breaking-texas-open-carry-campus-carry-bills-pass-committee/

[Saltyag2010]

Why choose OC over concealed carry? OC
just stirs up the sheep! We have the right to OC, I just don't see the necessity of exercis-ing that right.What's wrong with concealed carry?Why not put all our effort into getting concealed carry,without need of a license? If
you want to OC, go to it,I just don't see any advantage over concealed carry.

Damnit not again.

Were trying to expand rights here. They haven't introduced CC without CHL. Wait your turn.

OC is an expansion of rights. The government works slowly.

 

[benenglish]

so, if you hang a holster in your waistband and don't wear a belt your break the law?

That's not what it says. In fact, it doesn't define (or I just missed it) "shoulder or belt holster." So if you have a holster with a slot for a belt, that's a belt holster, right? If that's the case, I don't see anything here that prevents you from taping it to your leg or wearing it on a string around your neck.

 

[benenglish]

... 3 point retention or higher holsters.

I just read the text. The whole "3 point" thing has been cut out, right?

 

[locke_n_load]

I just read the text. The whole "3 point" thing has been cut out, right?

It was not in the original bill, but will probably be added as an amendment, praying that it gets voted down.

 

[benenglish]

They added A requirement you OC on belt or shoulder holster only. this level of micro-legislation is retarded.

I see the requirement but I see NO requirement that said shoulder or belt holster must actually be attached to your person at the shoulder or belt line.

 

[benenglish]

It was not in the original bill, but will probably be added as an amendment, praying that it gets voted down.

If it gets amended in, that's a load of suckage, right there.

 

[benenglish]

Maybe they're trying to prevent AR pistols from being slung up.

Maybe. But the language, as I read it, doesn't prevent that. It just requires that the pistol be carried in a shoulder or belt holster.

Fine.

Someone will design a belt holster for AR pistols that does not interfere with the operation of the pistol. Put that on the pistol, then carry it via sling. As I read the text of the bill, that will satisfy the requirement to use a "shoulder or belt holster".

I spent a lot of years reading, interpreting, and acting on federal law for a living. I even wrote a couple of paragraphs, here and there. As I read it, the text of this bill does not require what people think it requires.

 

[AustinN4]

As I read it, the text of this bill does not require what people think it requires.

Such as?

 

[Younggun]

Maybe. But the language, as I read it, doesn't prevent that. It just requires that the pistol be carried in a shoulder or belt holster.

Fine.

Someone will design a belt holster for AR pistols that does not interfere with the operation of the pistol. Put that on the pistol, then carry it via sling. As I read the text of the bill, that will satisfy the requirement to use a "shoulder or belt holster".

Or a thigh rig. They have loops that attach to a belt.Sounds like a belt holster to me.


Of course, all this points out the problem with holster requirements. There are no real legal definitions for the different levels or types. It will only cause problems.

 

[TX69]

I'm pumped about getting a CHL badge!!!!!

/sarcasm

I'm gonna start selling these!

 

[kyletxria1911a1]

So when you talk about 3 point holsters is that a level 4 holster. I have a serpa Blackhawk
That locks mine down mine reads lvl 3

 

[roadkill]

 

[locke_n_load]

So when you talk about 3 point holsters is that a level 4 holster. I have a serpa Blackhawk
That locks mine down mine reads lvl 3

As YG pointed out, there are no industry standards. Serpa could call it a level 8 holster if they wanted.
And there is already an AR Hip holster on the market:
S.A.R.R.P AR Holster - The Firearm Blog

 

[benenglish]

Such as?

People seem to be under the impression that requiring a pistol to be carried in a belt holster also requires the holster to be on the belt. I don't see that second requirement in the text of the bill.

If it's there, I hope someone will point it out to me so I can issue a mea culpa.

 

[vmax]

View attachment 32513

alright..thats funny right there.

 

[AustinN4]

People seem to be under the impression that requiring a pistol to be carried in a belt holster also requires the holster to be on the belt. I don't see that second requirement in the text of the bill.

Thanks!

 

[Brian Boru]

Hell, even the committee chair, Sen. Joan Huffman, a republican, was all in favor of 3 point retention or higher holsters.

We have only a small handful of State Senators who are not RINO's. Huffman is not very good. This may be the most conservative senate in history. But its still pretty pathetic.

 

[99taws6]

As YG pointed out, there are no industry standards. Serpa could call it a level 8 holster if they wanted.
And there is already an AR Hip holster on the market:
S.A.R.R.P AR Holster - The Firearm Blog

Yes but regardless of what level the manufacturers call it, it's the number of retention features that the possible amendments will be addressing.

I think it's all over analyzing and won't be an issue. For now get a CHl and you'll be able to carry concealed or open as long as in a holster. Don't think it'll be ok outside of a holster is all they'll regulate.

Next step will be constitutional but for now I am gonna be happy with the first step.

 

[TheDan]

What are the other options?

Wear it on a chain around your neck like Flava Flav.

 

[txbirddog]

We have only a small handful of State Senators who are not RINO's. Huffman is not very good. This may be the most conservative senate in history. But its still pretty pathetic.

Sadly, it won't be getting much better in years to come.