Rep George Lavender will sponsor Texas open carry bill

[B.D. WALKER]

so when will this go public that mr lavender will sponsor texas open carry bill

I am curious myself, but no word just yet. I would assume a bill like this would take some time to prepare and review. I'm just hoping the bill would get filed in time before the Jan 2011 session. What is also needed is support from our state reps and state senate people.

 

[emk]

Just a heads-up, there needs to be legal protection for open carry explicitly, plus pre-emption over local laws. If you simply don't make it illegal, carriers are prone to local laws and the classic disorderly conduct charge that comes from states that don't explicitly legalize open carry.

 

[protias]

Just a heads-up, there needs to be legal protection for open carry explicitly, plus pre-emption over local laws. If you simply don't make it illegal, carriers are prone to local laws and the classic disorderly conduct charge that comes from states that don't explicitly legalize open carry.

I thought TX already had preemption?

 

[Grapeshot]

I thought TX already had preemption?

This is from TX preemption statute:

"No governmental subdivision or agency may enact or enforce a law that makes any conduct covered by this code an offense subject to a criminal penalty."

Unfortunately, my goggle-fu did not provide me with a link to the statute this A.M. - anybody?

 

[emk]

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/SOTWDocs/PE/htm/PE.1.htm

I'm sure as OCers, you're all aware of places where OC is not explicitly legal, but not illegal, and people who do it are constantly subject to disorderly conduct charges by LEOs that hate seeing citizens be free. The Texas law essentially says that if we don't explicitly say it's legal here, municipalities can do whatever they want. In this case, OC would be locally regulated and not protected if we don't make it explicitly legal. Even if a municipality doesn't have a law against it, you could still be charged with disorderly conduct. This happens in Wisconsin on a fairly regular basis. It's totally and completely legal to OC, but people get DC charges all the time because of a horrible police force.

 

[protias]

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/SOTWDocs/PE/htm/PE.1.htm

I'm sure as OCers, you're all aware of places where OC is not explicitly legal, but not illegal, and people who do it are constantly subject to disorderly conduct charges by LEOs that hate seeing citizens be free. The Texas law essentially says that if we don't explicitly say it's legal here, municipalities can do whatever they want. In this case, OC would be locally regulated and not protected if we don't make it explicitly legal. Even if a municipality doesn't have a law against it, you could still be charged with disorderly conduct. This happens in Wisconsin on a fairly regular basis. It's totally and completely legal to OC, but people get DC charges all the time because of a horrible police force.

No it does not. In fact, police can try to charge you with it here, but it won't stick. Why? Because of Van Hollen's memo sent out in 08. Now, the Madison 5 incident is going to go the way of the guys, not the police. Madison will be paying them a lot of money. As for TX, if the state has preemption, then no municipality can enact laws more strict than the state.

 

[emk]

Right, except the state only has preemption over things explicitly stated as being legal, not all firearms laws. Without making it expressly legal, it leaves citizens and worse, travelers, at the mercy of their local city councils. As I understand it, the Madison PD is saying they're still going to arrest OCers anyway. There are places like this all over the place, and it happens all the time, not just in WI. Nebraska is another place. When I was in Boulder, CO, a cop tried to intimidate me out of OCing by saying they had a local ordinance grandfathered in saying that it couldn't be loaded, even though they aren't allowed homestead status. It's not my concern that you won't get off in court, but many people, especially in these economic times, do not have the time and money to throw at the court systems, and cannot afford to be arrested or detained. Making it expressly legal prevents the "little" things and the majority of the harassment. That, or Texas needs to modify their preemption statute to include all firearms laws.

 

[protias]

Right, except the state only has preemption over things explicitly stated as being legal, not all firearms laws. Without making it expressly legal, it leaves citizens and worse, travelers, at the mercy of their local city councils. As I understand it, the Madison PD is saying they're still going to arrest OCers anyway. There are places like this all over the place, and it happens all the time, not just in WI. Nebraska is another place. When I was in Boulder, CO, a cop tried to intimidate me out of OCing by saying they had a local ordinance grandfathered in saying that it couldn't be loaded, even though they aren't allowed homestead status. It's not my concern that you won't get off in court, but many people, especially in these economic times, do not have the time and money to throw at the court systems, and cannot afford to be arrested or detained. Making it expressly legal prevents the "little" things and the majority of the harassment. That, or Texas needs to modify their preemption statute to include all firearms laws.

If TX rescinds the OC restriction, then how do localities enact laws prohibition it? I'm not well versed in TX law, so I'm just trying to learn. As for Madison, it is the "totality of the circumstances" that they will detain/arrest/fine, illegally I might add. We can discuss this further in the WI forum if you wish. Chief Flynn in Milwaukee basically said the same thing. He instructed his officers to detain/arrest anyone OCing, however, as far as I know, no one has. I didn't think CO could enact local ordances either. From my understanding, they've become more liberal over the years though. I haven't studied their laws all that much, so I cannot comment further. As for people not affording court cases, I know for the Madison 5, their attorney costs are already taken care of. I believe there are people still donating too. I believe Skidmark in VA is pretty close, if not completely covered by people donating. For members here, I wouldn't be too worried. Most of the people here are very helpful. :banana:

 

[aadvark]

Texas Local Government Code 229.001 reads:
A Municipality may not Adopt Regulations Relating to The Transfer, [The] Private Ownership, [The] Keeping, [The] Transportation, [The] Licensing, or [The] Registration of Firearms, Ammunition, or Firearm Supplies.

 

[Grapeshot]

As for people not affording court cases, I know for the Madison 5, their attorney costs are already taken care of. I believe there are people still donating too. I believe Skidmark in VA is pretty close, if not completely covered by people donating. For members here, I wouldn't be too worried. Most of the people here are very helpful. :banana:

We do step up to the plate and take care of our own, don't we.

 

[emk]

Texas Local Government Code 229.001 reads:
A Municipality may not Adopt Regulations Relating to The Transfer, [The] Private Ownership, [The] Keeping, [The] Transportation, [The] Licensing, or [The] Registration of Firearms, Ammunition, or Firearm Supplies.

It just doesn't say carry in there, and the way I read it, as I'm sure many liberal government officials would read it, is that if not expressly prohibited by Texas state law, municipalities can regulate the carry of firearms. Because Texas expressly allows concealed carry but prohibits open carry, this is a non-issue. However, by simply allowing open carry, the law is still open for municipalities to regulate open carry according to their own city councils. I'm not saying simply omitting it from the law isn't a good first step, but ensuring protection for all citizens who wish to do so whether licensed or unlicensed should be included. There's too much wiggle room here for me to be comfortable with.

 

[DKSuddeth]

It just doesn't say carry in there, and the way I read it, as I'm sure many liberal government officials would read it, is that if not expressly prohibited by Texas state law, municipalities can regulate the carry of firearms. Because Texas expressly allows concealed carry but prohibits open carry, this is a non-issue. However, by simply allowing open carry, the law is still open for municipalities to regulate open carry according to their own city councils. I'm not saying simply omitting it from the law isn't a good first step, but ensuring protection for all citizens who wish to do so whether licensed or unlicensed should be included. There's too much wiggle room here for me to be comfortable with.

before anyone tries to get too far ahead, an explanation of TX firearms laws are in order.

46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person
commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or
recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun, illegal
knife, or club if the person is not:

this means that carrying a handgun is prohibited, period. then, it outlines some exceptions. Later on, it provides a system for someone to carry a handgun through a licensing scheme. Take note that the licensing exception is NOT considered a right, because many of the offenses listed in the penal code concerning firearms carry explicitly state that the license is a defense to prosecution, not an exception to the prohibition.

 

[rushcreek2]

HERE'S A STOCKING STUFFER -lMerry Christmas !

# 1 -Current Texas law criminalizes carrying on or about one's person a handgun (presumably because handguns are CONCEALABLE ).....HOWEVER.......

# 2 - Current Texas law does make provision for certain EXCEPTIONS, AND DEFENSES AGAINST PROSECUTION under this law (Section 46.02)

# 3 - Although not routinely available, justification for the use of deadly force is the broadest defense to prosecution under every provision of law, and in all circumstances.

# 4 - In addition to a list of persons functioning in an official capacity who are otherwise excepted, Texas law does provide for general exceptions when at home or on premises under one's control, inside of or directly en route to a vehicle owned or under one's control, traveling, fishing, or while on the premises - or en route to and from said premises where any lawful gun related "sporting" activity is taking place.

# 5 - An EXCLUSIVE exception -irrespective of the other exceptions -is also provided to persons who are either licensed under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411 of the Government Code - issued a valid Texas Concealed Handgun License - OR issued a license under the authority of another state that is RECOGNIZED IN TEXAS by way of a reciprocity agreement, or unilateral proclamation by the Texas Governor.

All that having been said -there are only 3 circumstances WHERE I MAY NOT LEGALLY WEAR A HOLSTERED HANDGUN IN PLAIN VIEW IN TEXAS. Here's where I fly under bridges, buzz roof-tops, remove my sport coat in the barber shop -and generally annoy the nay-sayers.

1. INSIDE MY VEHICLE - UNLESS I AM traveling, hunting, fishing, or engaged in some other on-premises gun related activity or enroute to or from said premises, or licensed AND CARRYING under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411 which in itself requires concealment, or if I have been issued a concealed handgun license under the authority of another state jurisdiction that is recognized in Texas with the implied understanding that the handgun will be remain concealed. Section 42.01 (a)(8) still applies.

2. OUTSIDE MY VEHICLE - and I AM NOT directly en route to my vehicle, on my own property, or premises under my control, traveling, or on premises -or enroute to and from premises- where fishing, hunting, gun-range, or any other lawful gun related activity ("OC BBQ") is taking place.

3. While ON ANY OTHER privately owned property NOT UNDER MY CONTROL - UNLESS - I have been authorized to wear my holstered handgun in plain view by the person in control of those premises.

I 'fess up ! Pretty much tongue & cheek - But, DO YOU GET MY POINT ? If you don't PUSH-OUT against the oppression - it will slowly envelope you.

 

[USMCONE]

I'm all for those that want to open carry, I just moved to Texas from Illinois and I have a concealed carry permit under HR218 and before I got that; I had received a Florida concealed permit which is still in effect.
Personally If I were able to carry open I would not choose to do so; I would not want my adversary to know I had a weapon; I'm 65 years old and I never leave home with out my side arm; tonight I was having supper with my wife in at Aransas Pass Texas cafeteria and a Sheriffs deputy was also setting near me and even though I'm as legal as one can be I still felt paranoid about carrying concealed; so if I was able to carry open I wouldn't want the hassle of some new officer not knowing the law and question my credentials; so no matter what the law decides on this; I will still carry concealed

 

[B.D. WALKER]

I'm all for those that want to open carry, I just moved to Texas from Illinois and I have a concealed carry permit under HR218 and before I got that; I had received a Florida concealed permit which is still in effect.
Personally If I were able to carry open I would not choose to do so; I would not want my adversary to know I had a weapon; I'm 65 years old and I never leave home with out my side arm; tonight I was having supper with my wife in at Aransas Pass Texas cafeteria and a Sheriffs deputy was also setting near me and even though I'm as legal as one can be I still felt paranoid about carrying concealed; so if I was able to carry open I wouldn't want the hassle of some new officer not knowing the law and question my credentials; so no matter what the law decides on this; I will still carry concealed

First i would say, welcome to Texas. Ur view on CC is a good one and like a lot of people like myself that are strong about OC we still would not carry openly all the time like when we go out to eat but the want to know we can do so if we choose.

I personally would both OC and CC; it all depends on my mood and were I am going. I am not out to make a statement but I would carry based on my convenience. I always have my firearm when I leave the house; now how I carry it is what I am aiming for...

 

[Grapeshot]

I'm all for those that want to open carry, I just moved to Texas from Illinois and I have a concealed carry permit under HR218 and before I got that; I had received a Florida concealed permit which is still in effect.
Personally If I were able to carry open I would not choose to do so; I would not want my adversary to know I had a weapon; I'm 65 years old and I never leave home with out my side arm; tonight I was having supper with my wife in at Aransas Pass Texas cafeteria and a Sheriffs deputy was also setting near me and even though I'm as legal as one can be I still felt paranoid about carrying concealed; so if I was able to carry open I wouldn't want the hassle of some new officer not knowing the law and question my credentials; so no matter what the law decides on this; I will still carry concealed

The idea of CC or OC or noC is a personal choice that should NOT be mandated by the government. Granted it takes time and education considering the political climate and the many years that guns have been vilified to gain the understanding and acceptance we desire.

We are succeeding by both large and small steps. Keep the ball rolling!

 

[CrimsonSoul]

Would the easiest way of getting OC be by wrapping it up with the CHL's that are issued in Texas and just removing the "intentional failure to conceal" part? That way the sheeple have the "security" of the "training" that is done along with the background check of the CHL (yes, yes, I know Constitutional carry and all, but get it how you can take it and work to remove restrictions is how I see it at this point), seems to me this would be easier than trying to get rid of the concealed handgun part in the laws for unlicensed carry.

 

[rushcreek2]

Amending Chapter 46 to delete Section 46.035 (a) is a no-brainer, first step.
As the law is currently written Texas CHL holders are the only citizens in Texas specifically subject to a criminal penalty for intentional failure to conceal.

The next step is to bring Chapter 46 into compliance with Article I, Section 23 which reads:

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

The reservation of power granted to the legislature to regulate the wearing of arms for the specific purpose of preventing crime was never intended to function as an over-ride switch for the guarantee of the right to keep and bear arms.

Every citizen exercising their right to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves or the State constitutes the front-line of defense in the prevention of crime.

One way to rectify this problem would be the introduction of a bill in the Legislature to amend Chapter 46 in such a way as to insert the following statement as the header, or preamble for Chapter 46:

"Under the provision of Article I, Section 23 of the Texas Constitution the people of the State of Texas have granted limited power to their Legislature to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime. Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to justify infringement upon the right of peaceful, and orderly citizens to keep and bear arms in defense of their persons, homes, and property."

It may seem too simple an approach, but it would be constitutional, and I'm sure the courts would manage to navigate around the tolerances inherent in the phrase "peaceful, and orderly citizen" :

felon/DVM/TRO = not peaceful/disorderly
courtrooms= disorderly persons present
schools= protect the children

 

[USMCONE]

I'm wondering about all this concealed carry and open carry laws that are being enacted in the peoples favor so it seems all be it slow; right at a time in our history that our government seems to tracking all of us with electronics; there are video cameras every where we go now days; what if "they" the Government want to let us exercise or 2nd amendment right laws seeking only to know where all the weapons actually are when they decide to take them from us? what better way I ask would there to be for them to know this and about us? that would be for them to allow us open and concealed carry licenses? in this way if there is some kind of a insurrection in the U.S., how long do you think it would take them to come to our homes to collect our weapons? just some thoughts I was having being new to this web site.

 

[Grapeshot]

I'm wondering about all this concealed carry and open carry laws that are being enacted in the peoples favor so it seems all be it slow; right at a time in our history that our government seems to tracking all of us with electronics; there are video cameras every where we go now days; what if "they" the Government want to let us exercise or 2nd amendment right laws seeking only to know where all the weapons actually are when they decide to take them from us? what better way I ask would there to be for them to know this and about us? that would be for them to allow us open and concealed carry licenses? in this way if there is some kind of a insurrection in the U.S., how long do you think it would take them to come to our homes to collect our weapons? just some thoughts I was having being new to this web site.

That is exactly why some people prefer unlicensed (no permit) open carry - Virginia being one of those states. The most desirable of course is Constitutional Carry - no permit for either OC or CC.