imported post
The fact he had a Concealed Handgun License had no bearingon his use ofthe gunbeing legal. Thatshould fall under - "useless trivia about this story" not a focal point of any relevence. Mentioning it like it means anything takes away from the fact one CAN defend himself legally without a permit involved in Texas.
You can strap one on open or concealed atyour place of business or at home in Texas if you have control and care of the property. His CHL was not needed in that situation for him to carry it or use it like he did.
When I see reporters make these irrelevent additional remarks it only serves to further re-inforcean "anti" mindset. By including it in this story one can be naturally led to the belief that a CHL was required, and that since he jumped thru that hoop for the Govt he MUST be OK, so therefore THAT"s what makes it OK that a gun was present at all - all Govt approved steps were followed -You can startforming a line on the left to comply please.... All the while legit uses by the public are curbed by this "anti" brainwashing prevailing.
I cringe every time I hear a reporter ask or describe about if a gun held by a private citizen was "registered". Once again normalizing the idea that they should be -
Avg sheep:"whaaat? There's no registration? Gosh I always thought there was so starting a registration can't be bad? right?"
P.S. OC is currently prohibited in the general public without some kind of commission from the State of Texas. On your own property you can carry however you want - no permits required.
