Texas Open Carry HB 2756

rushcreek2 · May 24, 2011

The Texas legislative process has had 135 years since 1876 to rectify this situation.

Texas doesn't need ONE "deep pocketed" citizen to ramrod this issue. Texas needs about 20,000 "every citizens" to say they've had enough of having their constitution being discounted, and subordinated through the misapplication of statutory laws, and their rights ignored, disrespected and suppressed by the State government.

Education is the key . If Texans keep asking their lame legislature to "restore" rights that have been unlawfully suppressed despite the fact that they are affirmed under the Texas Constitution - what message is that sending the State government ?

Freeflight · May 25, 2011

rushcreek2 said:
Article 1, Section 23 [Texas Declaration of RESERVED rights] makes NO DISTINCTION between RIFLES, SHOTGUNS, HANDGUNS, BOWIE KNIVES, or CLUBS. The Texas Constitution makes only TWO DISTINCTIONS regarding the right to BEAR ARMS.

1) Every citizen shall have the right to keep and BEAR ARMS in LAWFUL defense, BUT-

2) the Legislatute shall have power, by law, to regulate THE WEARING OF ARMS , with a view TO PREVENT CRIME. This pertains to the CONCEALMENT of ARMS ONLY.

That is what Texas CONSTITUTIONAL LAW says regarding the right to keep & bear arms.

Article 1, Section 23 -(the operative , or perhaps more acurately stated - the DECLARATORY clause)- the RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS
(1) Applies to rifles, shotguns, handguns, Bowie Knives, switchblades, ice picks, butcher knives, and clubs - but is not limited to those arms

Article 1, Section 23 ( provisional clause)- THE WEARING OF ARMS
(2) Applies ONLY TO THE CONCEALMENT OF ARMS FOR CRIMINAL PURPOSE & INTENT.

Now you can counter with what Section 46.02(a) says, and what Section 46.035(a) says, and what some D.A. says, or some judge said - BUT that cites statutes, and case law. ALL statutes are presumed to be CONSTITUTIONAL, and the courts have the obligation to defer to the Constitution in all cases. Therefore Section 46.02 (a) DOES NOT APPLY TO THE BEARING OF ARMS IN LAWFUL DEFENSE. Section 46.035(a) [failure by CHL holder to conceal handgun] DOES NOT APPLY TO THE BEARING OF ARMS IN LAWFUL DEFENSE.

Those provisions of Texas law address CRIMINAL PURPOSE & INTENT.

Before the sputtering, and stammering begins - ponder for just a moment this question - WHICH LAW is supreme-the Texas Constitution, or the Penal Code. If there is any conflict between the two - which trumps ?

If you standby and allow any public servant to effectively deny your constitutionally declared rights - YOU are the ONE RELINQUISHING THOSE RIGHTS.

Free people do not seek the permission of their respective governments to exercise rights that they already have, and have been LEGALLY declared to be INVIOLATE and EXCEPTED FROM THE POWERS OF STATE GOVERNMENT.

I know - Yeah, BUT - Yeah, BUT...... suit yourselves folks.

You are going to have to reclaim those confiscated rights - by ASSERTING THEM, and being prepared to defend them in a courtroom if need be.
____________________________

www.lonestarcdl.org is about reclamation of confiscated rights, and we are fixin' to get busy.

It is time for every citizen who cherishes the right to bear arms to "FIRE A SHOT ACROSS THE BOW" of their corrupt legislators, Governor, and judges. None of them will voluntarily restore YOUR RIGHTS.

YOU WILL HAVE TO RECLAIM THEM - OR gradually loose them all together.

Thanks!! I like it and I now Understand. I will always wear my firearm now when I go to my Texas Home, all around town and everywhere. Just like in Virginia. I will report on how it goes.

LIVE FREE OR DIE.

mustangkiller · May 25, 2011

Freeflight said:
Thanks!! I like it and I now Understand. I will always wear my firearm now when I go to my Texas Home, all around town and everywhere. Just like in Virginia. I will report on how it goes.

LIVE FREE OR DIE.

I've been doing this for a while now. The only people who have said anything, asked if it was legal and I explained to them why it was but wasn't legal but i refuse to let my rights be taken. I have yet to have someone call the police or give dirty looks. Ya'll get ready to put togeather my legal defence fund

Grapeshot · May 25, 2011

mustangkiller said:
I've been doing this for a while now. The only people who have said anything, asked if it was legal and I explained to them why it was but wasn't legal but i refuse to let my rights be taken. I have yet to have someone call the police or give dirty looks. Ya'll get ready to put togeather my legal defence fund

Problem is that OCDO advocates for the law abiding (referring to statute law) not for those that intentionally break the law.

(15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.

Emotionally, I understand your frustration; however, you risk a lot. Your RKBA and very freedom could be at risk even if you were to generate large backing. That is not at what the courts will look.

Notso · May 25, 2011

Grapeshot said:
Yep - we just need a volunteer with deep pockets to step forward and carry this through the courts. :uhoh:

Absenting that perhaps the legislative process makes a lot of sense.

Contact SAF about taking this issue to the courts. They have the money and the expertise. They will have a good idea if it's possible and more importantly, how and WHEN it should be attempted. I think it's doubtful the legislature will ever pass it and even if it did, and although Perry said he wasn't against it, I doubt he'd sign it.

mustangkiller · May 25, 2011

Grapeshot said:
Problem is that OCDO advocates for the law abiding (referring to statute law) not for those that intentionally break the law.

(15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.

Emotionally, I understand your frustration; however, you risk a lot. Your RKBA and very freedom could be at risk even if you were to generate large backing. That is not at what the courts will look.

Good point sir. Just to keep the peace around here, it won't happen again. I do have a question though. If I continue to "break the law" and I do get busted is telling the story ( or as much as my atty. allows me to tell ) a board rule violation?

rushcreek2 · May 25, 2011

This is the Texas forum page of OCDO, and citizens in Texas have 135 years of justification to address a very relevant topic at this time. The totality of Texas LAW on this handgun carry subject IS NOT SETTLED LAW by a long shot.

If the OCDO ADMINISTRATION WERE TO HAVE A PROBLEM with the Texas discussion - that would be a very sad commentary on the purpose & goals of this interprise. I don't believe that is the case. If that were to be shown to be the case, my time would be better spent elsewhere, and I would incourage those Texans desirous of exercising their First Amendment RIGHTS as well as their Second Amendment RIGHT to join us at the Lone Star Citizens Defense League.

So how about enough of the "muzzling" effort.

______________________
www.lonestarcdl.org

Grapeshot · May 25, 2011

mustangkiller said:
Good point sir. Just to keep the peace around here, it won't happen again. I do have a question though. If I continue to "break the law" and I do get busted is telling the story ( or as much as my atty. allows me to tell ) a board rule violation?

Not at all, sir. We follow the stories of all cases, some with a great deal if interest.

Appreciate your cordiality.

The Annoyed Man · May 25, 2011

MR Redenck said:
Go to your CHL " Elitist " forum and get your answers. Im not wasting any of my time arguing with a cotton ball.

Wow. His name is actually Charles L. Cotton. He is an established long time attorney in the Houston area. He is on the national board of directors of the NRA. He's a past executive director of the TSRA. He is the actual author of the original CHL legislation, and author of most of its upgrades since its passage. I know him personally, and he is FAR from being an elitist. He's actually a pretty humble guy. He has PUBLICLY, more than once, stated that he would support an open carry bill for Texas if the following criteria were met:

That it was a properly drafted bill that did not throw CHL under the bus or lose any of the gains made for CHL;
That it was written and sponsored well in advance of an upcoming legislative session, and not at the beginning of a current session;
That it did not compete with any other "flagship" RKBA bills during the same legislative session. See below for the explanation of this.

Due to the Texas Constitution, our legislature only meets on odd numbered years. Therefore, we have half the time of most other states in which to pass two years worth of accumulated bills. This means that we have to prioritize our efforts into the 2 or 3 "flagship" bills where most of the effort will be concentrated, and then several other 2nd tier bills which they will try to get to if they can.

THIS year, the flagship bills were: A) a "parking lot bill" which would protect employees from being fired from their jobs for lawfully storing their weapon in their vehicles during work hours; B) a "campus carry bill" which would extend CHL "rights" to the inside of campus buildings for anyone holding a CHL; and C) a "shooting range protection bill" designed to prevent established ranges from being forced out of business by noise ordinances and other nuisance ordinances that are enacted specifically to force them out of business.

The open carry bill currently before the legislature was introduced too late to be effectively taken up. It includes a provision for making PC 30.06—which currently only applies to CHL—apply to open carry also. This will be a setback for concealed carry. Therefore, it automatically failed to gain the support of Charles Cotton, the TSRA, or the NRA. Lastly, it competes with the 3 "flagship" bills for the time and effort required to get a bill through the legislature in our every-other-year cycle. Consequently, it is not being actively pushed by any of the major players. Until the above 3 conditions are met, NO open carry bill will ever get the support of any of the state's major players.

If you refuse to play within those parameters in Texas politics, be prepared to be disappointed. The effective approach is to try and meet those parameters and enlist the support of the heavy hitters. By the way, if you think that passage of open carry in Texas is a slam dunk, we just LOST on campus carry, the parking lot bill is probably going to pass, and the shooting range bill is still at risk. And that is in a state with a 3/4 republican and allegedly conservative majority in the legislature. In other words, passage of open carry is NOT a slam dunk in Texas, and the expenditure of political capital at this time might put further progress in gradually extending the RKBA in Texas at risk.

I am a brand new member here, and this is only my second post. Over on the TexasCHLforum, I have stated many times that I am in favor of Constitutional Carry. That would be my ultimate goal. BUT.... I think there is a right and proper way to go about getting there, and bomb-throwing is not the way to get it done. That would include name-calling someone because you couldn't bully them into submitting to your agenda. My personal feelings about open carry are that I am curious about it. I'm going to give it a try when I pass back through Arizona on my way home from California, where I am currently attending to some family business. Who knows, I may like it. But, I am used to concealed carry, and even if open carry passes in Texas, I am one of those who will most likely carry concealed most of the time. To me, "open carry" simply means that I don't have to worry if it's just too hot to wear a cover garment... stuff like that. But I'm not interested in advertising my gun to most people. I want people to have the right to OC, but I may not practice it myself.

MR Redenck · May 25, 2011

Sorry Annoyed man, Im not interested in your comments. I have lots of people that I work with who support the 2nd amendment to the exact way it is written. "Your not one of them". Feel free to post all you want to on here, just dont wast your time addressing me.
Just so you know, it's not me you need to debate with, Im just one of the many people who support the 2nd amendment as it is written. " Actually, lots of those people take that right to a less restrictive definition than I do", not that I have a problem with it.
So focus you opposition toward the citizens of Texas, not toward me. No matter what you have been led to believe, it aint me that you should worry about. Im just one of many who is fed up with a bunch of Elitist infringements against my rights.

Annoyed Man, if you really want to debate some issues on this forum, explain what your little group wanted to do with SB905.

MR Redenck · May 25, 2011

mustangkiller said:
Good point sir. Just to keep the peace around here, it won't happen again. I do have a question though. If I continue to "break the law" and I do get busted is telling the story ( or as much as my atty. allows me to tell ) a board rule violation?

Stangspanker, Im not real sure what it is you think you doing is illegal, but there are many exemptions to 46.02 in the Texas penal code. Open carry while traveling is not illegal. "Not accepted by some, but not actually illegal either". There is a lot of information you need to study about this. If your doing anything that you feel like you shouldn't do, I would suggest you stop doing it.
Before you make any decissions, let me suggest something. know what the penal code say's and also look for case law to back it up.
Just dont get yourself in trouble for something your not 100% sure of.

The Annoyed Man · May 25, 2011

MR Redenck said:
Sorry Annoyed man, Im not interested in your comments.

That's fine with me. I'm not really interested in yours either. I simply wanted to defend the character of someone I know personally, whom you know nothing at all about.

If bomb-throwing floats your boat, go ahead and throw them. I'll consider the source and try not to pay attention to them anymore.

Kingfish · May 25, 2011

rushcreek2 said:
I would incourage those Texans desirous of exercising their First Amendment RIGHTS...

You have no First Amendment Rights on this private property. You are in John and Mike's house and you play by their rules.

I think they allow way more than they should.

Click to expand...

The Annoyed Man · May 25, 2011

MR Redenck said:
Annoyed Man, if you really want to debate some issues on this forum, explain what your little group wanted to do with SB905.

SB905 is not on the calendar for today, and today is the last day it could have been passed. It's dead. The effort to either kill it OR amend it to include all CHLs was led largely by Charles Cotton. You got your story entirely backwards. Educate yourself.

KBCraig · May 25, 2011

The Annoyed Man said:
(Charles L. Cotton)...has PUBLICLY, more than once, stated that he would support an open carry bill for Texas if the following criteria were met:

TAM, the problem with your defense of Cotton, is that many of us who have been involved for years have realized that Cotton's greatest skill is lawyerly doublespeak: what he seems to say, and what he actually says, can be at odds.

He has also said, rather emphatically, that TSRA will not get involved in OC unless the membership demands it. "Overwhelmingly demands" was the phrase he used, IIRC, and he has steadfastly refused to make it a topic for discussion with the membership.

I know that you support constitutional carry as a goal, and you understand the reality of the Texas legislative process. The problem is that the major players keep falling well short of their goals. Cotton's role as gatekeeper for Texas gun legislation is something that has to end. His secretive insider politics have been frustrating other activists since before 1995, and you can check the archives at tx.guns to see that.

He challenged OC supporters to create our own Texas-based organization and introduce our own legislation -- well, we did that, and he's been nothing but dismissive of the effort.

Incrementalism is one thing, but we're not even taking baby steps. We're inching along at a pace that will see Texas take a major stride toward true handgun freedom sometime after Illinois goes shall-issue with total statewide preemption.

MR Redenck · May 25, 2011

The Annoyed Man said:
SB905 is not on the calendar for today, and today is the last day it could have been passed. It's dead. The effort to either kill it OR amend it to include all CHLs was led largely by Charles Cotton. You got your story entirely backwards. Educate yourself.

If your going to post information please post the correct information for the forum members to read. Maybe you misunderstood what the following message is saying. It will only apply to 3rd renewals, NOT ALL CHL's. Read it again. This is an attempt to create more Elitist concealed carry laws. Also, it's is known that we were going to have a floor vote to amend HB2756 to SB905. This is why Cotton asks you to tell your Reps to oppose any amendments that are not (Kleinschmidt) amendments.
When SB905 comes to the House Floor, Rep. Kleinschmidt plans to offer an amendment that extends it provisions from just elected officials to all CHL's who are on their 3rd or later renewals. Some will ask why the amendment will not cover all CHLs, but I can't go into that now. It's going to be hard enough to fight off a point-of-order.

Please call your Representative and ask him/her to support any amendment to SB905 that is offered by Rep. Kleinschmidt and to oppose any amendments to the Kleinschmidt amendment that are not acceptable to the author (Kleinschmidt).

Thanks,
Chas.

Now, lets read this Elitist SB905 bill.
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT
relating to the application of certain concealed handgun license
laws to statewide elected officials, certain current and former
members of the legislature, and certain federal and state
employees.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Subsection (h-1), Section 46.035, Penal Code, as
added by Chapter 1222 (H.B. 2300), Acts of the 80th Legislature,
Regular Session, 2007, is amended to read as follows:
(h-1) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsections
(b)(1), (2), and (4)-(6), and (c) that at the time of the commission
of the offense, the actor was:
(1) a judge or justice of a federal court;
(2) an active judicial officer, as defined by Section
411.201, Government Code; [or]
(3) a district attorney, assistant district attorney,
criminal district attorney, assistant criminal district attorney,
county attorney, or assistant county attorney;
(4) a United States attorney or an assistant United
States attorney;
(5) a statewide elected official;
(6) a member of the legislature; or
(7) a noncommissioned employee of the Department of
Public Safety, designated by the director of the department.
SECTION 2. Section 46.035, Penal Code, is amended by adding
Subsection (h-2) to read as follows:
(h-2) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsections
(b)(1), (2), and (4)-(6), and (c) that at the time of the commission
of the offense, the actor was a person who on September 1, 2011, was
serving as a member of the legislature and possessed a concealed
handgun license under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,
if the person is no longer a member at the time of the offense and if
the license has not yet been subject to renewal since the person
ceased to be a member. This subsection expires on September 1,
2020.
SECTION 3. The change in law made by this Act applies only
to an offense committed on or after the effective date of this Act.
An offense committed before the effective date of this Act is
governed by the law in effect on the date the offense was committed,
and the former law is continued in effect for that purpose. For
purposes of this section, an offense was committed before the
effective date of this Act if any element of the offense occurred
before that date.
SECTION 4. This Act takes effect September 1, 2011.
By adding 3rd renewal CHL's to this bill, this becomes one big Elitist POS!!! Is this the method you support to getting your Constitutional Carry? Constitutional Carry applies to everyone Mr. Annoyed Man. Just like in that great state of Arizona that you just visited without anybody wanting to harm you.
Also, SB905 is dead. This bill was amended by Pete Galligo and sent to local & Consent where it can no longer be amended. Pete took the Reps off the bill. HaHa.
To conclude, HB2756 is now a dead bill.

ScottDLS · May 26, 2011

This One

Grapeshot said:
What thread might that be?

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?87374-Felony-to-record

Hardly related to Texas (a one party consent state BTW), so why in the state forum...?

I think the open carry rifle guys typically get a quicker "beat down" than OP did on this one.

Anyway...licensed open (HANDGUN) carry is now officially dead in Texas. But we did decriminalize "Noodling" (catfish fishing with bare hands)... assuming the Gov signs.

The Annoyed Man · May 26, 2011

MR Redenck said:
If your going to post information please post the correct information for the forum members to read. Maybe you misunderstood what the following message is saying. It will only apply to 3rd renewals, NOT ALL CHL's. Read it again. This is an attempt to create more Elitist concealed carry laws. Also, it's is known that we were going to have a floor vote to amend HB2756 to SB905. This is why Cotton asks you to tell your Reps to oppose any amendments that are not (Kleinschmidt) amendments.
When SB905 comes to the House Floor, Rep. Kleinschmidt plans to offer an amendment that extends it provisions from just elected officials to all CHL's who are on their 3rd or later renewals. Some will ask why the amendment will not cover all CHLs, but I can't go into that now. It's going to be hard enough to fight off a point-of-order.

Please call your Representative and ask him/her to support any amendment to SB905 that is offered by Rep. Kleinschmidt and to oppose any amendments to the Kleinschmidt amendment that are not acceptable to the author (Kleinschmidt).

Thanks,
Chas.

Now, lets read this Elitist SB905 bill.
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT
relating to the application of certain concealed handgun license
laws to statewide elected officials, certain current and former
members of the legislature, and certain federal and state
employees.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Subsection (h-1), Section 46.035, Penal Code, as
added by Chapter 1222 (H.B. 2300), Acts of the 80th Legislature,
Regular Session, 2007, is amended to read as follows:
(h-1) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsections
(b)(1), (2), and (4)-(6), and (c) that at the time of the commission
of the offense, the actor was:
(1) a judge or justice of a federal court;
(2) an active judicial officer, as defined by Section
411.201, Government Code; [or]
(3) a district attorney, assistant district attorney,
criminal district attorney, assistant criminal district attorney,
county attorney, or assistant county attorney;
(4) a United States attorney or an assistant United
States attorney;
(5) a statewide elected official;
(6) a member of the legislature; or
(7) a noncommissioned employee of the Department of
Public Safety, designated by the director of the department.
SECTION 2. Section 46.035, Penal Code, is amended by adding
Subsection (h-2) to read as follows:
(h-2) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsections
(b)(1), (2), and (4)-(6), and (c) that at the time of the commission
of the offense, the actor was a person who on September 1, 2011, was
serving as a member of the legislature and possessed a concealed
handgun license under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,
if the person is no longer a member at the time of the offense and if
the license has not yet been subject to renewal since the person
ceased to be a member. This subsection expires on September 1,
2020.
SECTION 3. The change in law made by this Act applies only
to an offense committed on or after the effective date of this Act.
An offense committed before the effective date of this Act is
governed by the law in effect on the date the offense was committed,
and the former law is continued in effect for that purpose. For
purposes of this section, an offense was committed before the
effective date of this Act if any element of the offense occurred
before that date.
SECTION 4. This Act takes effect September 1, 2011.
By adding 3rd renewal CHL's to this bill, this becomes one big Elitist POS!!! Is this the method you support to getting your Constitutional Carry? Constitutional Carry applies to everyone Mr. Annoyed Man. Just like in that great state of Arizona that you just visited without anybody wanting to harm you.
Also, SB905 is dead. This bill was amended by Pete Galligo and sent to local & Consent where it can no longer be amended. Pete took the Reps off the bill. HaHa.
To conclude, HB2756 is now a dead bill.

Again, you conveniently left out the rest of what Charles posted about SB905 and why the Kleinschmidt amendment should be supported, and it had nothing whatsoever with desiring a result of extending privileges to 3rd time renewals. It was a smokescreen being done to maneuver the foes of RKBA into accepting something they otherwise would not have done. It was done, fulling knowing that SB905 and the Kleinschmidt amendment would be killed, in order to accomplish a completely different end unrelated to this bill.

Here's the thing.... If you would take the time to truly educate yourself about the back stories instead of reaming everyone a new one as if you had a lock on all knowledge, you'd actually get further in your goals.

But that's OK. I'm done with you.

mustangkiller · May 26, 2011

MR Redenck said:
Stangspanker, Im not real sure what it is you think you doing is illegal, but there are many exemptions to 46.02 in the Texas penal code. Open carry while traveling is not illegal. "Not accepted by some, but not actually illegal either". There is a lot of information you need to study about this. If your doing anything that you feel like you shouldn't do, I would suggest you stop doing it.
Before you make any decissions, let me suggest something. know what the penal code say's and also look for case law to back it up.
Just dont get yourself in trouble for something your not 100% sure of.

I OC legally quite often. Traveling, doing yardwork, on my way to or from a lawful activity where the weapon is commonly used ect. I also grocery shop get my hair cut and a few other things. To be honest I know I said I wouldn't advocate "breaking the law" and I'm not. I'm saying what I do to protest unconstitutional "laws". So with that said, to hell with them, I'll carry where and when I feel it's prudent with or with out a lic. open or concealed. If I find myself in handcuffs I'll deal with that. I hope other 2A supporters will help me fight it and get the laws changed by donating to my legal fund. If not I'll do it on my own. Someone has to have the balls to stand up to the criminals in Austin and D.C. When I was in school I'd stand up for the nerds and geeks getting picked on by the bullies. This is no different. Well maybe it is, these bullies can jack me up pretty good

My point is, this websites motto is " A right not exercised is a right lost". I'm exercising my rights and to hell with those that don't like it. The founding fathers would stand up and cheer and race down the street to be the first to shake my hand in thanx....would you?

Oh one last thing Redneck, I have read lots of case law on the subject, Murdock being my personal favorite. Also the case escapes me right now but SCOTUS in a nut shell said that the states CAN NOT turn a right into a privilige. if the do it is the right and duty of the citizen to ignore the laws and exercise their rights with impunity. I'll try and find the case and exact quote. It may have been Murdock I'm not sure but I do know they at least referenced Murdock in that case.

Sorry for ranting and rambling....I'm done you may now return to your regular schedualed programming

MR Redenck · May 26, 2011

mustangkiller said:
I OC legally quite often. Traveling, doing yardwork, on my way to or from a lawful activity where the weapon is commonly used ect. I also grocery shop get my hair cut and a few other things. To be honest I know I said I wouldn't advocate "breaking the law" and I'm not. I'm saying what I do to protest unconstitutional "laws". So with that said, to hell with them, I'll carry where and when I feel it's prudent with or with out a lic. open or concealed. If I find myself in handcuffs I'll deal with that. I hope other 2A supporters will help me fight it and get the laws changed by donating to my legal fund. If not I'll do it on my own. Someone has to have the balls to stand up to the criminals in Austin and D.C. When I was in school I'd stand up for the nerds and geeks getting picked on by the bullies. This is no different. Well maybe it is, these bullies can jack me up pretty good

My point is, this websites motto is " A right not exercised is a right lost". I'm exercising my rights and to hell with those that don't like it. The founding fathers would stand up and cheer and race down the street to be the first to shake my hand in thanx....would you?

Oh one last thing Redneck, I have read lots of case law on the subject, Murdock being my personal favorite. Also the case escapes me right now but SCOTUS in a nut shell said that the states CAN NOT turn a right into a privilige. if the do it is the right and duty of the citizen to ignore the laws and exercise their rights with impunity. I'll try and find the case and exact quote. It may have been Murdock I'm not sure but I do know they at least referenced Murdock in that case.

Sorry for ranting and rambling....I'm done you may now return to your regular schedualed programming

What your talking about is our regular programming. Some people are just Annoying so ignor them.
Murdock is a great case but im not the one who studies that stuff. We got other guy's who handle that end of it. As for the SCOTUS stuff about rights and priviliges, find it, I want to read it. While traveling you can open carry. I do want to encourage you to follow the letter of the law though.

Texas Open Carry HB 2756

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

New member

Regular Member

Regular Member

New member

Regular Member

New member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

New member

Regular Member

Regular Member