• 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.

Getting Ready for 2013

rushcreek2

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Messages
909
Location
Colorado Springs. CO
I still believe that Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott is the one State official who can help facilitate the repeal of 46.035a during the 2013 session. He knows that inane provision of the Texas Penal Code cannot withstand constitutional scrutiny in the courts under either the Texas Constitution, or the 2A per Heller/McDonald.

If the mail volume begins to pile up high enough in the AG's inbox I believe some impetus would be forthcoming to stimulate action on this much needed "code cleanup" measure.

The same political dynamics apply to the concealed carry on campus effort. Amplifying the decibels of any controversial legislative effort in Texas is counter-intuitive because the State has "....a long way to go, and a short time to get there" legislative reality.

Unfortunately,I believe Texans will have to live with LICENSED OC for some time, but at least that is progress.

Unlike Colorado - Texas still bears the scars of being on the losing side of the Civil War. You would think that after 147 years Texas could push past the Reconstruction mentality . Missouri by contrast was a Union state , and is today an open carry state . I remember being a kid in Missouri during the 1940's when the KKK would put on its annual "Veiled Prophet's Parade" in downtown St. Louis.

Governor Perry was touting the every- other- year Texas Legislature as a model for the U.S. Congress during his GOP primary campaign. That needs to change. Texas is too big, too populated, and too culturally diverse to be governed by a part-time legislature.
 
Last edited:

KBCraig

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,886
Location
Granite State of Mind
Governor Perry was touting the every- other- year Texas Legislature as a model for the U.S. Congress during his GOP primary campaign. That needs to change. Texas is too big, too populated, and too culturally diverse to be governed by a part-time legislature.
I dread to think how much damage they could do as a full-time professional legislature. As the old saying goes, they meet for 140 days every two years, and it's a shame it's not the other way around.

Yes, it takes a long time to make positive changes, but there would be more we would have to change, and stay on top of and beware. At least we get a little breathing time now.

The most positive change we could make to the legislature would be to make it bigger. Much bigger. New Hampshire has 400 state representatives serving just 1.3 million people. At the same ratio, Texas would have almost 8,500 representatives, each serving about 3,000 people. That would make them truly accountable to their friends and neighbors; in such small districts, you can't hide from the voters.

Oh, and NH only pays their reps $10 a year, plus mileage and tolls. This is set in the state constitution, and can't be changed by the legislature.
 

rushcreek2

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Messages
909
Location
Colorado Springs. CO
Historically in Texas since 1871 the carry of a handgun has been a criminal offense. The legislature has provided a few extenuating exceptions. Since September 1996 the State granted PRIVILEGE of carrying a concealed handgun has been available to a growing number of "every citizens"- presently numbering around 500,000- plus those holding out-of-state recognized licenses.

What ever happened to the constitutional RIGHT TO CARRY in Texas ?

This is of course a rhetorical question. The point that I wish to make is that this is going to be a matter for the courts to address in Texas - if the Legislature doesn't address it during the next session.
 

acmariner99

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
655
Location
Renton, Wa
I think the best course of action is baby steps in Texas. As many have said it is like a whole other country. It is big, diverse, and a small group from one part of the state is not going to have enough influence. There needs to be a consensus that the majority of the state can agree on. So, I wouldn't expect Texas to allow unlicensed OC in 2013 -- maybe in 2015 or 2017 if you get licensed OC in 2013. I don't think a license to exercise a right is in any way Constitutional, but I don't think you will get anywhere if you try to get everything at once. I would think that the option to OC would be reasonable considering the climate in TX, but I digress. Signage does appear after a major change in carry laws, but those same signs come down after the sky doesn't fall like everyone expects. I have had some casual conversation in a couple of gun stores around Dallas and they seem inclined to at least have the option to OC.

Here's a thought -- if you add licensed OC in Texas, would it be possible to change the law to Constitutional Carry at some point?

I don't see OC as being a high priority for Austin next year. Unless you can convince your lobbying power to side on OC. I would advise them to watch what happens in Oklahoma between now and next year and use trends from states that had recent changes in their carry laws -- Wyoming, Arizona, and Wisconsin come to mind.
 

rushcreek2

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Messages
909
Location
Colorado Springs. CO
Texas remains one of the few states that still treats the carry of a handgun as a criminal act.
In order to restrict the licensed carry of a handgun in 1996 the legislation included a criminal penalty provision requiring concealment by licensees.

The repeal of that criminal penalty would not automatically translate into widespread open carry by licensees in Texas. I have no desire when in Texas to advertise the fact that I am carrying a holstered handgun. On the other hand there may be moments in time, and certain circumstances under which I would in fact feel much safer by not concealing that fact.

I believe that this rationale is shared by the vast majority of concealed handgun license holders in Texas.

Section 46.035a is an extreme statutory provision that serves only to establish criminal conduct in the absence of any criminal conduct.
 

Gator5713

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
591
Location
Aggieland, Texas, USA
Anybody (Rush?) feel like putting together some type of 'form' letter that we can start sending to the AG and our legislators?

Unfortunately, I agree that quiet and deep is the way to go here. We all saw what happened when we tried to openly push OC and CCC at the same time. While we supported CCC, people were scared of getting the 2 confused and it became a fight between the 2 instead of a unified front as it should have been!

While I don't like the idea of licensed OC, I will take it as a step in the right direction. Anything we can do to get OC at least started is a BIG step in the right direction, then we can work on the clean-up as we go... The truth of the matter is that its plum hot here and its just plain easier to OC than CC! Quite frankly, I don't want to have to worry about which side of my gun my shirt tail is on and if the bottom of my holster is exposed or not...

As for the 30-06 signage... Isn't that just for 51% alcohol establishments? Therefore, all 51% establishments should already have the signs, and nobody else should have them. I could be off here, been a while since I read that particular law.
 

()pen(arry

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Messages
735
Location
Seattle, WA; escaped from 18 years in TX
As for the 30-06 signage... Isn't that just for 51% alcohol establishments? Therefore, all 51% establishments should already have the signs, and nobody else should have them. I could be off here, been a while since I read that particular law.

No. In Texas, with or without a license, it's illegal to carry a concealed weapon inside any establishment that derives 51% or more of their revenue from the sale of alcohol to be consumed on the premises. In order to assist licensees, such establishments are also required to post a 51% sign.

Absolutely unrelated to that, with or without a license, it is illegal to carry a concealed weapon into an property with a proper and properly-posted 30.06 sign.

Two completely separate provisions.
 

Gator5713

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
591
Location
Aggieland, Texas, USA
Thanks () (.
I just went back and re-read 30.06... I've been away from the gun forums for a while and other than general (individual) conversations with folks I haven't been a super activist lately, so I'm back here now and probably gonna have to re-fresh some of my memory and update with some changes that have happened since I've been gone!
 

KBCraig

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,886
Location
Granite State of Mind
Absolutely unrelated to that, with or without a license, it is illegal to carry a concealed weapon into an property with a proper and properly-posted 30.06 sign.
Just to get hyper-technical, 30.06 only applies to licensees.

Any signage, whether 30.06-compliant or not, is adequate notice for an unlicensed person. For both licensed and unlicensed persons, the penalty for criminal trespass while in possession of a dangerous weapon is a Class A misdemeanor (up to a year in jail), but they'd actually be charged under different sections. It would be 30.05 for an unlicensed person.
 

rushcreek2

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Messages
909
Location
Colorado Springs. CO
This is my take on the subject. Exception from 46.035a is already available under circumstances warranting the possible use of deadly force to prevent an impending criminal threat.

Well..... there are also many circumstances under which any reasonable person might well think an ounce of prevention may be worth a ton of cure. I call these occasions threshold events.

A license holder should not be subject to criminal penalty for merely not concealing the fact that they are armed. What nation keeps its navy, air force, and infantry hidden from the view of potential adversaries ?

What does "in case of confrontation" mean ? Does a person have to wait for the assault to begin before they can reveal that they are armed and able to prevent it ?
 

Ravendove

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
24
Location
Richardson
Well..... there are also many circumstances under which any reasonable person might well think an ounce of prevention may be worth a ton of cure. I call these occasions threshold events.

I've had such an event myself while open carrying in Tennessee. The mere sight of my firearm being on my belt caused an individual, who I could tell had just made up his mind to violently mug me, to change his mind and return to his original course. I didn't have to reach for it or even say a word. This example, of course, doesn't mean open carry all the time, rather that occasionally it is the most non-violent way to resolve a dangerous situation before it goes over that "threshold".

So far, I agree with most of what's been said here. I'm pretty optimistic about this session. People who expected things to happen last year and didn't get involved are getting involved now. I'm definitely looking forward to a stronger, more civil, more unified movement this time. Thanks for not being all negativity, guys. It's hard to find that on any forum, much less a gun rights forum.
 

rushcreek2

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Messages
909
Location
Colorado Springs. CO
As is frequently mentioned "incremental" legislative measures are more successful in the long run.

Ravendove's experience in Tennessee is not all that unusual. It is impossible to document a "crime" that never occurred because of the presence of some deterrent factor.

This is the "incremental" approach that needs to be introduced into the next legislative session. This is precisely WHY 46.035a is BAD law. I would even argue that the term "open carry" should be avoided if at all possible. Don't allow the opposition to frame the issue as an "OC" effort. You are simply seeking to REMOVE a criminal penalty for conduct that is neither disorderly, or alarming to any reasonable person not intent upon criminally confronting you- and is precisely what Article 2, Section 23 provides for - to KEEP arms - notoriously if need be - in the lawful defense of one's self for the purpose of PREVENTING CRIME.

Repeal Section 46.035 (a)(h) - "With a view to prevent crime" - Cited right out of the text of the Texas Constitution Article 2, Section 23.
 
Top