|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 5, 2010, 02:02 PM | #1 |
Junior Member
Join Date: May 24, 2010
Posts: 5
|
rationale for concealed carry
I'm going to be getting my CHL here in Texas pretty soon, and I was wondering: what's the rationale behind concealing?
If someone catches a glimpse by accident, is it like, "Aw crap, game over, gotta go put my piece in the glove compartment"? Can I tell someone I'm carrying? Is it specifically a response to anti-open carry people? |
June 5, 2010, 02:11 PM | #2 |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
My understanding is that it was a necessary compromise to get carry legislation passed at all in Texas at the time.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
June 5, 2010, 02:58 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 24, 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 769
|
If you're asking about the legislative end, Tom's answer is good.
If you're asking about the personal choice of OC v CC well... there are numerous threads on that... Not sure if troll... If someone glimpses the pistol it's usually OK unless TX has a law about it... some might argue that if the pistol becomes partially uncovered that you're technically OCing and that has repercussions. Incidentally, it is NOT brandishing if the weapon is accidentally unconcealed. You usually don't have to put the weapon away if someone sees it. You can tell whoever you want that you're carrying. I wouldn't walk up to a LEO and say "Yo I'm packing" cuz that might elicit a very... interesting reaction. CCing is not at all a response to anyone other than criminals who might attempt to do us harm. It has nothing to do with "anti-OC" or anything like this. |
June 5, 2010, 07:21 PM | #4 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 25, 2006
Location: Oak Harbor, WA
Posts: 1,719
|
Quote:
Last edited by NavyLT; June 5, 2010 at 07:26 PM. |
|
June 5, 2010, 08:55 PM | #5 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
June 5, 2010, 09:28 PM | #6 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 24, 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 769
|
Quote:
Thankfully we have VERY good mods that usually put and end to this stuff pretty quick The above is not brown nosing, it is a warning to OP. |
|
June 6, 2010, 12:13 AM | #7 | |||||
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,928
|
Quote:
If you mean why did the law require that the gun be concealed then the answer is that it required it because it is a concealed handgun law. Quote:
On the other hand, if it seems to get "accidentally exposed" a lot then you could find yourself in trouble. Quote:
On the other hand, if you go around telling everyone you meet that you are carrying a gun then you will probably get some decidedly negative responses and results. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
|||||
June 6, 2010, 07:36 PM | #8 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 25, 2006
Location: Oak Harbor, WA
Posts: 1,719
|
Quote:
|
|
June 6, 2010, 11:36 PM | #9 |
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,928
|
TX "gun control" laws started cropping up shortly after the civil war and appear to have had a lot less to do with anti-gun legislators than they did with racist legislators worried about freed slaves carrying firearms.
It's likely that in the beginning the laws were applied selectively but that became impossible as time marched on. From what I can tell this sort of thing wasn't at all uncommon in the southern states and certainly wasn't specific to TX. Getting back to the point; if you have any evidence that the TX CHL laws were affected by anti-gunners trying to keep open carry illegal or pro-gunners trying to appease anti-gunners by making concealment a legal requirement, I'd like to see it.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
June 6, 2010, 11:49 PM | #10 |
Junior member
Join Date: January 25, 2006
Location: Oak Harbor, WA
Posts: 1,719
|
Yes, you are correct, most "may issue" permit laws were/are Jim Crow laws.
|
June 7, 2010, 12:03 AM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Location: Kodiak, Alaska
Posts: 2,118
|
If only the whole country adopted the Alaska doctrine..
It really stuck in my craw; watching the show "Alaska State Troopers"... The narrator would often say something to the effect of: "In Alaska, there are no permits required to buy or carry a handgun. This could cause even the simplest of traffic stops to turn deadly in seconds." As if no traffic stops are deadly in Illinois, California, or New York... Really ticked me off. All of the LEO's I know in Kodiak range from neutral to heavily in favor of Alaska's carry laws. I wish all the states had good sense enough to pass similar legislation.
__________________
"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." -Richard Henry Lee, Virginia delegate to the Continental Congress, initiator of the Declaration of Independence, and member of the first Senate, which passed the Bill of Rights. |
June 7, 2010, 12:29 AM | #12 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
June 7, 2010, 09:33 AM | #13 |
Junior Member
Join Date: May 24, 2010
Posts: 5
|
OP here, sorry if I worded my question trollish-ly. I'm genuinely curious about the rationale behind making people conceal their guns. In my mind, all it does is make you wonder who's carrying and who's not, since you already know someone is, because of the existence of the CHL law.
On a side note, the new metal detectors at the Capitol seem to have had the unexpected effect of making a bunch of people get CHLs who wouldn't have otherwise (journalists and lobbyists, mainly), because if you have a CHL you can bypass the line for the metal detectors. Hopefully another consequence will be maybe that if all these liberal journalists get CHLs, the scales will fall from their eyes (at least a little bit) w/r/t guns, and we'll get some more honest reporting about the issues. |
June 7, 2010, 09:43 AM | #14 |
Junior member
Join Date: January 25, 2006
Location: Oak Harbor, WA
Posts: 1,719
|
IMHO, the only people whom the requirement to conceal protects is those afraid of guns. The requirement to conceal severely restricts the second amendment right to keep and BEAR arms, if a permit is also required in order to conceal.
Notice the word requirement and not option above. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|