New Blog - began with Texas signage and OC


PDA






Greybeard
February 16, 2014, 01:41 PM
Well, with an updated web site under control, I finally got around to the highly-suggested "Blog" thing. Time will tell what other topics will come along (several more already in mind), but it's kicked off with a little signage discussion. And a slight injection of a not-so-humble opinion in regard to the ongoing Open Carry hoopla. Comments welcome here or there. http://www.dentoncountysports.com/blog.html

If you enjoyed reading about "New Blog - began with Texas signage and OC" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Magnuumpwr
February 16, 2014, 03:21 PM
Nice reading, thank you for the link.

Greybeard
February 17, 2014, 06:51 AM
Thanks. Ya, some stuff there that many CHL people do not know, but need to know.

El Tejon
February 17, 2014, 04:02 PM
we will likely be seeing at least one bill introduced again related to "Open Carry", which is quite controversial

Grey, why is this? Why is it controversial?

GEM
February 17, 2014, 04:13 PM
1. It scares people and this might have negative consequences.

2. It is seen to be tactically unsound and an attractor for gun desiring predators.

3. It is suggested that it might bring a resurgence of posting 30.06 signs and thus causing an unintended consequence of banning more locations.

4. It is not guaranteed that future governors and legislatures will be gun friendly in TX and no need to provoke that future risk.

Those are the common arguments. Let the flame war begin as I duck for cover.

Greybeard
February 17, 2014, 08:25 PM
ET -

Your question is one of the reasons I mentioned the possibility OC being a topic in a future post in the blog. I touched on one of the primary issues for an estimated 700,000 current concealed carry license holders with "it could result in just enough "Man with a Gun" calls to 911 to create an epidemic of wasted police resources, business owners and managers not wanting any more "panic attacks" in their buildings or parking lots and a rash of new 30.06 signs". (Which I see GEM had as similar with #3 on his list, including the words "unintended consequences".)

When I can make the time to get into more details of some of the controversy(ies), it may also need a "historical approach", including some of the most recent as described in http://therealwendy.com/gun-rights-cities/. And yes, compared to what we have now with our preemption laws, THAT WOULD really begin with the word cluster!

Deaf Smith
February 17, 2014, 08:46 PM
I'm not bubbly with OC but.. they have it in Alaska, Arizona, and Vermont and people ain't dieing in the street from having their guns snatched.

So whatever happens in Texas happens.

At least with OC if I scratch my privates and my roscoe is exposed (uh.. I mean gun, ok?) then no biggie.

Deaf

Flintknapper
February 17, 2014, 09:23 PM
1. It scares people and this might have negative consequences.

Simply a matter of practice and education. Yes, there will be some freaked out Soccer Moms at first, but generally...the public is accepting of just about anything they see/experience with any frequency. Remember also, Open Carry already exists (in one form or another) in 45 States! Even California has a provision for it.

2. It is seen to be tactically unsound and an attractor for gun desiring predators.
Highly debatable and only a minuscule number of supporting 'examples' can be produced from ALL states combined.

3. It is suggested that it might bring a resurgence of posting 30.06 signs and thus causing an unintended consequence of banning more locations.

Initially, this happened with 'Concealed Carry' too...until Businesses saw the folly of it. Again, with education (the public needs to know just how law abiding CCers are are) I can't see this lasting long...(if ever a problem). There are over 700,000 people with CHL's now, so guns (those horrid things) are already out there.

4. It is not guaranteed that future governors and legislatures will be gun friendly in TX and no need to provoke that future risk.

Oh no, by all means cower and submit, no need to fight for the 'advancement' of your gun 'rights'. Let's just be content to ride in the 'back of the bus' and hope for the best (sarcasm off).

Yes, Open Carry legislation needs to be crafted smartly and for it to work in Texas (a State lacking any real open carry history) it might need to be done incrementally, but it needs to be done.

Just my .00002

Flint.

NavyLCDR
February 18, 2014, 12:14 AM
I'm not bubbly with OC but.. they have it in Alaska, Arizona, and Vermont and people ain't dieing in the street from having their guns snatched.

And 40 other states. The only states that ban open carry completely are Illinois, Florida, DC, New York, South Carolina and Texas. Even now, open carry is permitted more in California than in Texas.

So, yeah, in the 6 states that currently ban open carry - it will surely cause unique problems that have not occurred yet in 45 other states (counting DC as a state that prohibits open carry) if it does pass. And it is really sad to hear about these proposed "problems and controversies" being spread by pro-gun organizations/sites.

When open carry was proposed in Oklahoma, the police association there claimed that it would put police officers in more danger. Apparently, the visible gun is more dangerous to LEOs than the hidden guns, according to them.

GEM -

In your post #5 don't forget the wild west gun fights over such things as parking spaces....you've got to use the words "wild west"!

Greybeard
February 18, 2014, 09:41 AM
A primary difference between circumstances in Texas and other states is the uniqueness of Texas' 30.06 signage requirements, which, as explained in the blog was implemented in 1997 to protect license holders. Note as well "very carefully worded in regard to signage". The bill that was filed from the get-go this last session of the legislature was certainly not. I would have to look it up to say for sure how many pages it was, but the thing was at least 20 to 30, so recklessly written that it made "pro-gun" people familiar with the Texas legislative process want to puke.

At the time of Oklahoma's OC law going into effect, my son was was part of the young 20's crowd, going to school in Norman and subsequently getting a job in Oklahoma City. He said that shortly after the Open Carry law went into effect, there were a number of "No Open Carry" signs placed at entrances of many stores, restaurants and movie theaters - locations where there was no "gun signage" whatsoever when their state law was "concealed".

SC Shooter
February 18, 2014, 10:49 AM
A good blog and some very good comments to it. It does point to the fact that if you carry, and travel into other states, it is super important to study and know the laws and statutes of those states you are entering. You can never assume that what is good in your state is good in all states. Signage and notifications is just one of many areas where there are wide variances between states.

NavyLCDR
February 18, 2014, 11:48 AM
I'm glad I live near Seattle, WA where we don't have such problems with open carry :-)

NavyLCDR
February 18, 2014, 04:11 PM
A primary difference between circumstances in Texas and other states is the uniqueness of Texas' 30.06 signage requirements, which, as explained in the blog was implemented in 1997 to protect license holders. Note as well "very carefully worded in regard to signage". The bill that was filed from the get-go this last session of the legislature was certainly not. I would have to look it up to say for sure how many pages it was, but the thing was at least 20 to 30, so recklessly written that it made "pro-gun" people familiar with the Texas legislative process want to puke.

At the time of Oklahoma's OC law going into effect, my son was was part of the young 20's crowd, going to school in Norman and subsequently getting a job in Oklahoma City. He said that shortly after the Open Carry law went into effect, there were a number of "No Open Carry" signs placed at entrances of many stores, restaurants and movie theaters - locations where there was no "gun signage" whatsoever when their state law was "concealed".

I fail to see anything unique about Texas. Open carry gets passed:

1. Business posts a "no guns" or "no open carry" sign which does not conform to 30.06 as a request that customers not carry guns on the premises which has no legal weight behind it.

2. Joe Customer carries his gun past the sign because he knows it has no legal weight behind it.

3. Business owner or manager verbally tells Joe Customer that he must remove the firearm from the premises.

4. Joe Customer must comply with the request, and if he does not, he may be cited for trespassing.

^^^^That is exactly the way it is in all of the 45+ states where "no guns" signs have no weight of law behind them. And nothing changes in regards to 30.06 because 30.06 already contains the provision for verbal notification to be given (see 30.06 quoted at the end.)

5. LEO associations in Texas will complain about open carry because it will make life harder for them. Whenever the free exercise of rights by citizens is expanded it makes life more difficult for government/law enforcement.

6. The media will overreact and exaggerate and use the words "wild west" many more times in their reports/articles.

7. A handful of businesses will put up new no gun signss where there were none before.

8. Some concealed carry only snobs will blame open carry for the new signs instead of the anti-gun businesses that posted them.

9. A month later nobody will remember what all the hoopla was about.

Absolutely nothing unique about any of that, including the current pro-gun group comments inventing "uniqueness" and "controversy" where none exists - at least not in the 45+ states where open carry is already legal.

Sec. 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder: (1) carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and (2) received notice that: (A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was forbidden; or (B) remaining on the property with a concealed handgun was forbidden and failed to depart. (b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.

dogtown tom
February 18, 2014, 05:55 PM
NavyLCDR The only states that ban open carry completely are Illinois, Florida, DC, New York, South Carolina and Texas.
You would be wrong.
Texas law does not prohibit OPEN CARRY of handguns in several circumstances as well as not requiring a CHL to do so. A CHL is only required when you plan to carry your handgun concealed.

In some circumstances open carry of a handgun is REQUIRED.

Midwest
February 18, 2014, 06:04 PM
1. It scares people and this might have negative consequences.

2. It is seen to be tactically unsound and an attractor for gun desiring predators.

3. It is suggested that it might bring a resurgence of posting 30.06 signs and thus causing an unintended consequence of banning more locations.

4. It is not guaranteed that future governors and legislatures will be gun friendly in TX and no need to provoke that future risk.

Those are the common arguments. Let the flame war begin as I duck for cover.
Here is the solution, just open carry with this and everything will be ... 'ok'


http://www.glockforum.net/forum/attachments/off-topic-discussion/2503d1377666165-drop-gun-i-said-drop-bam-bam-bam-p_080000833_1.jpg

Greybeard
February 18, 2014, 06:32 PM
It seems that sumbuddy might best have concluded with post #12.

Absent that (and the "snobs" injection), how about staying on the original topic and backing up the "nothing unique" assertion by providing us with a the text and a link to any state(s) current Penal Code that has size and verbiage specifications any where close to:

"a sign posted on the property that: (i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish; (ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and (iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public."

???

Frosty Dave
February 18, 2014, 06:36 PM
As a long-time Okie, I thought it was interesting how closely Texas carry history paralleled ours.

And now having a form of open carry, I can say that we didn't have a flood of "man with a gun" 911 calls. It was very much in the news when the law passed and again when the law went into effect, so the soccer moms were not suddenly surprised.

Likewise, local LEOs got some new training on how to deal with most likely legal open carry incidents so those were non-events as well.

All in all, life was the same as it was before. On one OK forum members still report in that they finally saw someone actually openly carrying. The record is 2. :) I've only seen one "no guns" sign go up since the law passed and a half dozen come down.

Thanks for the link to your blog.

Mainsail
February 18, 2014, 06:55 PM
And now having a form of open carry, I can say that we didn't have a flood of "man with a gun" 911 calls.

Likewise, local LEOs got some new training on how to deal with most likely legal open carry incidents so those were non-events as well.

All in all, life was the same as it was before. On one OK forum members still report in that they finally saw someone actually openly carrying. The record is 2. :) I've only seen one "no guns" sign go up since the law passed and a half dozen come down.

Thanks for the link to your blog.
That's how it is pretty much anywhere. The only place open carry has been a problem is in the minds of the zealous anti-gunners and the minds of the zealous concealed carry only crowd.

Plan2Live
February 18, 2014, 07:51 PM
Since we seem to have slipped into a post regarding Open Carry I will throw in my two cents. I guess I'm missing something. Other than being too lazy to cover up I fail to see any advantage to open carry.

With that said, I do wish South Carolina had verbiage in their concealed carry laws that decriminalized momentary and unintentional "flashing" of a concealed carry firearm when your cover garment inadvertanly blows back or rides up as you reach for that top shelf. If that language was in our CC laws I would see no need for open carry.

Midwest
February 18, 2014, 07:59 PM
It looks like Kentucky and Louisiana were the first states to ban concealed in 1813. So it appears that we have had open carry since 1813. I believe our (KY) constitution only regulates concealed carry.


"The history of concealed carry"

http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-672350.html

GEM
February 18, 2014, 09:16 PM
BTW - I was summarizing what was said in the debate.

I'm quite OK with it being passed. I wish we would put more energy into campus carry though. Pragmatic issue for me.

NavyLCDR
February 18, 2014, 10:55 PM
It seems that sumbuddy might best have concluded with post #12.

Absent that (and the "snobs" injection), how about staying on the original topic and backing up the "nothing unique" assertion by providing us with a the text and a link to any state(s) current Penal Code that has size and verbiage specifications any where close to:

"a sign posted on the property that: (i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish; (ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and (iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public."

???
How about this, then....

Texas is somewhat unique in that it has some of the most restrictive laws concerning the carrying of handguns in public among all the states. Texas also has the unique 30.06 sign law. That being said, quoting your blog:

"In conclusion for now as it relates to the 30.06 signage: Currently, in the locations where many of us go on a daily basis, there are just not all that many 30.06 signs. What many of us fear is that if any "Open Carry" legislation happens to get passed and is not very carefully worded in regard to signage (as in NOT tied to the current 30.06 verbiage), it could result in just enough "Man with a Gun" calls to 911 to create an epidemic of wasted police resources, business owners and managers not wanting any more "panic attacks" in their buildings or parking lots and a rash of new 30.06 signs going up at thousands of locations where there are none present today."

An epidemic of wasted police resources?!? Thousands of locations banning firearms due to "panic attacks" caused by legalizing open carry? REALLY?!? Why not toss a couple comparisons to "wild west" in there while you are at it? I will agree with you - if "thousands of locations" in Texas post new "no guns" signs, whether they comply with 30.06 or not, and if there is an "epidemic of wasted police resources", then Texas will be unique. Because it hasn't happened in any other state when open carry has been legalized.

Walkalong
February 19, 2014, 01:29 PM
I deleted a few posts. Let's please keep it civil.

NavyLCDR
February 19, 2014, 01:34 PM
You would be wrong.
Texas law does not prohibit OPEN CARRY of handguns in several circumstances as well as not requiring a CHL to do so. A CHL is only required when you plan to carry your handgun concealed.

In some circumstances open carry of a handgun is REQUIRED.

Then why the doom and gloom predictions regarding open carry laws as expressed in the OP blog?

dogtown tom
February 19, 2014, 01:55 PM
NavyLCDR Quote:
Originally Posted by dogtown tom View Post
You would be wrong.
Texas law does not prohibit OPEN CARRY of handguns in several circumstances as well as not requiring a CHL to do so. A CHL is only required when you plan to carry your handgun concealed.

In some circumstances open carry of a handgun is REQUIRED.

Then why the doom and gloom predictions regarding open carry laws as expressed in the OP blog?
You'll have to ask the OP........its his blog.

Greybeard
February 19, 2014, 07:49 PM
I don't recall using the words "doom and gloom" (nor "wild west"). What I believe was clearly stated in the blog and again in post 10 was "very carefully worded in regard to signage". If such is not present in the next proposed legislation, THAT could very well be "gloom and doom" for prospects of expanded OC in Texas for at least another 2 years.

And, as stated, if and when I make time for another blog post more specific to OC progress (or lack thereof) in Texas, it will likely also include somewhat of an abbreviated "historical" approach, based upon observations of and discussions with primarily Texans.

Flintknapper
February 19, 2014, 08:12 PM
I guess I'm missing something. Other than being too lazy to cover up I fail to see any advantage to open carry.

Come spend a summer in Texas (concealed) and then we will talk about 'lazy' (vs. about to faint from the heat). ;)

I can offer other 'advantages', but I am sure they have been bantered back and forth here before....with no one having changed their minds.

I would love have the 'choice' to open or conceal carry.

Plan2Live
February 19, 2014, 08:16 PM
Come spend a summer in Texas (concealed) and then we will talk about 'lazy' (vs. about to faint from the heat).


I grew up in South Florida and have lived in central South Carolina for the past 24 years. I know a thing or two about heat and humidity.

Flintknapper
February 19, 2014, 11:29 PM
I grew up in South Florida and have lived in central South Carolina for the past 24 years. I know a thing or two about heat and humidity.

Then you can appreciate the need to dress in cool/light clothing. If you 'carry' then you must already be aware of the 'challenges' it can present with respect to concealing a handgun (other than a pocket pistol).

Open carry would relieve many of us having to 'dress around' a firearm.

'Comfort and ease of access' are a far departure from 'laziness' is my point.

Flint.

JRH6856
February 20, 2014, 06:49 PM
All things considered, I suspect a primary reason for objection to OC in Texas is that without a permit requirement it would have a negative impact on schools and instructors who provide the class required for a CHL since a lot of people would just opt to carry openly rather than pay for the CHL. A "carefully worded" law might be one that requires the same permit for either type of carry. :scrutiny:

buck460XVR
February 20, 2014, 07:34 PM
All things considered, I suspect a primary reason for objection to OC in Texas is that without a permit requirement it would have a negative impact on schools and instructors who provide the class required for a CHL since a lot of people would just opt to carry openly rather than pay for the CHL. A "carefully worded" law might be one that requires the same permit for either type of carry. :scrutiny:

That's an interesting observation and would mean that pro-gun folks would be against a pro-gun measure simply because of greed. Even tho we had a liberal open carry law before Wisconsin enacted our CWC rights, most folks, even with a training requirement, have opted for CWC instead of open carry. Part of it had to do with carrying in a vehicle. Without a CWC permit you can have a loaded handgun in a vehicle, but it must be exposed, other wise it must be encased and unloaded. This means if you are open carrying and go to the post office or other restricted area, you either unload the weapon and put it in a case before tuckin' it under the seat or you leave it lay open on the seat for all the world to see.....or you break the law. All in all, having a CWC permit and being allowed to open carry too, really is the best of both worlds.

JRH6856
February 20, 2014, 07:50 PM
That's an interesting observation and would mean that pro-gun folks would be against a pro-gun measure simply because of greed.

I would not say "greed", but in a capitalist system, profit is a legitimate motive and should not be ignored. Pro-gun does not equate to unselfish altruism in the name of the cause. We may all be in this together, but not necessarily all for the same reasons. :scrutiny:

NavyLCDR
February 20, 2014, 11:44 PM
The initial argument presented basically was - you can't have your rights expanded, because if you have your rights expanded it might have a negative impact on my ability to carry concealed in some places.

LeonCarr
February 26, 2014, 11:01 AM
That Lawman in the second photo looks familiar.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

Mainsail
February 26, 2014, 12:15 PM
The initial argument presented basically was - you can't have your rights expanded, because if you have your rights expanded it might have a negative impact on my ability to carry concealed in some places.

I agree, with the changes below: ;)

...you can't have your rights recognized, because if you have your rights recognized it might have a negative impact on my privilege to carry concealed in some places.

NavyLCDR
February 26, 2014, 12:17 PM
I agree, with the changes below: ;)

...you can't have your rights recognized, because if you have your rights recognized it might have a negative impact on my privilege to carry concealed in some places.
Very true, thank you for the correction!

If you enjoyed reading about "New Blog - began with Texas signage and OC" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!