Posted on 03/19/2009 11:24:04 PM PDT by Jet Jaguar
This may stir up some debate, but I think this open carry testing is pushing the envelope a bit too far. I believe strongly in the 2nd Amendment, but there’s a balance to be struck here.
We don’t have the right to do whatever we please without limits. The free expression of our rights ends where that expression infringes on someone else’s rights.
Now if we allow folks to walk around in public openly carrying, we have to allow everyone. Even the folks that don’t look too savory. Image sitting down for dinner and seeing a gang-banger come in with his baggy pants down below his waist, hat on backward, tatoos, attitude, etc..., with a gun strapped on. Would it make you look twice? Would it make you or your wife or your kids feel uncomfortable or nervous? Your rights have just been infringed. The sight of a gun in public makes some people feel threatened. I’m not saying that’s right or wrong, its just the way it is.
Let me put it another way. Most people don’t mind if you are a homosexual, but they don’t want to see you openly displaying your homosexuality in public. Don’t ask don’t tell. Its for the same reason that Texas has concealed carry but not open carry. We don’t mind if you’re packing, we just don’t want to know about it.
My concern is that this open carry “testing” is going to backfire.
If that’s property-owner policy, then tell him to leave. Calling the cops is only reasonable if, for whatever reason asked to, someone refuses to leave.
Not true.
In Texas, thanks to reworking of the law a couple of years ago, the presumption when in a vehicle is that the the weapon is legal unless you are specifically prohibted from posessing same.
A qualified "yes". A handgun cannot be "openly displayed" on a motorcycle but can be carried without a license. A motorcycle is a "vehicle".
I actually asked that very same question at my last CHL training session.
On HIS property? Yes.
That law part of the law was revised in 2007. Specifically, there is a "presumption of innocence" now.
Its going to take a while for the sheep to become accustomed to seeing a sheepdog.
“they changed the law so that we can carry in a vehicle in the open”
That’s not entirely correct. You are allowed to carry in your vehicle, but the handgun must be concealed. Here it is straight from the Texas Penal Code.
Sec. 46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun, illegal knife, or club if the person is not:
(1) on the person’s own premises or premises under the person’s control; or
(2) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle that is owned by the person or under the person’s control.
(a-1) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun in a motor vehicle that is owned by the person or under the person’s control at any time in which:
(1) the handgun is in plain view; or
(2) the person is:
(A) engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic;
(B) prohibited by law from possessing a firearm; or
(C) a member of a criminal street gang, as defined by Section 71.01.
Police say he was “testing” the law, but one local gunowner says he was exercising his right to bear arms.
Excellent!
I'll print off a copy of the applicable laws, and keep them on the bike.
Good catch! Glad to learn something new and good.
I think it would be interesting to put up a sign: “No weapons in the hands of Police”
Uh, no, they don’t.
We used to have a rather vague statute about travelling for pistols, but that’s gone now. You may carry any legal firearm in your vehicle in a loaded state. Longarms may be exposed or concealed as the owner wishes, pistols must be concealed. No permit needed inside your car.
The definition of traveling is pretty clear, it means any where you go. What part isn’t right?
Hey, we’re working on it. Wasn’t that long ago that they didn’t acknowledge that we had the right to carry a pistol at all.
That wasn’t what the definition of “travelling” when applied to the carriage of a pistol in a vehicle used to be. It used to be whatever the local DA wanted it to mean and would mean anything from the common-sense “anywhere you are going” to “must cross at least two county lines with an overnight stay and cannot be a commute.”
It could also be interpreted as the pistol becoming illegally stored in the car if you were at a stop light, stopping for fuel or food, parked for a bathroom break, etc., etc. It needed to be cleared up and was in 2007.
Specifically - it is still legal to have your loaded longarm exposed in a pickup truck window rack. Never has been illegal here, IIRC.
FREEP THIS POLL ***PING!*** FRmail me if you want to be added or removed from the Fearless Poll-Freeping Freepers Ping list. And be sure to ping me to any polls that need Freepin', if I miss them. (looks like a medium volume list) (gordongekko909, founder of the pinglist, stays on the list until his ghost signs up for the list)
Good. Glad they arrested him.
I am entirely fine with him being arrested, prosecuted, fined or jailed.
From the article: He was asked to leave the gun in his vehicle because he was scaring customers, and when he refused, Ruston police arrested him on the loitering charge.
Once you are asked by the people who work in the store to remove yourself and/or your weapon, failing to do so is a crime.
The time and place to take it up with the property owner was not in the store, and not while armed. He was given an order to vacate and should have done so. The time to take it up with the store owners was later. He could have boycotted, written letters, protested, picketed. He chose to break the law.
Failing to respect the property owner's right gets no sympathy from me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.