Will we ever get constitutional carry?

[KAK]

I was just wondering what yall think? I know quite a few law abiding people that say they would carry if thay didnt have to go through the hassle of a 10hr class or pay 300 bucks. Why leave these lawful people unarmed?

Wyoming has it now! Texas should too.

 

[txinvestigator]

The question is impossible to answer. No one has a crystal ball. However, I predict this thread becomes one of the arguments for what you call constitutional carry, wit a few rants thrown in for good measure. lol

 

[KAK]

Well its becoming pretty popular. I would be very disappointed if it didnt come up eventually.

I will have my chl in 2-3 weeks, and I still believe in constitutional carry. I dont even care that I spent 300 bucks on a license. I want to arm more good guys!

 

[mkillebrew]

Florida non-resident license is $117 and requires no ten hour class, though that's likely beside the point.

 

[txinvestigator]

Hey KAK, can you pin down what you mean by Constitutional Carry? Be specific if you can. IOW, sort of "write the law".

Then we will have a basis for discussion. Or are you just for eliminating Penal Code 46.02 altogether?

I am interested in this topic and have mixed feelings.

 

[zembonez]

I certainly believe (as most here probably do) that anyone who can legally possess a firearm should be able to carry if they so choose - without a license - or at the very least with a streamlined one day training/educational program.

 

[Randman]

I certainly believe (as most here probably do) that anyone who can legally possess a firearm should be able to carry if they so choose - without a license - or at the very least with a streamlined one day training/educational program.

No where in the 2ND "A" does it discuss a training/educational program or course. I for one would not have a problem with it, other than the obvious how do you know if the person took the course. Is there still a card to be carried? name on a list of course completions etc.. Given the times we live in I would love to see more law abiding citizens carrying weapons. My fear is that there are too many out there that are somewhat clueless when it comes to this. I'll use two examples...

one, having children..too many clueless people having babies, look at the mess we are in..

Two.. Too many idiots on Motorcycles that are clueless, I can't tell you how many morons have jumped on brand new bikes only to drop them before they get out of the parking lot..A class would have prevented 99% of those drops.
I don't know what would prevent clueless moronic parents, other than an IQ test before being allowed to procreate.

just my .02

 

[MR Redneck]

One day I think we will. Actually I think it's going to begin in about 730 days.

 

[zembonez]

No where in the 2ND "A" does it discuss a training/educational program or course. I for one would not have a problem with it, other than the obvious how do you know if the person took the course. Is there still a card to be carried? name on a list of course completions etc.. Given the times we live in I would love to see more law abiding citizens carrying weapons. My fear is that there are too many out there that are somewhat clueless when it comes to this. I'll use two examples...

one, having children..too many clueless people having babies, look at the mess we are in..

Two.. Too many idiots on Motorcycles that are clueless, I can't tell you how many morons have jumped on brand new bikes only to drop them before they get out of the parking lot..A class would have prevented 99% of those drops.
I don't know what would prevent clueless moronic parents, other than an IQ test before being allowed to procreate.

just my .02

I understand people wanting everything to be free and unfiltered... but the reality is that unlimited carry for those who can legally own a firearm would be a much easier "sell" to today's uninformed public if there was a short training course involved - plus it would likely improve the safety of many of those who choose to carry, not because they are dumb, but because many are untrained in the use of firearms.

 

[KAK]

One day I think we will. Actually I think it's going to begin in about 730 days.

What exactly do you mean by this?

My definition of constitutional carry is the following: anyone who can legally posses their firearm should be able to carry it as their firearm is their own property.

CHL should still be in place for reciprocity reasons. I believe it is only constitutional if the law doesn't infringe you from bearing your arms.

 

[kurt]

What exactly do you mean by this?

Disaster Countdown - End of Mayan Calendar

 

[Texan2]

Wow, this thread is going in an interesting direction.

 

[txinvestigator]

My definition of constitutional carry is the following: anyone who can legally posses their firearm should be able to carry it as their firearm is their own property.

How would you have this accomplished? Eliminate 46.02 of the Penal Code? Are you OK with the current state and federal restrictions on "possession"?

I assume you want no licensing. So could a Peace Officer then stop you and run a background if he observed you carrying a handgun? How exactly would the "legally able to posses a firearm" be enforced?

 

[KAK]

I am fine with the current possession limitations. I guess it would be fine with me for the cop to actually make a nics check or similar if they are suspicious.

 

[SC-Texas]

I am not fine with the current limitations but I accept them with the exception of the vawa limitations that raise a misdemeanor to essentially a felony.

The constitution should be amended to allow open and or concealed carry of a firearm or knife or sword. Hell, through a switchblade in there. The only prohibited weapons should be nuclear bombs and nerve gas.

This pretty much eradicates 46.

 

[KAK]

Well if we could get it that far than I agree. I was just saying for the sake of constitutional carry I could deal with the current ilmitations.

 

[zembonez]

When a bunch of like minded people (like us) has trouble weeding through this issue and agreeing on proper solutions, it proves how touchy it is with some people (on all sides). I really believe that much more exposure to (and readily available training in the use of) firearms would go along way toward changing the perception that a lot of the public has regarding their safety and would encourage more new gun owners. We can all make a positive impact.

If we suck it up and try to put a positive spin on these issues as a group, we might actually get somewhere.

If we come across as a bunch of nuts, we only make it worse.

In the end we want to win.

 

[MR Redneck]

What's so troubling about Constitutional Carry?
All ya got to do is look at Arizona's Penal Code on weapons. It's damn near perfect.
They dont allow felons and criminals to run around with guns, but they have perfected the process for a felon to prove he is no threat to the public in order to get his rights back. I actually have a friend who done that out there.
You have to have some rules in place, but you dont have to simply restrict every damn body in the state because some assholes think they should be the only ones carrying guns around.
WTF people, I carry guns all over the place. I dont have a CHL either. Does that make me unsafe? When I go to New Mexico and Arizona, they dont give a crap if I have a permit or not. Never had any issues with carrying firearms anywhere I have been other than in Texas.

 

[Texastransplant]

A police officer would have to have probable cause. Carrying a firearm would not be probable cause under constitutional carry. Constitutional carry is just that, the right to bear arms. Probable cause, in the commision of a crime, displaying firearm in a threating manner etc. Just like CHL and CCW Constitutional Carry reduces crime. Anything added to "the right to bear arms shally not be infringed" is NOT Constitutional Carry. When you add anything to that you are taking brick by brick away a piece of what the foundation the Founding Fathers built.

How would you have this accomplished? Eliminate 46.02 of the Penal Code? Are you OK with the current state and federal restrictions on "possession"?

I assume you want no licensing. So could a Peace Officer then stop you and run a background if he observed you carrying a handgun? How exactly would the "legally able to posses a firearm" be enforced?

 

[matefrio]

How would you have this accomplished? Eliminate 46.02 of the Penal Code? Are you OK with the current state and federal restrictions on "possession"?

I assume you want no licensing. So could a Peace Officer then stop you and run a background if he observed you carrying a handgun? How exactly would the "legally able to posses a firearm" be enforced?

Make optional the license, background check, class and shooting test of the CHL and let everyone carry under current CHL laws if they can legally possess a firearm but also with the less restrictive traveling\other exemptions. And I do think 30.06 signs should sill be posted if you'd want to.

As for police stops, You don't need a CHL now to conceal in your home, place of business and car, on the way to the range etc so how would this be any different than stopping someone who can legally own a gun and is carrying legally but without a license?