Is there something in the water in Texas?....

Status
Not open for further replies.
Would there be so much outrage if the demonstrations were about an incorrectly perceived disease (like AIDS) and the restrictions placed due to "public unease and fear"? ...or where one had to sit on a bus?

I realize those pesky civil rights marches of the fifties and sixties caused "distress amongst the public", did those demonstrations make the citizens deprived of their rights less worthy to be heard, and less deserving the exercise of Constitutionally guaranteed practices? Some thought so, and pronounced them "backward, even sub human". (As opposed to "bucktoothed rednecks with small reproductive organs").

And perhaps more important, who were those that chose to suppress and criticize, back in those days so easily forgotten?

The issue is NOT firearms. The issue is the recognition and sworn defense of the Constitution, not just those parts of it that happen to be trendy, and not just those rights that avoid making others "uncomfortable".
 
Last edited:
Perhaps more useful than a list of ridiculous amateur Freudian analysis and ad hominen attacks would be a summary of somewhat reasonable but erroneous arguments made against open carrying. The three primary arguments seem to be:

1. OC is strategically unsound because the OC-er is the one who will be shot first when some bad guy decides to start shooting.

No one can cite even a single example of this ever occurring.

2. There is no tactical advantage to OC over CC.

This is clearly false otherwise everyone from cops and the military to competitive shooters would do away with belt holsters and carry concealed instead. The fact of the matter is that next to a gun already in the hands, a gun easily accessible at one's fingertips, without the need to fumble with clothing, digging around in a pocket or fishing around in one's pants, is the quickest gun to get into action when required. I daresay no one can draw and fire from an IWB or otherwise concealed rig as fast as they can an open outside-carried gun.

3. OC is bad because it alienates/scares/offends people.

I can't address this any better than Old TexMex does in the post above. In short, sometimes people need to be alienated/scared/offended.
 
Last edited:
Would there be so much outrage if the demonstrations were about an incorrectly perceived disease (like AIDS) and the restrictions placed due to "public unease and fear"? ...Or the color of a mans skin?

I realize those pesky civil rights marches of the fifties and sixties caused "distress amongst the public", did those demonstrations make the citizens deprived of their rights less worthy to be heard, and less deserving the exercise of Constitutionally guaranteed practices? Some thought so, and pronounced them "backward, even sub human". (As opposed to "bucktoothed rednecks with small reproductive organs").

And perhaps more important, who were those that chose to suppress and criticize, back in those days so easily forgotten?

The issue is NOT firearms. The issue is the recognition and sworn defense of the Constitution, not just those parts of it that happen to be trendy, and not just those rights that avoid making others "uncomfortable".

I could give that a dozen likes.......in fact, I will. :D

like like like like like like like like like like like like

I support the whole Constitution, even parts that may be distasteful to me. Having anyone losing their rights afforded under the Constitution is unacceptable....to me. Who's next?
 
Last edited:
Open carry.
Concealed carry.
Why I've done both,
Most times at the same time.

Am I right or wrong....Who's to say.

All men should be able to choose for themselves what suits them best.

As for that OCT crowd, they are well meaning, but misdirected in their efforts.....

Carrying rifles in to eat joints is just plain ol rude behavior by my notion.

May they be forgiving, as they really don't know what they do.

That is all for today........


.

Oh, would any of you want to wear a rig like this'n to your neighbor's BBQ shindig?



Wells, as of today (unless you are totin a badge) it would be against the Texas statutes......


.
 
I don't object to open carry as such, my objection is to the idea of walking into a private establishment with a long gun strapped to your back or in some cases held at low ready.

Unlike the civil rights movement these people aren't being called out on their race or ethnicity they are being called out on their specific behavior which is within their control.

Also to reiterate what I said upthread these clowns aren't making us any friends. So far every place they've tried this stunt has kicked them out and then prohibited all firearms from their premises. How many times is this going to happen before they get it?

If they want to protest go stand in front of City hall or the State Capital
 
I don't object to open carry as such, my objection is to the idea of walking into a private establishment with a long gun strapped to your back or in some cases held at low ready.

Unlike the civil rights movement these people aren't being called out on their race or ethnicity they are being called out on their specific behavior which is within their control.

Also to reiterate what I said upthread these clowns aren't making us any friends. So far every place they've tried this stunt has kicked them out and then prohibited all firearms from their premises. How many times is this going to happen before they get it?

If they want to protest go stand in front of City hall or the State Capital

I'm begining to wonder if there might be some truth to the idea that these are ANTI-GUN people doing this, knowing that guns will be banned from each location they choose.
 
I don't object to open carry as such, my objection is to the idea of walking into a private establishment with a long gun strapped to your back or in some cases held at low ready.

Unlike the civil rights movement these people aren't being called out on their race or ethnicity they are being called out on their specific behavior which is within their control.

Also to reiterate what I said upthread these clowns aren't making us any friends. So far every place they've tried this stunt has kicked them out and then prohibited all firearms from their premises. How many times is this going to happen before they get it?

If they want to protest go stand in front of City hall or the State Capital

The second Amendement is about, by definition, a civil right. To be clear, most civil rights are NOT conditions that are beyond ones choice. Free speech, assembly religion and most all the other "conditions" are a matter of freedom of choice.
I may not agree, nor approve of what you say/ do, but I swore an oath to defend your right to say/ do it.
A study of gun control in the south will raise some eyebrows, as will the history of gun control in the Midwestern cities.
 
''...sometimes people need to be alienated/scared/offended.''
I don't think that's a very sound legal principle.
Near as I can tell, gun owners have to depend on the ''good will'' of their governors and legislatures to get OC passed in places that don't have it yet. Alienating, etc., these legislators or the rest of their constituents is not going to accomplish a thing except push more undecided votes into the anti's column.
 
TexMex, I don't mean to be disagreeable, but I have to point out something.
If the right to OC is so fundamental to the Second Amendment, why are we having to get it passed by every legislature in every state? Seems to me ''somebody'' doesn't consider it as such, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion...
 
The second Amendement is about, by definition, a civil right. To be clear, most civil rights are NOT conditions that are beyond ones choice. Free speech, assembly religion and most all the other "conditions" are a matter of freedom of choice.
I may not agree, nor approve of what you say/ do, but I swore an oath to defend your right to say/ do it.
A study of gun control in the south will raise some eyebrows, as will the history of gun control in the Midwestern cities.

You do not have a civil right to carry a gun on private property against the owners wishes anymore than we have a first amendment right to discuss politics on this forum against Handejector's wishes.

Again these peope are not helping to advance our cause. if you want to change the law in Texas start writing letters to your state reps letting them know that your continued support depends on their stance regarding the second amendment and Texas Open Carry.

That will change the law a lot faster than carrying an AR at the Waffle House
 
Excellent historical perspective, TexMex.

Constitutional/civil rights fights are not often won by the timid or by criticizing and insulting those standing up for them.

For many years... each step of the way from Shall Issue on forward has been met with resistance, criticism and handwringing by those who profess to have gun owners best interests in mind. They have been routinely wrong.

The entire notion of assault weapon bans is to appease and not offend... "not alienate" others with evil black rifles. Where did that get anyone? The moment any AWB is passed the non-alienated march forward with more things to be offended by. In NY the limit for offending others is now 7 rounds.

Now this is not to say that there are not better ways to do things. The NRA should provide support and guidance to these grassroots groups fighting 2A infringement. Posting insults to gun owners who have the gumption to get off the couch and stand up for the 2A isn't the path to victory. Chris Cox appears to have come to that conclusion and I hope other gun owners do too.
 
Again these peope are not helping to advance our cause. if you want to change the law in Texas start writing letters to your state reps letting them know that your continued support depends on their stance regarding the second amendment and Texas Open Carry.

How's that been working for ya in Colorado?
 
They keep it up and there'll be a new law prohibiting OC anything within city/town limits.
 
If the right to OC is so fundamental to the Second Amendment, why are we having to get it passed by every legislature in every state? Seems to me ''somebody'' doesn't consider it as such, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion...

Lots of people do not think carrying a handgun at all is fundamental to the 2A. That's why Shall Issue was fought for and passed in most every state. It's been a decades long hard fight, state by state.

And it was the same old story with criticisms, insults and predictions of doom... warnings that it would result in blood in the streets and the loss of even more 2A rights. The naysayers were once again proven wrong.

Take a look at the animated map (second one down) and see the victories state by state from 1986 thru 2013.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed_carry_in_the_United_States
 
Last edited:
"There you go again..."

It's about the sex organ, huh?
You guys are pitiful.

Doesn't Cosmo have a forum?


If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck. It's a sure bet, it's a duck.
BTW, They didn't even allow OC in Tombstone. Look up OK Corral.
 
Why don't you ask John Morse, Evie Hudak and Angela Giron?

Ok. The below is what the Governor answered per your link.

Anyway... let's not hijack this thread with Colorado's move backward... or Magpul's move to Texas.

Hickenlooper said he doesn't anticipate lawmakers introducing new gun bills or repealing any laws passed in 2013.

BTW, They didn't even allow OC in Tombstone. Look up OK Corral.

I don't know about then..... but open carry is legal now.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top