Open Carry Texas writes [via ammoland.com]:
Open Carry Texas has aggressively fought for constitutional carry legislation since its founding in 2013. Constitutional carry is simply defined as the right to carry a firearm without a license if you can legally purchase and possess one. It does not change who is prohibited by law from carrying (felons, domestic abusers, etc.). Texans should be able to walk into a gun shop, purchase a handgun after passing a background check, and immediately holster and carry that handgun without having to obtain a government permission slip or pay a second amendment tax.
Licensing schemes only present roadblocks to law abiding citizens since criminals, by definition, don’t obey laws.
Opponents of this legislation invoke scary language like “blood in the streets,” “felons will be able to carry,” “violent crime will increase,” and “law enforcement won’t be able to tell the good guys from the bad guys.” These are all faulty arguments that have no basis in reality.
Texas, once again, is not the driving engine on this issue; we are the caboose. Currently, 12 states have constitutional carry: Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Kansas, Missouri,Minnesota, Arkansas, Mississippi, West Virginia, Vermont and Maine.
An additional 21 states do not require a license to open carry. That makes Texas one of only 17 states that require a license to carry at all (five of which outright ban open carry).
After Arizona passed constitutional carry in 2010, violent crime dipped over 20 percent. In Mississippi, the law enforcement community overwhelmingly opposed constitutional carry when it was passed last year, but those same groups have had to admit that it’s been a “non-issue.”
With two-thirds of the United States allowing some form of unlicensed carry and none of the doom and gloom predictions having come true there, all the arguments against it are baseless here.
We urge our legislators to pass constitutional carry this session. Since the 84th Legislative Session, the number of states where the unlicensed free exercise of the right to keep and bear arms is recognized has increased from five to twelve – a 120 percent increase!
With a supposedly conservative and “pro-gun” majority in both chambers, along with a self-described “pro-gun” Lieutenant Governor and Governor, the only people standing in the way of these rights are Republicans.
There is no excuse not to pass it. If the support isn’t there, as Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick claims, then bring it to a vote so we can see where the lack of support exists to hold them accountable next election cycle.
The Republican Party of Texas platform lists constitutional carry as its number one priority. We expect Republicans in Austin to enforce the will of the people and implement the platform agenda on gun rights.
My prediction if you put it to a vote…pass the Senate. Probably won’t go to floor in house. Rep Stickland is probably Speaker Straus’ least favorite right now. And stuff coming from the Senate is going to have a tough row to hoe in the House this session as the Speaker and Lt Gov’s priorities are starting to diverge.
If you look at the bills filed as a sign, the trend is to remove the fees required for a LTC, vice Constitutional Carry. This way they still do the background check and issue a license, but remove the costs. If this passes, CC is dead.
“If this passes, CC is dead.”
Please explain your thought process.
See Stinkeye’s comment below.
Last year if I looked to the presidential candidates who filed to run as a sign, the trend indicated that a career politician of one flavor or another, most likely one with a name long associated with the presidency, would be president today.
Strange things can happen in politics. Signs are signs, not certainties, and even then don’t always point in the right direction.
All of what you say is true. Based on the number of filings and co-sponsors, it would appear that intent of the pro-gun legislation is centered around removing or reducing the fees for LTC, rather than a big push for constitutional carry (CC). Similar to last session where the intent could be read looking at the filings and sponsors of OC and to a smaller degree, Campus Carry. Campus Carry nearly failed and the weak law was the result. Const Carry is only being championed by one Sen and a handful of Reps, none of which enjoy most favored status with the Speaker.
I don’t claim to be all knowing or perfect, but my job involves a fair amount of interaction with the lege. But this is the TX lege we’re talking about so things can go any direction at any time. I just call them as I see them on the give day.
Could TTAG have found a photo to use that did not help present OCT as a group of racist hillbilly white guys?
Racist… the little confederate flag-sticker… Really??
No where in my post did I say that I thought it was racist, or that I was offended by it. I’m not at all. Nor do I believe that flag stands for racism.
I could see how it could be read that way I guess. I’ll try to explain myself better next time.
There are many people out there that think gun owners are white hillbilly racist. These are the same people that think that flag = racist. There is no need to pass on this type of eye candy if it can be avoided. That is what I was referring to.
Troybilt wins idiot of the day award…
I win that almost every day at work. I’m very pleased to have won it here at TTAG for my 1st time lol.
I understood what you meant.
@Troybilt Exactly what I was thinking..
Troybilt – you are correct sir!
Racist? That’s the state flag of Texa… wait… (zoom, enhance, squints closely…) oh, that… hmmmph.
@Troybuilt if you study a bit of history it can be enlightening and you may learn something useful. One of the primary features of knowing what you are talking about is that you are less likely to say stupid things and embarrass yourself.
As someone with a masters in American history and who has spent a decade professionally studying history, I consider myself pretty well informed on the subject. The Confederate flag is not overtly racist, but it has had racist connotations throughout its history and is of course tied to the CSA which was innately racist in its quest to keep blacks in slavery and to keep free and enslaved blacks from basic human rights even well after the war was over.
A few “nice” Southern quotes from the period:
Future Confederate general Stephan Dodson Ramseur: “…Slavery, the very source of our existence, the greatest blessing both for Master & Slave that could have been bestowed upon us.”
Mississippi Senator Albert Gallatin Brown: “I want Cuba . . . I want Tamaulipas, Potosi, and one or two other Mexican States; and I want them all for the same reason — for the planting and spreading of slavery.”
John B. Baldwin at the Virginia Secession Convention, March 21, 1861: “I say, then, that viewed from that standpoint, there is but one single subject of complaint which Virginia has to make against the government under which we live; a complaint made by the whole South, and that is on the subject of African slavery….the great cause of complaint now is the slavery question, and the questions growing out of it. If there is any other cause of complaint which has been influential in any quarter, to bring about the crisis which is now upon us; if any State or any people have made the troubles growing out of this question, a pretext for agitation instead of a cause of honest complaint, Virginia can have no sympathy whatever, in any such feeling, in any such policy, in any such attempt. It is the slavery question. Is it not so?.
A student of History? Go read the New York Times from the year before the civil war.
It was a war of state’s rights – NOT slavery. Slavery became the main issue DURING the war.
Note: CON-Federate (Against the power of the federal government).
The north was not racist? Then read about the 3/5 compromise. The north (not the south) said that slaves should NOT count as a full person for representation – the south argued they should!
The north grabbed onto slavery to get France to enter on the side of the North, a year after the war started.
Was slavery wrong and odious? YES! But don’t paint that bullshit of the racists were in the south and the north was not.
IN FACT to this day, the most segregated portions of the country are the areas of Boston, Pennsylvania, and Chicago!
The only person that embarrassed himself was you. Troybilt was right on the money. The majority of Americans know exactly what that hated flag stood for, racism, traitors to the country, bigotry and intolerance of all minorities and immigrants.
The best way to please all the civilized people in America would be for the U.S. Army to use Stone Mountain as an artillery range and blast it off the planet. And lets not forget to use C4 plastic explosive on all the outrageous monuments to the traitorous leaders of the South.
The end of the Civil War some of the Southern Traitors actually had the correct idea. They left the U.S. and went to South America and their decedents are still there to this day and still hold annual celebrations to the war. Of course come to think of it so do a lot of the far right Americans too. They love to give interviews to the Press about it.
In conclusion: “Time does not erase or condone the traitorous acts of the leaders of the South.” How some of these Morons today can still stick out their chests and say they are proud of their ancestors that did everything they could to destroy the U.S. is simply beyond any sane persons comprehension.
Whenever I seen such a picture of some Moron waving the Confederate Flag with a gun in his hand it makes it difficult for me to even begin to argue about gun rights to those who do not own guns.. You are beaten before you even open your mouth to defend the Second Amendment. Its the perfect propaganda the people who want to destroy the Second Amendment use which is: Confederate Flag waving, gun toting, racist, bigoted, xenophobic Moron who is a danger to the Constitutional Rights of the American people, especially minorities who according to the flag waver have no rights.
Why would CC be “dead”? Even with Constitutional Carry, many will choose to carry concealed. And having a license means no NICS checks and eligibility for national reciprocity.
By “CC”, he meant constitutional, not concealed, carry.
And by dead, he probably meant if the bill to eliminate the license fee passes, it will give the RINOs in the legislature cover so that they can avoid having to deal with CC this session and still claim they did something to advance gun rights.
Yes. Thank you, that is exactly what I meant.
This is as far as I got, or cared to go:
“Constitutional carry is simply defined as the right to carry a firearm without a license if you can legally purchase and possess one. It does not change who is prohibited by law from carrying (felons, domestic abusers, etc.). Texans should be able to walk into a gun shop, purchase a handgun after passing a background check, and immediately holster and carry that handgun without having to obtain a government permission slip or pay a second amendment tax.”
There is NOTHING Constitutional about the government deciding whether or not you can legally purchase a firearm – “…shall not be infringed.” There is nothing in the Second Amendment about felons or domestic abusers being prohibited from carrying firearms, nor allowing the government to decide which laws the government decides to pass, if violated, will make you forever ineligible to exercise your Second Amendment protected right to keep and bear arms.
The Second Amendment contains NO PROVISION for the government to create, maintain and enforce a list of persons who may not, in the opinion of the very government the Second Amendment was intended to protect us from, exercise their RKBA unless they pass a background check to determine if they are on any of their “prohibited persons” lists.
Which leaves the question, is there ANYTHING in the Open Carry Texas proposal for Constitutional Carry that has anything at all to do with The Constitution of the United States of America? It almost seems as though they have not actually read that document.
Alternatively, perhaps they realize that the only way to get this done at all is small bites at the apple. Perhaps they understand that with the nature of politics any attempt to restore firearms rights to felons and domestic abusers will A. Kill the bill and B. Destroy their political capital. Perhaps we have finally learned to use incremental ism in our favor with rollbacks on infringements one or two at a time each legislative session. May be slower than we like and harder than we like but it sure beats going for broke and getting nothing at all.
This, I believe, is the main lesson learned by Open Carry Texas in the fight for open carry two years ago. We went in trying to get permitless open carry, and came away with permitted open carry. Not ideal, but had we started off demanding constitutional carry for all, we would likely have come away with exactly nothing.
We got into the situation we’re in through decades of incremental infringements, and rolling all of those back in one fell swoop is more or less impossible if we stick to peaceful political processes.
What worked in Texas may not work elsewhere.
Texas (except Austin) is moderately pro gun. Most of the country is neutral and will tolerate gun owners if they aren’t threatening. They say most voters make up their mind on how to vote on a proposition on the ballot in less than a minute. The decision is probably made on image. Gun owners need to present a positive image that is responsible and does not intimidate society.
Tell that to the idiots who are in charge of amending the Texas State Constitution. I’m serious. Statism is a religion, and something the people of the world need to learn. You have a duty to preach nullification where the laws are ungodly.
Sec. 23. RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS. Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defense of himself or the State; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime.
Regarding the photo with the flag….
First amendment.
And if you see something you don’t like or something that “triggers” you…..ignore it! It’s that simple.
Don’t be so weak that a simple picture or someone else’s view throws you into meltdown.
I’m far from weak. And if I see something I dislike, I speak up. Because ignoring things you dislike has a name: Appeasement.
That guy with a flag and a gun looks like he is trying to intimidate others to vote the way he wants it. The Taliban carries flags and rifles in Afghanistan to influence votes and security forces are allowed to shoot them on site.
Regardless of how civil the person in the picture is, it looks like Taliban style voter intimidation.
The PUBLIC RELATIONS PICTURE OF GUN & FLAG MAN IS HORRIBLE!!!
Surf,
You, Mercer & suckanazi need to go chase your race card dealing asses up an alley!
That file photo has been on numerous sites since 2015, and never fails to bring out the yankee libtard race comments. ?
My post said nothing about race, only the image it projects. I am actually pro-gun but live in a coastal county in California and always have to explain my hobby to others.
If locals see gun owners as threatening, our liberties will disappear overnight
Hmmm….let me guess….because it’s racist?
How do you jump to “voter intimidation” from that picture? That’s almost certainly a photo from a pro-open-carry rally of some kind. I don’t see a polling place anywhere in the picture.
Also, I suspect that the orders to shoot Taliban dudes on sight in Afghanistan have more to do with the fact that the Taliban has declared war on the elected government and engaged in constant terror attacks against civilians. It probably has very little to do with Taliban attempts at voter coercion.
I did not say the man in the picture intends to intimidate voters.
The point is that many people have seen the TV coverage of Taliban voter intimidation. When people see this gun & flag guy, people will be reminded of the Taliban and other sketchy characters regardless of how civil this guy behaves.
If we ever expect to keep our freedoms, we have to project a positive and non-threatening image
May I ask how I won the idiot of the day when there is such a deserving post just shortly below my post?
Is there a easy way to pass my invisible trophy on?
IMHO consider it passed.
… has increased from five to twelve – a 120 percent increase!
P.S. Also increase funding for basic math classes.
What about us that were shit creek with a feloney 30 years ago by corupted law before cell phones videos ect
Comments are closed.