-1899 weapons are excluded from the definition of firearm (see below). That is true under federal law (no paperwork, can buy via mail, etc.) and Texas law is similar. Even if this is true, the officer that stops you won't know this. You will almost certainly be arrested and have the revolver seized. If you want a lawsuit that you can win, this is probably the one.

    (3)"Firearm" means any device designed, made, or adapted to expel a projectile through a barrel by using the energy generated by an explosion or burning substance or any device readily convertible to that use. Firearm does not include a firearm that may have, as an integral part, a folding knife blade or other characteristics of weapons made illegal by this chapter and that is:

    (A)an antique or curio firearm manufactured before 1899; or

    (B)a replica of an antique or curio firearm manufactured before 1899, but only if the replica does not use rim fire or center fire ammunition.

    SA-TX

  7. #7
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Ellis County, Texas, USA
    Posts
    275

    Post imported post

    BBB wrote:
    SA-TX wrote
    We are getting our way -- concealed carry is getting better each session -- and my guess is that working with the Lege will be quicker than anything that is going to comefrom the 5th Circuit. Suits take a looooong time and tend to be fact specific. Nordyke and Heller both demonstrate this.
    I don't agree. We are subject to the whim of the state legislatures, state courts, and popular opinion. Just look at the right to keep and bear arms in the Texas constitutions in 1832, 1845, then 1868 and 1876. Compare that with all the amendments to the 2nd amendment. There's no national standard against the 2nd amendment that's required under the 14th amendment. We're in completely new territory now. I would think that starting now on these Texas laws is better than later.
    I agree that with the 5th Circuit's conservative bent it will probably incorporate the 2nd, but even when it does, the holding in Heller is so narrow that I doubt any Texas statutes would be declared unconstitutional.
    Heller left the standard for scrutiny against the 2nd amendment as a fundamental individual right for self defense completely wide open. They hinted at what would stand, and ruled that the DC ordinances wouldn't stand under any standard. The standard for individual self defense under the 2nd amendment is otherwise undefined.

    I do agree that there are some statutes that are unconstitutional under the Texas Constitution such as the Prohibited Weapons section. Given the "wearing of arms" language, what makes them think they can ban NFA weapons (yes, there is a "defense to prosecution" that it is registered, but you can still be arrested)? Similarly, there is the Prohibited Places section where not just handguns (which are worn), but long arms are banned, too. Under what authority was that passed? There is also a section dealing with a particular lake or river (don't have the cite handy but could dig it up if need be) that makes the possession of a gun prima facia evidance of poaching. WTF?!
    See what I mean? We're not getting our way.

    As for open carry, I don't think we'll have a real federal case unless and until the federal courts expand on the base that Heller has laid. Heller was primarily a "keep arms" case, not a "bear arms" one. If the state of federal law ever gets to the point where the 2A is read to provide a certain, minimum right to bear arms in public without state approval, then Texas's CHL-only approach may be in danger. Not until.
    And when will that ever happen if we don't file cases to challenge these specific laws and also policies in federal court? Heller was primarily a 2nd amendment case. It covered way more ground than just the specific DC ordinance. Just read the Nordyke decision, see how many times it was cited, and ask yourself how many times any of the cites had anything to do with the specifics of the DC case. It defined the 2nd amendment as a fundamental and individual right to self defense. That is ground breaking. Why shouldn't Texas lead the way?

    We still have a pretty conservative, pro-2A legislature. Heller and Nordyke can be most useful in pursuading members to vote for open carry and relaxed concealed carry.
    That's true, and the more significant cases that are filed, the more money the state has to spend defending them, and the more they lose, will only increase that persuasiveness.

    Federal cases are filed all the time on other Bill of Rights issues. Why should we tolerate these issues in Texas without filing the Federal cases. Why are we avoiding the Federal courts on only gun rights issues? How long do you think it would take for a federal case to be filed if the legislature passed the same kind of onerous requirements limiting free speech? What if they passed a law that required training, registration, and background checks before you could become a preacher, banning all others from preaching? How long do you think it would take before someone was down at the courthouse with a lawsuit?

    Nice theory. File a case. The reason why more federal cases haven't been filed is because they LOSE. Emerson got the 5th Circuit to declare that the 2A is an individual right long before the Supreme Court said so in Heller but did that get the federal law against domestic violence restraining orders voided? Nope. Just like in Nordyke, the right was established and then the government act was found to be within the exceptions to the right.

    I've long said that the 2A should be treated just like the 1A. Unfortunately, the courts don't agree. Don't expect that to change any time soon. Saying it should be so doesn't make it so.

    In the long run, such cases have advanced our cause. In the short run, you'll likely spend huge amounts of time and money and get nearly zero in return. If you have deep pockets and are a patriot fighting the long-run fight, go for it. Just understand that both federal and state judges aren't generally disposed to voiding laws based on the 2A. On the contrary, they do nearly everything that they can to keep them on the books.

    SA-TX

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    37

    Post imported post

    SA-TX wrote:
    orthzar wrote:
    Article I, Section 23 of the Texas State Constitution:

    "Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defense of himself or the State; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime."

    So then Texans may wear arms. The "wearing" part may be regulated. The point of such regulation is "to prevent crime." So far this all makes sense.

    Now to the actual Legislature. Concealed Carry is banned to the general public, except under the regulation of a license(CHL), which is not too harsh. Open Carry is also banned to the general public, except under regulation of a license(LEO, Dog Catcher, District Attorney, Judge, etc.).
    Not true. LEOs have no license. Neither do judges, DAs, etc. They are simply exempt from the UCW statute. So are you, under certain circumstances. Are you on your ownpremises orone under your control? Are you traveling? Are you going to or from a place of shooting activity? If so, you too can carry any way you want.
    You are correct, though I was using the word "license" to rhetorically refer to the fact that only those expressly allowed by the government may OC, which, in my book, is license.

    One final thought, if you REALLY want to open carry a handgun in Texas, get a pre-1899 revolver. The state of the law is unsettled, but it is thought that pre-1899 weapons are excluded from the definition of firearm (see below). That is true under federal law (no paperwork, can buy via mail, etc.) and Texas law is similar. Even if this is true, the officer that stops you won't know this. You will almost certainly be arrested and have the revolver seized.
    I bought a cap-and-ball revolver in February, and I even made a holster for it. I will gladly walk to the nearest shooting range with my shooting kit in hand and my revolver on my hip. How does July 4th sound?

    If you want a lawsuit that you can win, this is probably the one.
    I appreciate your confidence. I will have to ask a pro-2A lawyer and get him to write an affidavit, and then get local Fox news to cover my walk.

    I have not made my final decision.

  9. #9
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Ellis County, Texas, USA
    Posts
    275

    Post imported post

    orthzar wrote:
    I appreciate your confidence. I will have to ask a pro-2A lawyer and get him to write an affidavit, and then get local Fox news to cover my walk.

    I have not made my final decision.
    Let me know what your attorney says. Perhpas he will come along. By having your shooting equipment in hand and heading to the range, you've covered yourself every way possible. Maybe we can get a group together. The news is more likely to cover several people making a political statement than just one. I have a Smith & Wesson safety hammerless in .38 from 1891 that is just dying to be open carried.

  10. #10
    Lone Star Veteran Gator5713's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Aggieland, Texas, USA
    Posts
    593

    Post imported post

    If you are en-route to a shooting activity you are covered, even with a brand spankin new gun...

    ETA:
    thus why I suggested some time back that a group of us get together sometime wearing OCDO shirts/caps/whatever and park down the street from a gun show or some similar 'gun related' event and hike it in....

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pittsburg, Texas, USA
    Posts
    22

    Post imported post

    Texas law is plainly and unconditionally unconstitutional and should be challenged. I recently moved back home to Texas from 20 years in the DC area as a contractor to the feds. Virginia is an Open Carry (OC) state. I held a VA CCL but often OCed. I know it is a bit confusing for some Texans, they somehow think this is backwards. However many in VA wanted the CCL passed because in winter in the northern VA (it snows there) it is impossible to OC in a heavy coat. With a CCL put on a coat your legal… take it off, your still legal. The attitude in VA about OC is like this… VA is one of the original thirteen colonies and the home of many of the framers of the Bill of Rights. As you know recently the SCOTUS reaffirmed the Second Amendment as an individual right. As understood by most Virginians (and by me), the original intent of the Bill of Rights was to affirm rights granted by God and “shall not be infringed” by government… free speech, the right to assemble, redress of grievances, freedom of religion, and the right to bear arms among the 1st and 2nd. Wearing a gun on your hip is a normal way to "bear" a pistol. Virginians were often jaw dropping shocked to find OC was illegal in Texas. They would ask, "How is that possible to outlaw a constitutional right?" I could only shrug. It was kind of embarrassing. In as much upon my return to Texas I had to give up my constitutional right to OC. I could no longer openly carry my pistol on my hip. As my beloved state of Texas is one of only six of the 50 that outlaws open carry. In Virginia as far as Open Carry, no license is required for a God given and constitutionally protected right.



    The "normal" way to "bear arms" is to sling your rifle over your shoulder and stick you pistol in your belt or in a holster at your side and head out on your way. Incidentally the 46 states that have OC and CC, most often the CC laws were hard to pass... why? Historically criminals conceal their guns. In VA the resistance was centered on criminals lawfully carrying guns or criminal activity arising from CC. I was there during the debate and remember it well. The idea of OC being a bad idea after being legal for over 200 years never really came up. I will admit that occasionally you will run into a willfully ignorant LEO or even group of them as happened in Manassas, VA several years ago. However, the VA Constitution states:



    From the VA state constitution:
    Sec. 13. That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.Sound a little familiar? Pretty much the same fellows wrote the U.S. one too. One of the original drafts of the U.S. 2nd amendment was almost verbatim. In an attempt to be terse, most of the wording was dropped and the misunderstandings began… however, most of the misunderstandings and misinterpretations are by design rather than actual. See arguments for and against Heller case. Liberals had to ignore a lot of written history to come to their conclusions about the 2nd amendment. As to our peculiar predicament, Texas either must be challenged in court or the legislature just has to fix it one way or another. The laws on the Texas books are unconstitutional. The members of the Texas legislature must be lead to understand they do not have the power they have given themselves in the Texas Constitution to take away our U.S. Constitutional rights.[code]ELKnox

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877

    Post imported post

    I know we're talking about Texas here, but I don't see how ANY state -- such as Hawaii for example -- can get away with havingno legal OC and only "May Issue" CC (meaning it's just about impossible to get)...which sounds to me as being unconstitutional also (ANDHawaii hasgun REGISTRATIONon top of that).

    Yet states like HI continue to get away with it without challenge.

    DO anti-gun people outnumber the pro-gun people there or are the pro-gun people just apathetic?

    :?

    -- John D.


    (formerly of Colorado Springs, CO)

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Arlington, Texas, USA
    Posts
    234

    Post imported post

    Any Texas legislative action REGULATING the GUARANTEED RIGHT TO KEEP & BEAR ARMS ("with a view to preventing crime") - CANNOT logically DEFEAT the RIGHT SIMULTANEOUSLY GUARANTEED in the primary clause of the same sentence.

    The only LEGITIMATE application of the Legislature's power to REGULATE this RIGHT is to PROHIBIT persons determined by DUE PROCESS as being PREDISPOSED toDANGEROUS CRIMINAL conduct from WEARING arms in public.Specific guidelines for any such DETERMINATION would be a legislative matter WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE TX CONSTITUTION.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Splendora, Texas, USA
    Posts
    29

    Post imported post

    Gator5713 wrote:
    If you are en-route to a shooting activity you are covered, even with a brand spankin new gun...

    ETA:
    thus why I suggested some time back that a group of us get together sometime wearing OCDO shirts/caps/whatever and park down the street from a gun show or some similar 'gun related' event and hike it in....
    I'm game. Just say when and where.


  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Arlington, Texas, USA
    Posts
    234

    Post imported post

    So exactly WHAT is holding back the constitutional challenges ?

    A challenge at the State constitution level seems to be the first step - since Texas action constructively disabling the right to carry a handgun openly for defensive purpose is a result of State law - not federal law interestingly.

    Has anyone down there contacted the Governor's office regarding an official request to the Texas Attorney General for a formal opinion on this CONSTITUTIONALissue ?

    The AG could effectively frame this open carry issue as a matter for urgent legislative attention , by issuing a formal opinion to the effect that the existing general restriction of the right to keep & bear arms is an embarrassment to the State of Texas,and an issue that needs to be addressed by the Legislature.

    Any legislator that honestly believes an epidemic of "brandishing" would result from repealing the ridiculous law - needs to visit at least ONE of the 44 states that do not deny this constitutionally protected civil right.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Arlington, Texas, USA
    Posts
    234

    Post imported post

    DOUBLE POST .....Call in the "Geek Squad", the "BUG" is killing this site.


  17. #17
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bedford, Texas, USA
    Posts
    834

    Post imported post

    SANDCREEK wrote:
    So exactly WHAT is holding back the constitutional challenges ?

    A challenge at the State constitution level seems to be the first step - since Texas action constructively disabling the right to carry a handgun openly for defensive purpose is a result of State law - not federal law interestingly.
    maybe we're looking at this wrong.

    tennessee and texas have nearly identical state articles concerning the right to arms.

    tenn.
    Article I, Section 26

    That the citizens of this State have a right to keep and to bear arms for their common defense; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime.

    Article I, Section 23

    Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defense of himself or the State; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime.

    In Nunn v. State, the Georgia SC struck down the prohibition of carrying pistols openly (even though it upheld a prohibition on carrying concealed).
    In Andrews v. State, the Tennessee SC likewise held that a statute that forbade openly carrying a pistol "publicly or privately, without regard to time or place, or circumstances, violated the state constitutional provision (which the court equated with the 2nd Amendment). That was so even though the statute did not restrict the carrying of long guns.


    does this not sound familiar?

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    902

    Post imported post

    No

  19. #19
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Ellis County, Texas, USA
    Posts
    275

    Post imported post

    DK,

    I love the ruling from Tennessee and the Texas constitutional provision is almost certainly drawn from the TN one, but help me understand this: even with that ruling, you still have to have a CHP to carry, openly or concealed, in TN. TN criminalizes carrying a handgun unless you qualify for an exemption just like TX does. How is that statute constitutional under that ruling? The only real difference seems to be that TN has not chosen to discriminate between open and concealed carry and TX has.

    Court rulings are nice but don't count on them to overturn laws here or in TN. The ruling in TN was issued in 1871 and yet without permission from the state, you can't carry in public there. What does that tell you? Incidentally, TN just passed a restaurant carry bill (you can't drink while carrying) and had to override the veto of their governor. My point is that, aside from open vs. concealed, I'm not sure TN's laws are much better than TX's.

    Even if TN WERE a gold star open carry state, how the Texas constitution is interpreted is what really matters.I'll betthat there is a CCA or TX Supreme Court ruling on that section of the penal code and it was upheld. Heller and Nordyke might pave the way for a change in the future, that's probably a long way away.

    In my opinion, we should continue to improve CHL and work for open carry each legislative session.

    SA-TX

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    Black's Law Dictionary? although many of the cases in it do not directly deal with the 2a, there are a host of others dealing with many other rights. if these other rights are upheld, it would go to reason that those that are fundamental like the 2a should all fit the same molds in that they are fundamental. in hellar and others, the idea of not going into government buildings is extremely prejudicial. when the government is corrupt, how else do we get to them? we wouldn't like to be arrested at home, so arrest them at work, especially some of these judges. some are far more crooked than the cops or politicians

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    3

    Post imported post

    I have spoken directly with Rick Perry in regards to recent attempts at a Texas sovereignty law being passed. There will be another attempt to get it passed next year.

    Gov. Perry told me when I asked about the Gun Control Act of 1968 in regards to hcr 50 passing, he told me directly and to quote:

    "Any Law restricting Texans 2nd Amendment rights will not fly in this State, and I will fight to ensure that every right is returned."

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    now if perry will stick to his 'guns'.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510

    Post imported post

    Orange wrote:
    I have spoken directly with Rick Perry in regards to recent attempts at a Texas sovereignty law being passed. There will be another attempt to get it passed next year.
    Nextsession, you mean. The Legislature doesn't meet again until 2011.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    all perry has to do is denounce these laws publicly, and pardon all those convicted on such charges.as far as when the legislature reconvenes, will perry still be governor?

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Arlington, Texas, USA
    Posts
    234

    Post imported post

    Next time you talk with Governor Perry - please ask him if he has requested a formalopinion from the Attorney General on how Texas law enforcement should interpret Title 10, 46.02 and 46.035 [unlicensed handgun carry restrictions, and "fails to conceal" provision under authority of the CHL] - in accordance with the Texas Constitution's right to keep & bear arms guarantee.

    Taking this step would impress me alot more than rhetoric.

    I wrote the good Governor in May incouraging him to take this step. No reply from his "good offices" to date.


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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