• 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.

Someone is out and about testing OC in Fort Worth!

T

truthandfacts

New member
Joined
Nov 9, 2009
Messages
2
Location
, ,
imported post

I have never posted, but have been lurking around the board for a year or so.

I have witnessed a young white male, early 30's, who drives a Red Ford Mustang, OC'ing on two occasions around Downtown Fort Worth/ Fort Worth Westside. Each time I have seen him in a store, and in an effort to not call attention to him, did not approach him. I really wanted to talk to him about OC’ing, his experience so far, and any encounter he has had. Does anyone know about this guy?
 
B

baseballguy2001

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
37
Location
DFW, Texas, USA
imported post

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.

Open carry is seriously illegal in Texas. Whoever that is, they are ASKING for trouble.
 
J

JBURGII

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2008
Messages
612
Location
A, A
imported post

The fella might of had a badge to match the weapon...

Can officers OC in Texas?



Rev Jim II
 
T

TexasBill

New member
Joined
Nov 9, 2009
Messages
5
Location
, ,
imported post

Yes, a licensed, full-time peace officer can OC as can judges and certain other government officials. They will normally have their badge visible, as well, though it's not required.

If the person OC'ing in the Ft. Worth area has done it more than once or twice, he is probably a cop. If a civilian sees a badge on the belt, they are unlikely to call the police about someone carrying a gun.
 
T

truthandfacts

New member
Joined
Nov 9, 2009
Messages
2
Location
, ,
imported post

Although officers do not have to be in uniform to open carry, my understanding is that they must be displaying their badge.
 
T

TexasBill

New member
Joined
Nov 9, 2009
Messages
5
Location
, ,
imported post

I don't recall a requirement for displaying a badge or other ID, but an issue cap or T-shirt, or the badge, certainly avoided questions.
 
R

Rush Creek

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2009
Messages
48
Location
Arlington, Texas, USA
imported post

Perhaps this W/M in his early 30's, driving a red Mustang chooses not to display his badge. If he does not have a badge maybe he isnotlicensed under the authority of Subchapter H, chapter 411 (Texas CHL) to carry a handgun. In any cases he may be traveling.Perhaps he owns the store in question, orexercises control over the premises, and is in direct route to his red Mustang when you have observed him.

You did not place a MWAG call to FWPD and you were obviously not "alarmed" at this person's presentation- so it sounds like a case forlawfully armedlaw-abiding citizen ( or LEO) helping make Texas a safer place for the rest of us.
 
T

TexasBill

New member
Joined
Nov 9, 2009
Messages
5
Location
, ,
imported post

Even if he is traveling under the new, and much more sensible, definitions laid out in HB1815, the handgun would have to remain concealed on his person or in the vehicle. For some reason, Texas is very squeamish about OC for citizens except in their homes or places of business. I think that's also one of the factors behind the state's very strict view of what constitutes "concealed."

Nonetheless, so long as his reasons are peaceable, I personally wish the gentleman well.
 
D

DKSuddeth

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

TexasBill wrote:
Even if he is traveling under the new, and much more sensible, definitions laid out in HB1855, the handgun would have to remain concealed on his person or in the vehicle. For some reason, Texas is very squeamish about OC for citizens except in their homes or places of business. I think that's also one of the factors behind the state's very strict view of what constitutes "concealed."

Nonetheless, so long as his reasons are peaceable, I personally wish the gentleman well.
Click to expand...
The only requirement for 'not in plain sight' is when the carrier is inside the vehicle. The other exemptions for carrying a handgun apply to people on their own property or premises that they control and directly enroute to their vehicle. This means that my wifes car could break down halfway between my house and the 7-11 and I could open carry to her car.
 
T

TexasBill

New member
Joined
Nov 9, 2009
Messages
5
Location
, ,
imported post

That would seem to be an awfully liberal view of HB 1815 (which I mistakenly referred to as HB 1855), but you may be correct. I am still not sure I would want to test it out on the Harris County Sheriff's Department even though Chuck Rosenthal is finally gone.:cool:
 
D

DocNTexas

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
300
Location
, Texas, USA
imported post

DKSuddeth wrote:
The only requirement for 'not in plain sight' is when the carrier is inside the vehicle. The other exemptions for carrying a handgun apply to people on their own property or premises that they control and directly enroute to their vehicle. This means that my wifes car could break down halfway between my house and the 7-11 and I could open carry to her car.
Click to expand...


DK,

I have to disagree with your interpretation of the statute. I feel you are stretching the literal wording too far. While I agree that the actual wording of PC46.02 suggests this interpretation I do not feel this was the intent of the legislators when drafting the statute andthere is no case history to support this view.I feel the courts would find that the intent of the statute was to include a reasonabledistance for accessing ones vehicle, such as a parking area for the residence, business or building one was leaving, and was not intended to cover one for an extended or indefinite distance. Applyingthe literalwording and interpretation of the statute as you suggest one could effectively open carryacross the entire state if they had access to a vehicle on the other side.

I feel the courts would limit the exemption afforded under the statute to the reasonable parking area ofones immediate confines and would not support ones right to carry beyond that area under this statute. I am certain that any LEO would see it this way andone would most definitely find them self defendingthis position if you were to try it. While it may be the literal wording of the statute, the courts base their actions and opinions primarilyon theintent of the statute and I feel this is how they would interpret it.

Doc
 
D

DKSuddeth

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

DocNTexas wrote:
DKSuddeth wrote:
The only requirement for 'not in plain sight' is when the carrier is inside the vehicle. The other exemptions for carrying a handgun apply to people on their own property or premises that they control and directly enroute to their vehicle. This means that my wifes car could break down halfway between my house and the 7-11 and I could open carry to her car.
Click to expand...


DK,

I have to disagree with your interpretation of the statute. I feel you are stretching the literal wording too far. While I agree that the actual wording of PC46.02 suggests this interpretation I do not feel this was the intent of the legislators when drafting the statute andthere is no case history to support this view.I feel the courts would find that the intent of the statute was to include a reasonabledistance for accessing ones vehicle, such as a parking area for the residence, business or building one was leaving, and was not intended to cover one for an extended or indefinite distance. Applyingthe literalwording and interpretation of the statute as you suggest one could effectively open carryacross the entire state if they had access to a vehicle on the other side.

I feel the courts would limit the exemption afforded under the statute to the reasonable parking area ofones immediate confines and would not support ones right to carry beyond that area under this statute. I am certain that any LEO would see it this way andone would most definitely find them self defendingthis position if you were to try it. While it may be the literal wording of the statute, the courts base their actions and opinions primarilyon theintent of the statute and I feel this is how they would interpret it.

Doc
Click to expand...
Doc, as to the courts ignoring literal wording of the text, i'd agree with you. In reading decades of case law, both state and federal, I pretty much have zero faith in the judiciary of either entity in applying the law as it is written, especially when it concerns individual rights. That's why there is case precedent in texas that the pre-1899 antique law doesn't work for open carry, since the texas courts decided that for carrying purposes, the pre 1899 is a firearm and not an antique.

It also wouldn't surprise me to see a conviction for carrying a rifle be upheld because the courts would apply some jacked up definition to include it.
 
R

Robin47

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
545
Location
Susanville, California, USA
imported post

The Texas court, can't do that about the 1899 Antique fire arms law.

Thats over stepping their authority, by over riding the Legislators Intent.

Thats making new laws on their own. Thats in violation of common law.

and is stated in UCC 1-103.6 " A staute should be construed in HARMONY with the Common Law, unless there is a claer legislative intent to abrogate the Common Law". This is the laws they go byall codes and statues' UCC is (Uniform Commercial Code) This is how they get around the Constitution and our Bill of Rights !

That needs to be challanged. Write your legislators or atterney general and ask for a clarification on the 1899 antique law.

Also read " Without Prejudice" UCC 1-207 You can google it.

Hope this helps ! Robin47
 
A

aadvark

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
1,597
Location
, ,
imported post

If anyone wants to match Him, just carry a Long Gun in Texas around the Fort Worth Area!


Long Guns are not prohibited under Texas Penal Code Sec. 46-02, so as long as you do not take it [the Long Gun] to any place listed as prohibited under Texas Penal Code 46.03!

Yes... the Long Gun may be both Openly carried and Loaded.
 
C

cloudcroft

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
1,908
Location
El Paso, TX (formerly Colorado Springs, CO)
imported post

That's mainly why I brought back my Mossberg 590A1 MilSpec from my just completed trip back West (to visit friends and family for the holidays...and get said 590A1 out of my storage safe).

After a serious hurricane here and in a war-zone environment, it'll be safer toOC the shotgun over my shoulder than it would be my OCinga handgun -- like I did last time in the aftermath ofHurricane Ikebecause Idid not have a suitable longarm -- sinceI would not have to be overly concerned about local cops who might notice (I only OCed at night out on the gounds, "patrolling" for looters, partly to avoid cops seeing me doing that). Although the cops said they'd not bother me OCing a handgun -- due to thedisaster situation and IF I stayed on the complex grounds -- I'd rather carry a long arm as it is clearly legal.

Besides, the shotgun will do more damage to looters and their vehicles than my handgun would.

Still looking forward to the legal OCing of handguns in Texas though...

-- John D.
 
S

SA-TX

Centurion
Joined
Feb 12, 2008
Messages
275
Location
Ellis County, Texas, USA
imported post

DKSuddeth wrote:
Doc, as to the courts ignoring literal wording of the text, i'd agree with you. In reading decades of case law, both state and federal, I pretty much have zero faith in the judiciary of either entity in applying the law as it is written, especially when it concerns individual rights. That's why there is case precedent in texas that the pre-1899 antique law doesn't work for open carry, since the texas courts decided that for carrying purposes, the pre 1899 is a firearm and not an antique.

It also wouldn't surprise me to see a conviction for carrying a rifle be upheld because the courts would apply some jacked up definition to include it.
Click to expand...

DK, can you post here or provide to me in PM the cases where someone was convicted of UCW or something else because the court concluded that a pre-1899 firearm wasn't an antique? I've been looking for such precedent but haven't been able to find it.

Thanks, SA-TX
 
S

SA-TX

Centurion
Joined
Feb 12, 2008
Messages
275
Location
Ellis County, Texas, USA
imported post

aadvark wrote:
If anyone wants to match Him, just carry a Long Gun in Texas around the Fort Worth Area!


Long Guns are not prohibited under Texas Penal Code Sec. 46-02, so as long as you do not take it [the Long Gun] to any place listed as prohibited under Texas Penal Code 46.03!

Yes... the Long Gun may be both Openly carried and Loaded.
Click to expand...
True (about open carry of long guns), and I'm not an attorney, butmy view is that46.03 is unconstitutional. The legislature is only given the power to regulate the "wearing" of arms. I don't have any references that I can post right now, but I would have to think that it was legally decided long ago that long arms aren't "worn". That seems to imply that the legislature has no authority on this subject.
 
I

IDAHO COWBOY

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
298
Location
, ,
imported post

Texas needs to pass a law stating open carry is legal for handguns then state this also applies to rifles and shotguns, etc for informational purposes.

Yes, Texas - Oklahoma - Arkansas and the other states - Alabama, Florida, and NC or SC - all need to the same.

I know you have tried, now try again - there is a new wave rolling across the country, your opposing forces of course will be your own TX CHL Instructors (since you are threatening their income and job security) along with "some" Peace Officers, govt lawyers, and judges (usually former judges) - again you are a threat to their elitism and people control perceived powers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top