Open Carry of Long Guns.

[MR Redneck]

No, its not. Using common sense is NOT a law. No one is required to use common sense.
But since you bring up the law...what the police did was also not against the law. So we have two sides, neither of which broke the law.
You may want to consider that bad guys carry too...bad guys shoot up office buildings on occasion.
Had that Sheriff sent one deputy down there and he got carved up by an active shooter, I would be hearing how stupid he was for sending a lone deputy to a report of a man with a rifle at an office building.
The conclusion I came to quite some time ago is that there are some LE bashers on here that will find fault in everything LE does. Whether they should have responded in the manner they did can be debated. We dont know all of the info that was provided to 911. But the fact is, they responded, talked to the guy, gave him his gun back and released him. In short they did their job and made the correct decision not to charge him.

Now how did we end up on this LE bashing thing again. I dont think I was bashing LE at all. Im simply debating the issues that the "wording" of the law will create. The word "Alarm" makes a good law bad. Alarm isnt defined well enough. Yea I find it a little extreme to send in the swat team but Im not the one making that call.
People are crazy no matter what their holding! The actions of a person should be what determines their intent.
As stated before, if you exercise your right to openly carry a rifle, your going to have a bad day!

 

[Texan2]

Now how did we end up on this LE bashing thing again. I dont think I was bashing LE at all. The actions of a person should be what determines their intent.
As stated before, if you exercise your right to openly carry a rifle, your going to have a bad day!

We end up on it when someone second guesses what a police department did by calling a nearby Sheriff and ask him to critique what the police did. The classy thing for him (the Sheriff) to do, would be to say, "Hey I wasnt there, I dont know the deatils of what was reported, so I am not going to second guess what decisons were made." What he did, was tell you what you wanted to hear.

And as stated before, carrying a rifle openly does not necessarily amount to having a bad day. It depends on the totality of the circumstances. I stopped to get a cup of coffee at a gas station this morning. 3 hunters were getting gas as I walked into the store, they were reorganizng all the crap they had in their truck and one guy had 2 rifles slung over his back as he stood next to the truck. They waved as I pulled out and I stopped and chatted for a moment.
Nobody went to jail....nobody was alarmed... and it is my assumtion that they are probably having a reasonably good day still. I see guys with rifles regularly and based on the context of everything that is going on in that area, it is no big deal.

If you are in a crowded urban area, that does not regularly see people with a rifle slung then you may have some issues.
It is a matter of public perception. Getting sideways at the police because someone calls 911 and says a guy is going into a downtown office building with an AR-15 solves nothing as the police responded as they probably should have.

As has been previously stated, people want rights but dont want to be responsible or exercise common sense in the application of those rights.

 

[TheDan]

i remember that. the guy never committed a crime. the problem is left wing dumbshit parents who never educate their left wing dumbshit children about guns.

I think these guys should have their show and tell every Thursday. Once everyone gets complacent about "man with gun" calls on Thursdays, they should change their show and tell day to Tuesday, lol...

If it becomes a common occurrence, people will stop being alarmed by it.

 

[M. Sage]

when they say "calculated" to alarm, does that mean to intentionally cause alarm?

It means planned out to cause alarm.

 

[lalonguecarabine]

I'm responding to KAK's original post, even though I read the rest of the thread just now:
It seems to me as though he is overly eager to carry a rifle through his neighborhood at night. That's not half as mysterious as his wanting to wear it while he walks his dog. So, say for the sake of argument that you're under attack by some vicious mugger who is already not deterred by a man with a dog (a WHOLE lot of criminals are gonna be more afraid of your dog than your gun, FYI). So, your dog will be going apeshit, and you'll be trying to restrain it with one hand because you're superman, and steadily aiming in with your cool rifle with the other hand. ...in the dark. Or maybe you'll let your dog go and use both hands to place well made shots. ...in the dark, on a flailing target that is on again/off again obscured by your own beloved pooch. All the while in either situation being sure that none of your rounds will find their way into any of your neighbors houses, skulls, children, etc. causing collateral damage.

I really don't think you've given this the type of thought required for this type of action. To say nothing of the fact that doing so will advertise to this massive criminal element you say is in your neighborhood that you've got a cool rifle in your house, apartment, or whatever. Then they just have to wait for you to leave, and go break into your place and help themselves to your home armory, lite beer and your Barnaby Jones VHS collection.

If you wish to carry in a bad neighborhood at night, you should have a handgun that is concealed and easily accessible on your person.
It's completely within our rights as Texas citizens to carry long guns wherever we want that isn't exempt (places that sell alcohol, post offices, etc.).
It's also the right of Ms. July 2009 to walk through central park in New York in a bathing suit at 2:37 in the morning. But common sense dictates that there would be unfavorable consequences from doing so.
Just food for thought.

 

[lalonguecarabine]

Additionally though - I'm totally "down" for having a long-gun get together in Austin sometime. We would definitely need to get the NRA involved simply as a matter of practicality. And as a group, we'd obviously need some kind of permit.

Maybe we could make it the rule that we all sling upside down over our left shoulders like P.O.W.s or something.

 

[atacorion]

As much as i like to exercise my rights OPSEC is probably a good Idea until TEOTWAWKI erupts.

And always remember "Never invite the Law into your life unless absolutely nesassary."

I'm down for maybe a hike and bike trail run around the lake one day with our rifles in Austin.

 

[mkillebrew]

what is the permit for?

 

[Bithabus]

It's completely within our rights as Texas citizens to carry long guns wherever we want that isn't exempt (places that sell alcohol

Huh?

 

[lalonguecarabine]

@ Bithabus: Are these not subject to the same restrictions placed on CCW? You know, you can't carry on businesses that have that little sign posted that basically says don't walk on "OUR" property with a firearm if you are not a cop, etc. etc.
As a CCW holder, you must of course remember that there are certain places that you are not allowed to carry at. We're all supposed to be responsible gun owners here interested in promoting how responsible and level headed we are to this new gun fearing public. Just because the sign says handgun shouldn't automatically make it okay to walk into the liquor store with a doggone FAL slung over your shoulder. We should understand that the intent of the law is to prevent firearms from being present at certain establishments, and not be some two-bit "sea lawyer" who argues that the sign didn't have the correct wording.

My point was that yes - of course it's legal to carry your rifle around. I then added that there might be places where that also would be restricted, so all the new users on this site don't read this and automatically think it's okay to go to the bank or something with their brand new Bushmaster on their back.

 

[lalonguecarabine]

@ mkillebrew: Having a large group of us together might fall under the definition of a demonstration, so it would be wise for us to contact the city we are planning to gather in to make sure we don't need a permit to gather together in such a way. If it was just you, me and a couple of our friends, then it would be different. But I suspect that most other Texas gun guys would like to participate in this too, once they get wind of it. That could lead to between a one hundred to one thousand people (broad range, huh), or even more. Whether we have rifles or simply picket signs, most cities require a permit of some sort before you can organize a gathering of groups of that size in their city.

 

[Renegade]

Just because the sign says handgun shouldn't automatically make it okay to walk into the liquor store with a doggone FAL slung over your shoulder. We should understand that the intent of the law is to prevent firearms from being present at certain establishments, and not be some two-bit "sea lawyer" who argues that the sign didn't have the correct wording.

The intent of the law, which was passed in 1871, was NOT to prevent firearms from being present at certain establishments, but to prevent the carrying of CONCEALABLE firearms. So carrying a FAL is completely within the intent of the law.

 

[Bithabus]

@ Bithabus: Are these not subject to the same restrictions placed on CCW?

Yes, they are not.

But CHL holders can carry concealed handguns into liquor stores anyway.

 

[lalonguecarabine]

Just so you all know where I stand on this, I believe that we should actually have complete open carry for all firearms by any law abiding citizen. I believe that we should be able to own any type of ordnance we can afford, including full auto belt feds, mortars, and grenades. I make a LOT of humorous comments because I'm naturally a funny guy. But I'm completely serious about that!

But I am an intelligent individual that recognizes that we have a gun fearing public that is so because they have been mis-informed by a largely anti-gun media.
I like what little rights we have left. My point to all this is that if we're going to do such a thing, we'd better have every "i" dotted and every "t" crossed, so to speak.
The last thing any of us wants is for the exercising of our existing rights be used against us by the aforementioned uber-liberal media.

 

[Bithabus]

Just so you all know where I stand on this, I believe that we should actually have complete open carry for all firearms by any law abiding citizen. I believe that we should be able to own any type of ordnance we can afford, including full auto belt feds, mortars, and grenades. I make a LOT of humorous comments because I'm naturally a funny guy. But I'm completely serious about that!

But I am an intelligent individual that recognizes that we have a gun fearing public that is so because they have been mis-informed by a largely anti-gun media.
I like what little rights we have left. My point to all this is that if we're going to do such a thing, we'd better have every "i" dotted and every "t" crossed, so to speak.
The last thing any of us wants is for the exercising of our existing rights be used against us by the aforementioned uber-liberal media.

I responded because you are mistaken about the law, that's all. Carry of long guns is not restricted the same as the carry of handguns by CHL holders.

 

[lalonguecarabine]

Oh, I know.
I was making an argument about erring on the side of caution.

I have no hard feelings against you, Bithabus.

I ended up making that last statement so no one thought I was some anti-gun type.

 

[Bithabus]

Oh, I know.
I was making an argument about erring on the side of caution.

I have no hard feelings against you, Bithabus.

I ended up making that last statement so no one thought I was some anti-gun type.

OK, my mistake then. I thought you were saying it was illegal to carry a rifle into a liquor store/bar or a 30.06 property.

 

[MR Redneck]

The intent of the law, which was passed in 1871, was NOT to prevent firearms from being present at certain establishments, but to prevent the carrying of CONCEALABLE firearms. So carrying a FAL is completely within the intent of the law.

This is an interesting subject that I have gain a lot of knowledge on. Sorry to say, but you sir are wrong.
In 1871 E.J. Davis prohibited the " bearing " of ALL arms except rifles and shotguns in All places except on ones property.
In 1868 an enabling act was proposed to allow city councils prohibit the bearing of " concealed" weapons. Concealed Carry was noted as the " evil" method of carrying firearms. This act was also initiated within the walls of Texas Government.
The Convention of 1868 meant to regulates the bearing of arms, not to prohibit them. Open carry was not prohibited, only " evil" concealed carry.

If you have anything else you would like to discuss on this subject, please let me know. I can get into great detail, and some of it is an embarrassment to me as a Texan. Lots Of Dirt Within The Wall Of Legislature!

 

[APatriot]

Oh my goodness.......OC of a different color now!!!!

 

[MR Redneck]

Oh my goodness.......OC of a different color now!!!!

No wonder your all messed up in the head, you keep banging it on the wall...
You should stop that before the damage become permanent.
Texas has always allowed open carry of rifles without restriction. The only thing negative in the texas rifle laws is the word " Alarm".
FYI, I conceal carry a AR15 all the time buddy. No CHL, No nothin!
How does that make you feel knowing I do such a thing without asking for permission?