CC just passed Senate. Almost law now!

[Cob]

Even if dps dose do that I will
Still talk to The lawyers it’s not a big deal
I shoot with them every Thursday afternoon

 

[easy rider]

I have not read it fully, but on another forum someone stated there is no permitless carry on campus allowed

I can't speak for all colleges, but mine has adopted a "Don't ask, don't tell" policy on concealed carry, so I'm not sure it matters. Still, I'll keep my LTC on the offhand chance.

 

[Renegade]

Even if dps dose do that I will
Still talk to The lawyers it’s not a big deal
I shoot with them every Thursday afternoon

If you are planning on carrying under this law, that is a good idea

 

[rotor]

League of municipal something put out a brochure when open carry started and their lawyers had the info wrong. They revised it after I pointed out the mistakes. Just because a lawyer tells you something doesn’t mean it’s correct. They will still charge you when it’s time to get out of jail.

 

[CAtoDFW2021]

I posted on a few 2A mailing lists and Facebook groups (not Texas specific) explaining my problem with the treatment of carrying of long arms, and how we should not have compromised on it in order to get CC.

Surprisingly no one agreed with me. A whole bunch of people wrote in defense of property owners right to exclude people carrying long guns. Including a Texas LTC holder. It's shocking how many supposedly pro-2A people don't have a problem adding a new law that specifically penalizes carrying of firearms, instead of just depending on existing laws against trespassing.

This forum is the only place so far where I have seen other people protest the violation of constitutional carry of long guns by 30.05.

 

[Kar98]

I'm working on getting you a factual answer, but I would think they'd be good to go - I know other states w/CC allow non-residents to carry under their law.

I’m fairly certain you still need a license to carry in Oklahoma if you’re not a resident.

 

[TexasRedneck]

I’m fairly certain you still need a license to carry in Oklahoma if you’re not a resident.

No, sir.

 

[Army 1911]

I posted on a few 2A mailing lists and Facebook groups (not Texas specific) explaining my problem with the treatment of carrying of long arms, and how we should not have compromised on it in order to get CC.

Surprisingly no one agreed with me. A whole bunch of people wrote in defense of property owners right to exclude people carrying long guns. Including a Texas LTC holder. It's shocking how many supposedly pro-2A people don't have a problem adding a new law that specifically penalizes carrying of firearms, instead of just depending on existing laws against trespassing.

This forum is the only place so far where I have seen other people protest the violation of constitutional carry of long guns by 30.05.

30.05 doesn't violate anyone's right to carry long or short guns. It upholds the property owner's rights to control access to the property.

 

[jimbo]

Just got this email from Sen. Kelly Hancock.

Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk

Way to go Kelly

 

[rotor]

30.05 doesn't violate anyone's right to carry long or short guns. It upholds the property owner's rights to control access to the property.

Property owner always had that right by posting a no firearms sign. Theoretically (this is stretching things) the property owner that wants to exclude handguns only but not long guns has excluded long guns too. He may want people carrying AR15s in his store. I know this is stupid but the 05 should have just been for handguns. We had CC for long guns, now less so.

 

[Army 1911]

Property owner always had that right by posting a no firearms sign. Theoretically (this is stretching things) the property owner that wants to exclude handguns only but not long guns has excluded long guns too. He may want people carrying AR15s in his store. I know this is stupid but the 05 should have just been for handguns. We had CC for long guns, now less so.

And pigs want to fly.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

As devils advocate, why would a "store" want to exclude handguns, but turn around and be perfectly okay with long guns?

I would have to presume that if 30.05 hadn't been changed, the owners would give verbal notification as soon as they saw your long gun.

Only difference I see would be if you had a concealed long gun, then you could skate past it "legally", with no fear of notification.

 

[easy rider]

I'm still trying to remember the last time I saw someone walk in a store with a long arm in person. I don't really see the advantage of carrying in a rifle just to make a point.

 

[rotor]

And pigs want to fly.

What an intelligent response.

As devils advocate, why would a "store" want to exclude handguns, but turn around and be perfectly okay with long guns?

I would have to presume that if 30.05 hadn't been changed, the owners would give verbal notification as soon as they saw your long gun.

Only difference I see would be if you had a concealed long gun, then you could skate past it "legally", with no fear of notification.

Exactly right. Some of us though have had concealed long guns (KelTec sub2000) and will now be in violation if we carry past a 30.05. Since this was CC handgun bill, it seems that it has limited the carry of a long gun. Technically with a 30.05 even a concealed long gun would be a violation.

 

[rotor]

I'm still trying to remember the last time I saw someone walk in a store with a long arm in person. I don't really see the advantage of carrying in a rifle just to make a point.

I agree. Not to make a point. Suppose you are a LTC holder and a store posts 30.06/07 right now. You want to carry but not be obvious. You have your sub2000 in a computer bag. You are now carrying a concealed long gun without being obvious. Right now the store could post a no firearms sign and you couldn't bring your concealed long gun in either. The new 30.05 though doesn't bar just handguns it bars all firearms. I can't imagine a store that would want people in with an open rifle but this signage will make it less freedom for the CC we had for long guns by using the term firearm instead of handgun in 30.05. The whole purpose of CC was handguns, not to decrease long gun carry. That's the point.
CC was not supposed to be about long guns and for whatever reason firearms replaced handguns in the proposed 05 signage. Why i don't know. I personally have never carried my sub 2000 into a store but if I went into a mall with 06/07 (and now 05) signage I would not be able to carry anything.

 

[easy rider]

What an intelligent response.

Exactly right. Some of us though have had concealed long guns (KelTec sub2000) and will now be in violation if we carry past a 30.05. Since this was CC handgun bill, it seems that it has limited the carry of a long gun. Technically with a 30.05 even a concealed long gun would be a violation.

As far as I know, a person with authority under 30.05 can ask you to leave because they don't like your smile, sign or no sign.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

As far as I know, a person with authority under 30.05 can ask you to leave because they don't like your smile, sign or no sign.

Is the sign a prerequisite for asking someone to leave?

 

[1911'S 4 Me]

I was satisfied with what we had. Now you can walk down the street carrying but not go in anywhere.

 

[easy rider]

Is the sign a prerequisite for asking someone to leave?

Not as far as I read it.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Not as far as I read it.

I only asked because you specified it in your post.

ETA: Sorry, you specified 30.05.
Is that a prerequisite?