Open Carry rules for Idiots....

[satx78247]

To ALL,

When one or 2 members demands evidence that there have been problems, where OC is lawful & some examples are given, then it is said that, "But, but, but it didn't happen in Texas, so that's NOT evidence of what might happen here", in Austin/Houston/Dallas/San Antonio in 2016.

Friends, you cannot have it both ways, as 01JAN16 isn't here yet, so there can be NO evidence of "problems with OC" in TX as of today.
(That's why I say that demanding such evidence NOW for TX is SILLY & makes the "demanding person" LOOK like a clueless dunce.)

Fwiw, I believe that some members here just want to ARGUE about something/anything, as they evidently have NO life.

just my OPINIONS, satx

 

[winchster]

To ALL,

When one or 2 members demands evidence that there have been problems, where OC is lawful & some examples are given, then it is said that, "But, but, but it didn't happen in Texas, so that's NOT evidence of what might happen here", in Austin/Houston/Dallas/San Antonio in 2016.

Friends, you cannot have it both ways, as 01JAN16 isn't here yet, so there can be NO evidence of "problems with OC" in TX as of today.
(That's why I say that demanding such evidence NOW for TX is SILLY & makes the "demanding person" LOOK like a clueless dunce.)

Fwiw, I believe that some members here just want to ARGUE about something/anything, as they evidently have NO life.

just my OPINIONS, satx

^^Cliff Notes version:
I have precisely zero citations to back my claims.

 

[satx78247]

winchster,

In other words, you are ONE person who just wants to ARGUE about something & discounts every single thing that disagrees with your unsupported opinions.
(SORRY, but I don't have time for FOOLISHNESS, as I have a life.)

yours, satx

 

[diesel1959]

I was taught that interpolation is less risky than extrapolation. Some would have you believe that, due to a vast and varied panoply of situations that they, their neighbors, their wife's mother's sister's third cousin, etc. have experienced throughout life and across the country--many of which don't precisely bear upon the issue at hand--bear witness to the fact that there are assholes that wear badges and, therefore, that there will be huge problems when OC comes to Texas. That's an example of extrapolation. I call that extrapolation specifically because it deals with all sorts of LE contacts with negative results--not all having to do with OC, but with varied reasons for the initial contact.

An example of interpolation would be examining the OC statutes of other states and viewing what legal bumps and challenges they have weathered and how those have borne out in the courts. I call that interpolation specifically because it deals with OC, with OC statutes, and an attempt to see how it might play out in Texas. Not that those who wear badges are assholes, but that there some that are and, fully admitting that when you run up against an asshole with a badge, there could be a problem. However, that is distinctly different from saying "there will be a bunch of problems when OC comes to Texas".

Ideally, we would have a crystal ball. None are known to exist that are of any actual use. Merely presupposing that there will be problems/doom and gloom/blood in the streets/whatever, is merely the manifestation of a symptom of a syndrome that some suffer from that requires them to be positioned to say "I told you so" should there be any problem. And I mean any problem. As for me, I have a lot more faith in Texas, in Texans, and in Texas peace officers than that. And in Texas Courts, if needed.

 

[jrbfishn]

winchster,

In other words, you are ONE person who just wants to ARGUE about something & discounts every single thing that disagrees with your unsupported opinions.
(SORRY, but I don't have time for FOOLISHNESS, as I have a life.)

yours, satx

Actually, you are the one that seems to need to be right and argue.
So you had some problems. Woop dee do. Means absolutely didley for the future.
Ignorant, and sometimes dumb, I may be. But not a fool or foolish.

Argue with yourself. Maybe one day, you'll even convince yourself you're right.

Or not.

 

[Shady]

I agree some users tend to just want to argue and spew out gibberish about how awesome they are. But I would hate to call anyone out on it. They are to thick skin to realize who they are anyways.

To ALL,

When one or 2 members demands evidence that there have been problems, where OC is lawful & some examples are given, then it is said that, "But, but, but it didn't happen in Texas, so that's NOT evidence of what might happen here", in Austin/Houston/Dallas/San Antonio in 2016.

Friends, you cannot have it both ways, as 01JAN16 isn't here yet, so there can be NO evidence of "problems with OC" in TX as of today.
(That's why I say that demanding such evidence NOW for TX is SILLY & makes the "demanding person" LOOK like a clueless dunce.)

Fwiw, I believe that some members here just want to ARGUE about something/anything, as they evidently have NO life.

just my OPINIONS, satx

 

[Shorts]

A lot of freak out in this thread. Chill out and have some faith people.

Don't add to the stupid and do your part as a good ambassador for any and all OC interactions you have with the general public and law enforcement.

Ramping up paranoia for conflict is the wrong mindset for Jan 1. Use your brains, not your emotions.

 

[XinTX]

It's like we're eating our young in a sort of gun board fratricide.

I think it's a hobby on this board. Probably no one on this board actually OWNS a firearm. We all just come here for the circular firing squads and thread jacks.

 

[schmellba99]

satx actually has some valid points, with respect to political ego's contradicting legislative fiat that they were personally and politically opposed to. To argue against that simply because you feel the need to argue is being obtuse at best.

Now, having said that, will every LEO in Austin be on a jihad against OC, simply because Avecedo has made his intentions and personal agenda very, very, very clear with respect to OC? Nope. But will there be a higher probability of some form of harassment come 01-01-2016 in the jurisdiction of Avecedo? To deny that is silly.

Politicians all have agendas, some more overt than others. Often times those agendas contradict law. And often times there isn't much care given to whether or not agenda and law are heading in opposite directions. I know that the DA in Tucson, AZ is like this from my time living in AZ. Said DA was adamantly against AZ's Castle Doctrine - he made no bones about the fact that he did not believe in such a law. Even when the law was passed overwhelmingly by AZ's legislature, he made it known that in his jurisdiction the would not recognize the law until absolutely forced to do so. I know of at least one case where a man shot somebody in obvious self defense, yet had charges brought against him - in spite of the legislation - that cost the guy several thousands of dollars in court costs, as well as his job.

Odds are that, generally speaking, the OC legislation will not make much of a splash. But rest assured, there will be areas that are hot spots, for one reason or another, until both the novelty of the new right wears off and as overall public desensitization starts to take root and people become less afraid at just the sight of a firearm.

 

[schmellba99]

Just for giggles, here is a fairly recent example of LEO harassment for open carry. Based on what information I have, this guy was standing at a street corner in Clear Lake (part of Houston) with an AR slung across his back (I.E. completely non threatening manner that should warrant nothing more than possibly a cursory question or two), a sign (does not state what is on the sign, but assume it is something espousing OC rights), some constitutional literature and his phone.

The video is pretty damning as to what some (some, not all) LEO's view in terms of OC.

VIDEO: Watch What this Police Officer Does to an Open-Carry Activist When He Thinks He?s NOT Being Recorded

 

[Mreed911]

Just for giggles, here is a fairly recent example of LEO harassment for open carry. Based on what information I have, this guy was standing at a street corner in Clear Lake (part of Houston) with an AR slung across his back (I.E. completely non threatening manner that should warrant nothing more than possibly a cursory question or two), a sign (does not state what is on the sign, but assume it is something espousing OC rights), some constitutional literature and his phone.

The video is pretty damning as to what some (some, not all) LEO's view in terms of OC.

VIDEO: Watch What this Police Officer Does to an Open-Carry Activist When He Thinks He?s NOT Being Recorded

This is NOT the same as OC of a handgun. NOT AT ALL.

 

[Davetex]

Swing and a miss.

 

[majormadmax]

Just for giggles, here is a fairly recent example of LEO harassment for open carry. Based on what information I have, this guy was standing at a street corner in Clear Lake (part of Houston) with an AR slung across his back (I.E. completely non threatening manner that should warrant nothing more than possibly a cursory question or two), a sign (does not state what is on the sign, but assume it is something espousing OC rights), some constitutional literature and his phone.

The video is pretty damning as to what some (some, not all) LEO's view in terms of OC.

VIDEO: Watch What this Police Officer Does to an Open-Carry Activist When He Thinks He?s NOT Being Recorded

Plus, TAFT.

 

[majormadmax]

satx actually has some valid points, with respect to political ego's contradicting legislative fiat that they were personally and politically opposed to. To argue against that simply because you feel the need to argue is being obtuse at best.

Now, having said that, will every LEO in Austin be on a jihad against OC, simply because Avecedo has made his intentions and personal agenda very, very, very clear with respect to OC? Nope. But will there be a higher probability of some form of harassment come 01-01-2016 in the jurisdiction of Avecedo? To deny that is silly.

Politicians all have agendas, some more overt than others. Often times those agendas contradict law. And often times there isn't much care given to whether or not agenda and law are heading in opposite directions. I know that the DA in Tucson, AZ is like this from my time living in AZ. Said DA was adamantly against AZ's Castle Doctrine - he made no bones about the fact that he did not believe in such a law. Even when the law was passed overwhelmingly by AZ's legislature, he made it known that in his jurisdiction the would not recognize the law until absolutely forced to do so. I know of at least one case where a man shot somebody in obvious self defense, yet had charges brought against him - in spite of the legislation - that cost the guy several thousands of dollars in court costs, as well as his job.

Odds are that, generally speaking, the OC legislation will not make much of a splash. But rest assured, there will be areas that are hot spots, for one reason or another, until both the novelty of the new right wears off and as overall public desensitization starts to take root and people become less afraid at just the sight of a firearm.

Again, unfounded speculation. Any such incidents will end up in court, and whatever Avecedo thinks he can do will be quickly shut down in the Texas justice system.

As long as people abide by the law, there won't be any issues...

 

[satx78247]

majormadmax,

YES, just as EVERY post that you've made to this thread is completely "unfounded speculation", unless you can convince everyone that you can accurately foretell the future.

NOBODY here KNOWS what will/will NOT happen in certain urban areas of Texas (in most especially Austin & Houston, as BOTH city administrations are ANTI-GUN RIGHTS in outlook.) after 01JAN16, reference "unlawful police harassment" of licensed "open carriers". - NOBODY knows.

just my OPINION,satx

 

[Shorts]

You're opinion is not helping set the tone. Your opinion is creating a conflict. Your opinion is continuing to fan the fire. Your opinion is that of a guy freaking out at the scene when personnel are trying to take control and calm it all down.

You cant run around screaming like your hair is on fire if it isn't on fire because it creates chaos, tension, confusion and background noise.

Get a hold of yourself. Be a part of the solution, not a part of the problem.

 

[schmellba99]

Again, unfounded speculation. Any such incidents will end up in court, and whatever Avecedo thinks he can do will be quickly shut down in the Texas justice system.

As long as people abide by the law, there won't be any issues...

I can see you are the type that is rarely, if ever, satisfied.

Of course it is speculation, but to say it is unfounded is A) incorrect and B) pure speculation on your part given that you know exactly jack and squat about me or my particular experiences.

And, like it or not, we all use past experiences to speculate on future probability. To act as if this is something unusual is plain stupid.

 

[schmellba99]

This is NOT the same as OC of a handgun. NOT AT ALL.

I know it's not the same as OC - but it is very much comparable because openly carrying an AR (long gun) is perfectly legal right now. It shows what is a possible outcome when you have specific officers that either have an agenda or are given an agenda by superiors. To blatantly say that they are not at the very least comparable and that this is not pertinent to the discussion is disingenuous.

 

[schmellba99]

You're opinion is not helping set the tone. Your opinion is creating a conflict. Your opinion is continuing to fan the fire. Your opinion is that of a guy freaking out at the scene when personnel are trying to take control and calm it all down.

You cant run around screaming like your hair is on fire if it isn't on fire because it creates chaos, tension, confusion and background noise.

Get a hold of yourself. Be a part of the solution, not a part of the problem.

I don't really get that with his opinion at all - he has said nothing out of the realm of possibility nor reality - only that there are likely to be some areas/agencies/LEO's that will use the fact that there is nothing specifically preventing a LEO from confronting an OC'er to confront OC'ers.

To what degree this may happen is debatable, but to sit back and say that any opinion that this is a likely, even if isolated, scenario is wrong and "fanning the flames" is silly. It's only fanning the flames because you don't necessarily disagree with it, not because it is some hypothetical that is so far out in left field that it defies any sort of logic.

We have LEO's now that take exception to people openly carrying long guns peacefully - a perfectly legal act. To think that there won't be those that take exception to legally openly carrying a pistol is naive at best.

 

[Mreed911]

You're opinion is not helping set the tone. Your opinion is creating a conflict. Your opinion is continuing to fan the fire. Your opinion is that of a guy freaking out at the scene when personnel are trying to take control and calm it all down.

You cant run around screaming like your hair is on fire if it isn't on fire because it creates chaos, tension, confusion and background noise.

Get a hold of yourself. Be a part of the solution, not a part of the problem.

Just add him to your ignore list like the rest of us. Then I won't have to see him quoted, either...