| Author | Post |
|---|
Rush Creek
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Oct 18th, 2009 11:16 pm |
|
I've been doing a little digging into the history behind the Texas "handgun issue". Not that I've uncovered anything startling or heretofore not covered - just a refeshing for myself I guess.
What is obvious is that the 1871 Texas legislation is in keeping with efforts by the other former Confederate States of America to restrict the ability of freedmen to possess firearms in general, and when that failed by the ratification of the 14th Amendment- by default to endeavor to hamper their ability to carry handguns. Beyond that selective application - it did not hinder anyone else's ability to "open carry".
It is absolutely ludicrous to invision anyone living in or traveling through Texas (especially West or South Texas, or the Rio Grande Valley)in the 1870's to refrain from wearing a Colt Navy .44, or any other substitute on their hip, tucked inside their belt, or coat pocket. The history of exercising the right to keep and bear arms in Texas has been -and continues to be a work in progress. This is not a right subject to the grant of privilege from either State or federal government.
It is well to remember that post -Civil War "civilized Texans" lived in East Texas primarily. Liberty, Columbus, Houston, Galveston. Beaumont, and Eastward. You would have had a hard time convincing folks in San Angelo, San Antonio, Gonzales, Fannin, Goliad, etc to not wear a side-arm.
Everything West of the Brazos was the frontier. "Law enforcement " was an individual responsibility. There were few "cry babies" running to the "law" (if they could locate such an entity ) The Comanchees weren't paticularly deterred by the legislative acts emanating from Austin. . I once owned a parcel of land in Mason County that was a Comanchee "bivouac area". During the 1880's a wagon load of white" settlers was ambushed and slaughtered 8.5 miles North-East of Mason , Texas and the ambush occurred adjacent to my property. I lived there for some years . I visited the Comanchee campfire sites - still stained by the blackened charcoal. This is a documented historical fact. Now do you really think these settlers were even aware of Title 10, Chapter 46 , sec. 46.02 ? If they had been - would they have left their Colts at home in deferrence to Austin's infinite wisdom ?
I'll go further than that. Very few LEO's or citizens in West Texas were of the opinion that mere "possession of a handgun" itself constituted a "crime" until Slick Willie was elected and the gun-grabbers seized the moment to advance their unconstitutional schemes. Check out the 1995 flood of gun laws at the federal and state level. That's when Title 10, Chapter 46, sec. 46.02 was "rediscovered", and given a front-row seat by law enforcement - primarily in Harris County. That's where most law-abiding handgun "possessors" were arrested prior to the 1995 passage of the Texas CHL .
I've said this before - in the absence of criminal intent- the carrying, wearing, bearing of a handgun in Texas IS NOT ILLEGAL. Title 10, Chapter 46, sec.46.02 addresses CRIMINAL CONDUCT. Now- best be aware that "unnecessarily threatening the public with the wearing, bearing, carrying of any firearm (or other weapon)" is prima facie criminal conduct.
I've come to the conclusion that freedom seeking Texans should not be begging the legislature to "allow" them to wear displayed handguns lawfully. It's already "legal" to wear a handgun lawfully in Texas. Being respectful of the property rights of others, prudence, and reasonable judgement as to where, when , and perhaps HOW to present one's self in an armed condition maybe challenging - but still a worthy, and acceptable undertaking.
The Supreme Court in Heller v DC laid out some foundational arguments for treatment of Title 10, Chapter 46, sec. 46.02 as only applicable to criminal conduct. Hanguns are the "quintessential self-defense weapon" the possession, and carrying of which is protected by the U.S. Constitution , as well as the Texas Constitution for the lawful purpose of self-defense. Texas does not (yet) criminalize concealed carry of a handgun - surprisingly.
I refuse to suffer further grief over this conjured up myth that OC is illegal in Texas.I have , and will continue to press the envelope of public tolerance for my displayed handgun, with prudent regard for the social environment. I've been practicing what I preach for some time already without any problem. Until folks realize that this right is not something Austin can bestow upon us there will be no progress. Stop begging -start exercising. Let's bide our time, keep up the pressure, as we await the Supreme Court's long over-due "incorporation" of the Second Amendment.
Last edited on Mon Oct 19th, 2009 02:15 am by Rush Creek
|
cloudcroft
Activist Member
|
Posted: Tue Oct 20th, 2009 06:28 am |
|
Well, sounds like we're back to needing a test case.
Any volunteers?
-- John D (in "civilized" Galveston)
Last edited on Tue Oct 20th, 2009 06:29 am by cloudcroft
|
dlofton
Regular Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 24th, 2008 |
| Location: | Schertz, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 65 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 20th, 2009 06:47 pm |
|
Ya'll are making this WAY too complicated...
The 2nd Amendment guarantees the "right to bare arms". Under the system known as "federalism" that we have in the United States, the Constitution trumps everything else...including TX law.
With that in mind, carry when and where and how you want with your firearm. It is perfectly legal and no police officer or DA can arrest and/or prosecute you for it. I know this because I am a peace officer in TX and I know the legal theory of federalism and how it applies to the 2nd Amend.
Just don't worry about the TX statutes and do what you want with your fiream. You won't get into any trouble...I promise!
David
|
cloudcroft
Activist Member
|
Posted: Tue Oct 20th, 2009 07:09 pm |
|
The first person that OCs a handgun down here will be arrested and gun confiscated. TX is not listed as an OC state...how can that be wrong all this time?
...and I don't see anyone willing to walk around OCing a handgun.
Please come down here and do that so we can follow your progress in the local, Houston and statewide news.
-- John D.
Last edited on Tue Oct 20th, 2009 07:09 pm by cloudcroft
|
Rush Creek
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Oct 20th, 2009 10:27 pm |
|
I don't live on Galveston Island. I've been there though , and there are some back street areas that I would probably avoid after the sun goes down. I have personally practiced "OC" in Texas (in far West Texas) in the past - on a routine basis - but I wouldn't even consider doing so in the Houston area. I've presented a case for serious (I hope) consideration. If folks are so proud of the status quo in Texas - please enjoy. I presented a case for the evolving "law" phenomenum being allowed to spread deception and intimidate citizens from exercising their inalienable right to self-defense.
If you think your state issued license "allows" you to exercise your right to bear arms - happy trails. The 2nd amendment does not grant, or protect your right to keep and bear arms. That IS YOUR RIGHT - either exercise it or waive it - I don't really care which you do. Ther is no collective responsibility to "rescue" the rights of others that are being "held hostage". That is their responsibility if they choose to undertake it.
If the notion of exercising a right that is being obstensibly denied creates uneasiness in some folks - I submit that those folks have already voluntarily surrendered said rights. I simply choose not to co-operate with a conspiracy to violate my civil rights. I will adapt to whatever the circumstances, make personal choices , to ensure my personal safety.
I have no desire to parade around "OC'ing" a handgun as some call it to prove my point, anymore than I would "OC" a shortened .30/.30 in a belt holster although that would be "legal" in Texas. Do I occassionally allow the display of my holstered handgun - you bet.
I honestly don't know why some folks even hang around this forum - unless it's to stroke each other and wallow in collective self-pity . I'm begining to think more can be accomplished on an individual basis.
Last edited on Wed Oct 21st, 2009 01:02 am by Rush Creek
|
cloudcroft
Activist Member
|
Posted: Tue Oct 20th, 2009 10:56 pm |
|
Then do so!
I've been trying to be polite reading your comments about how it's "legal to OC in the state of Texas" according to this or that legal citation, and your criticism of the rest of us here, but that politeness is over now since you show so much disdain and disrespect for me and others "who don't exercise our rights."
I am tired of people like you, MAINLY YOU, saying we CAN OC -- it's legal -- when we can't. I have invited you, Mr. Blowhard, to practice what you preach but you do not. WHY NOT OC down here in the Houston area, isn't it part of Texas? So why do you "allegedly" OC in West Texas but not here? Probably because you're full of crap.
I asked you to run for office if you're so obsessed with this issue, but you didn't even bother to respond. How rude.
So go ahead and "go it alone," who cares, JERK. You're just a lot of citations and rhetoric but when it comes down to it, you've got no substance whatsoever.
Put up or shut up...in this case, just STFU as you can't put up anything except talk.
So just leave.
-- John D.
Last edited on Tue Oct 20th, 2009 11:49 pm by cloudcroft
|
Rush Creek
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Oct 21st, 2009 12:37 am |
|
Cloudcroft -My reference to Galveston was only a reflection on my many visits there, and the tourist environment with all the issues that factor presents. No, I would not OC on Galveston Island. And I'm sure not going to drive 300 miles down there to demonstrate my manhood.I was not targeting you in particular, Cloudcroft in my alluding to the apparent disposition of many expressed here.
The purpose of any forum is to provide an outlet for folks to express their point of view. I have my point of view - and others have theirs. I have just as much right to express myself on the OC issue as you have to voice your impatience with me.
The reason I have pointed out some of the history on this issue - is that many seem to be misinterpreting 46.02 - even LEO's apparently- as though this part of the penal code was enacted to prohibit "open carry". That's unfortunate, given this creates a current that runs counter to the goals of the open carry effort in Texas.
Oh, finally - I really am not a "blowhard" - and I gave up feeling like I had to prove myself to others a long while back. I just ask any who will - to give some thought to the journey this issue has been on for about 140 years in Texas - and maybe a little retracing footsteps would be helpful in developing strategies to change attitudes.
|
CrossFire
Founder's Club Member
| Joined: | Thu Nov 29th, 2007 |
| Location: | Irving, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 257 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 21st, 2009 12:56 am |
|
Rush Creek wrote: Cloudcroft -My reference to Galveston was only a reflection on my many visits there, and the tourist environment with all the issues that factor presents. No, I would not OC on Galveston Island. And I'm sure not going to drive 300 miles down there to demonstrate my manhood.I was not targeting you in particular, Cloudcroft in my alluding to the apparent disposition of many expressed here.
The purpose of any forum is to provide an outlet for folks to express their point of view. I have my point of view - and others have theirs. I have just as much right to express myself on the OC issue as you have to voice your impatience with me.
The reason I have pointed out some of the history on this issue - is that many seem to be misinterpreting 46.02 - even LEO's apparently- as though this part of the penal code was enacted to prohibit "open carry". That's unfortunate, given this creates a current that runs counter to the goals of the open carry effort in Texas.
Oh, finally - I really am not a "blowhard" - and I gave up feeling like I had to prove myself to others a long while back. I just ask any who will - to give some thought to the journey this issue has been on for about 140 years in Texas - and maybe a little retracing footsteps would be helpful in developing strategies to change attitudes.
Try OC'ing in Arlington and be sure to let us know how that works out for you. I look forward to reading about you in the future as you are charged.
Last edited on Wed Oct 21st, 2009 12:57 am by CrossFire
|
Gator5713
Lone Star Veteran
|
Posted: Wed Oct 21st, 2009 11:09 pm |
|
Rush (Sand) Creek -
I think everybody understands the point that you are trying to make, however, in practice, your 'point' is simply not the case! I would absolutely LOVE to see your point argued and WON in court! That would really give some momentum to the cause! The problem is that most of us do not have the time or the resources to fight such a case! So, if you have the time and resources, by all means go ahead!
|
SA-TX
Centurion Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 22nd, 2009 05:01 am |
|
Rush Creek wrote: Cloudcroft -My reference to Galveston was only a reflection on my many visits there, and the tourist environment with all the issues that factor presents. No, I would not OC on Galveston Island. And I'm sure not going to drive 300 miles down there to demonstrate my manhood.I was not targeting you in particular, Cloudcroft in my alluding to the apparent disposition of many expressed here.
The purpose of any forum is to provide an outlet for folks to express their point of view. I have my point of view - and others have theirs. I have just as much right to express myself on the OC issue as you have to voice your impatience with me.
The reason I have pointed out some of the history on this issue - is that many seem to be misinterpreting 46.02 - even LEO's apparently- as though this part of the penal code was enacted to prohibit "open carry". That's unfortunate, given this creates a current that runs counter to the goals of the open carry effort in Texas.
Oh, finally - I really am not a "blowhard" - and I gave up feeling like I had to prove myself to others a long while back. I just ask any who will - to give some thought to the journey this issue has been on for about 140 years in Texas - and maybe a little retracing footsteps would be helpful in developing strategies to change attitudes.
Rush, I think your point that UCW has been inconsistently enforced depending on where in the state you are has merit. I suspect that a rural West Texas officer would be more willing to chalk up something to "traveling" whereas you'd end up in jail for the same trip in urban parts of Texas.
I witnessed this first hand when 4 of us Tech students were coming back from a camping trip in Palo Duro. My friend who was driving was a licensed security guard (could carry on duty) but that gave him no more right to carry when off duty and out of uniform than anyone else. His wallet and .357 were in the console when he was pulled over by a DPS trooper for speeding. He told the trooper about the pistol because he needed to open the console to get to his DL and insurance. No problem. Trooper saw the camping gear and told him that since we were traveling, being armed wasn't against the law. Would the story have been different if we'd been one county north of Harris instead of Lubbock? Perhaps so although DPS officers are, in my opinion, more likely to professionally enforce the law consistently because they do have state-wide jurisdiction and aren't as subject to local prejudices.
That said, even an accurate recitation of history and correct observations about how nearly the whole populous was armed at various times in our history is no match for criminal law precedent. The fact is that UCW is a serious charge and no one should falsely believe that open carry in Texas, absent a situation that qualifies as an exemption from UCW, is legal or accepted. No good will come of it.
If you truly want to open carry and have the odds of acquital on your side (although you could still potentially lose) there is one option: carry an antique revolver. I commend to your attention the definition of "firearm" and "handgun" from Penal Code, chapter 42:
(3) "Firearm" means any device designed, made, or adapted to expel a projectile through a barrel by using the energy generated by an explosion or burning substance or any device readily convertible to that use. Firearm does not include a firearm that may have, as an integral part, a folding knife blade or other characteristics of weapons made illegal by this chapter and that is:
(A) an antique or curio firearm manufactured before 1899; or
(B) a replica of an antique or curio firearm manufactured before 1899, but only if the replica does not use rim fire or center fire ammunition.
(5) "Handgun" means any firearm that is designed, made, or adapted to be fired with one hand.
Notice that "antique firearm" and "curio firearm" aren't defined. Additionally, there aren't any known court cases on whether or not ANY pre-1899 handgun qualifies or it it must have some special significance. It is worth noting that FEDERAL law defines an "antique firearm" as any made before 1899. Those can be purchased with no paperwork, across state lines, and without the assistance of an FFL. They do NOT have to be black powder. For example, my S&W Safety Hammerless in .38 S&W from 1891 qualifies.
I am not a lawyer, but Texas law appears to say that I could strap on that revolver and openly carry it nearly anywhere (since it isn't a firearm or a handgun and you aren't using your CHL authority, there are nearly no "off-limits" areas).
Again, if you really want to make a political statement and give yourself a pretty decent chance to win in court when/if you are arrested, that would be my choice.
SA-TX
|
Rush Creek
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 22nd, 2009 03:26 pm |
|
SA-TX : Thank you for your thoughtful reply. Your points are right on the mark. Make no mistake - I incourage no person to test the current penal code in Texas based upon my historical, cultural, or personal observations.
On the other side of the coin - I detect the persistent presence of a mind-set among some folks that amounts to not only reinforcement- but a strengthening of the "legal" noose around the free exercise of this right in Texas. When we are talking about the exercise of a right - allowances, dispensations, or licenses are not the answer. There are huge obstacles standing in front of "legal" open carry in Texas. The same obstacles that frustrate exercise of this right in the often cited "legal" states. Hoping for a definitive moment when we all wake up some morning to learn that law-abiding citizens may hit the streets with their displayed HG's and be greeted by overwhelming approval - probably isn't going to happen.
Appreciating the history behind the infringement of the 2A in Texas is necessary to mobilizing an effort aimed at restoration of the right. The same "selective" ( read: "demographic" profile) discomfort with the notion of law-abiding folks in Texas walking down 6th Street in Austin with a holstered Glock is a big part of the failure to get OC addressed in the last Legislature. We are all (myself included) shackled with conditioned perceptions, suspicions, concerns about "some people" being "allowed" to go about their business wearing a firearm. The 140 year old attitudes that gave birth to 46.02 still linger.
Aside from the legal parameters , what do we say as a society regarding the body-count of the weaker members among us who just might not be showing up in the morgues every morning had they not been deprived of their right to arm themselves against violent sadistic predators ? Granted, most folks in Texas are "allowed" (eligible for a license) to exercise this right - but that still is not recognition of the existence of that right. Current restrictions imposed on CHL holders clearly eliminate licensed concealed carry in Texas from any definition of the actual exercise of a right.
The civil rights movement that made traction during the 60's/70's didn't happen because everyone one fine day was suddenly"allowed" to sit in the front of the bus, issued a license to do so, or welcomed at the restuarant door just because some "law" had just been enacted, or rescinded.
We all recognize that the only people significantly impacted by 46.02 in Texas are the law-abiding. Violent criminal minds are not deterred. Some folks are fortunate by virtue of county of residence, social affiliation, or perhaps some aspect of their persona to be able to exercise this right without undue attention being brought to bear . At some point more of these folks need to move from the "back of the bus" if the balance is ever going to be swayed in the opposite direction.
|
SA-TX
Centurion Member
|
Posted: Fri Oct 23rd, 2009 02:00 am |
|
Rush Creek wrote: SA-TX : Thank you for your thoughtful reply. Your points are right on the mark. Make no mistake - I incourage no person to test the current penal code in Texas based upon my historical, cultural, or personal observations.
On the other side of the coin - I detect the persistent presence of a mind-set among some folks that amounts to not only reinforcement- but a strengthening of the "legal" noose around the free exercise of this right in Texas. When we are talking about the exercise of a right - allowances, dispensations, or licenses are not the answer. There are huge obstacles standing in front of "legal" open carry in Texas. The same obstacles that frustrate exercise of this right in the often cited "legal" states. Hoping for a definitive moment when we all wake up some morning to learn that law-abiding citizens may hit the streets with their displayed HG's and be greeted by overwhelming approval - probably isn't going to happen.
Appreciating the history behind the infringement of the 2A in Texas is necessary to mobilizing an effort aimed at restoration of the right. The same "selective" ( read: "demographic" profile) discomfort with the notion of law-abiding folks in Texas walking down 6th Street in Austin with a holstered Glock is a big part of the failure to get OC addressed in the last Legislature. We are all (myself included) shackled with conditioned perceptions, suspicions, concerns about "some people" being "allowed" to go about their business wearing a firearm. The 140 year old attitudes that gave birth to 46.02 still linger.
Aside from the legal parameters , what do we say as a society regarding the body-count of the weaker members among us who just might not be showing up in the morgues every morning had they not been deprived of their right to arm themselves against violent sadistic predators ? Granted, most folks in Texas are "allowed" (eligible for a license) to exercise this right - but that still is not recognition of the existence of that right. Current restrictions imposed on CHL holders clearly eliminate licensed concealed carry in Texas from any definition of the actual exercise of a right.
The civil rights movement that made traction during the 60's/70's didn't happen because everyone one fine day was suddenly"allowed" to sit in the front of the bus, issued a license to do so, or welcomed at the restuarant door just because some "law" had just been enacted, or rescinded.
We all recognize that the only people significantly impacted by 46.02 in Texas are the law-abiding. Violent criminal minds are not deterred. Some folks are fortunate by virtue of county of residence, social affiliation, or perhaps some aspect of their persona to be able to exercise this right without undue attention being brought to bear . At some point more of these folks need to move from the "back of the bus" if the balance is ever going to be swayed in the opposite direction.
I agree and attitudes are changing. Look what has happened since 1987 & Florida. CC has swept the country. Another recent bit of news from October 12, 2009: support for handgun ban falls to the lowest level in 50 years (http://www.economist.com/daily/chartgallery/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14632169&fsrc=rss).
We are winning. The anti-gun faction has had patience and incrementally pushed their agenda over decades while good men and women paid no attention. Now they are awakening. To name a few:
1) We have wins in federal courts around the country (most recently in New Mexico). OCDO, VCDL, GeorgiaCarry and other groups are making progress and pushing the banners back on their heels on their turf (the courts).
2) For those who hoped Obama and a heavily Democratic Congress would reverse the tide, 70-something congressional Democrats (!) signed a letter urging the new president not to propose an assault weapons ban. Those votes plus those of Republicans means that it will be very difficult for him.
3) He had to sign the legislation allowing carry in the national parks.
4) Voting rights for the D.C. delegate was derailed over a carry provision that was attached by pro-gun Democrats and Republicans. They are still stuck on that one.
5) Heller was huge. The upcoming applicability to the states is even bigger. That will ensure lawsuits for the next 20 years as the level of scrutiny is determined and regulations large and small are litigated. They will be on defense while we are on offense.
You get the picture. The last 10 years have been very, very good for us and the momentum continues to build. We ARE reclaiming our birthright.
SA-TX
|
XtremeDuty.45
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Oct 26th, 2009 01:58 am |
|
dlofton wrote: Ya'll are making this WAY too complicated...
The 2nd Amendment guarantees the "right to bare arms". Under the system known as "federalism" that we have in the United States, the Constitution trumps everything else...including TX law.
With that in mind, carry when and where and how you want with your firearm. It is perfectly legal and no police officer or DA can arrest and/or prosecute you for it. I know this because I am a peace officer in TX and I know the legal theory of federalism and how it applies to the 2nd Amend.
Just don't worry about the TX statutes and do what you want with your fiream. You won't get into any trouble...I promise!
David
So if I OC in Shertz, Converse, Downtown SA I will not get arrested?
Cause I OC on my property and the Police tried to arrest me on a bogus charges.
They wanted to charge me with failure to conceal under TPC 46.035...
Sec. 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER.
(a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun.
However, they quoted it to me like this...
Sec. 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN
(a) A person commits an offense if the person carries a handgun on or about the person and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun
Seems to me that there is a HUGE difference in the law and what they tried to arrest me on.
NOTE: I may have read your post wrong and you may have been being sarcastic. However, in the case that you were not can you please explain in more detail please?
Last edited on Mon Oct 26th, 2009 02:04 am by XtremeDuty.45
|
dlofton
Regular Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 24th, 2008 |
| Location: | Schertz, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 65 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 27th, 2009 06:53 pm |
|
I was not being sarcastic at all. Federal law (the US Constitution) trumps TX and local statutes. Carry any way you want because the Founding Fathers have guaranteed you that right. I am a peace officer here in TX and I can promise that I want arrest you and neither will any other "law abiding" peace officer.
Neither of the two below statutes could pass a Constitutional review by the courts:
Sec. 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER.
(a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun.
However, they quoted it to me like this...
Sec. 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN
David
|
XtremeDuty.45
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Oct 27th, 2009 07:04 pm |
|
I really appreciate your understanding of the law and your stance on arresting someone for OCing. But now my question is when I do get arrested by either a LEO that does not care about the law or one that is ignorant of the law...who is gonna pay all my legal fees? Cause one will be arrested I can gaurantee that.
Also, it has not been held in federal court that the 2A is a God given right...so since there is no case files in our favor im going to guess that if one OCs he/she will be in violation of TPC 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER and he/she will be arrested, charged and prosecuted.
|
cbackous
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Oct 30th, 2009 05:44 pm |
|
dlofton wrote: I was not being sarcastic at all. Federal law (the US Constitution) trumps TX and local statutes. Carry any way you want because the Founding Fathers have guaranteed you that right. I am a peace officer here in TX and I can promise that I want arrest you and neither will any other "law abiding" peace officer.
Neither of the two below statutes could pass a Constitutional review by the courts:
Sec. 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER.
(a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun.
However, they quoted it to me like this...
Sec. 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN
David
I would be a little careful giving legal advice like that.
|
dlofton
Regular Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 24th, 2008 |
| Location: | Schertz, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 65 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 30th, 2009 08:01 pm |
|
Why? As far as I know I am not an attorney so I am not subject to the bar rules for the State of Texas and also nobody has been prosecuted for any advice that I have given them so they have to "standing" to sue me. I guess that means I can say just about anything I want. I am only repeating with the Constitution says.
David
|
XtremeDuty.45
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Oct 31st, 2009 02:02 am |
|
It would be smart especially as a LEO to give people advice that follows the law. I get what you are saying about the constitution. However, that has not been held up in court. It is illegal to OC in the state of Texas. I have read the laws forwards and backwards. Until the USSC rules that 2A is a God given right and that no state can make laws that limits the 2A then we must follow the state laws. And right now that is NO OC.
So to be giving advice such as this as a LEO my be legal its not smart and its down right wrong. As a LEO you are supposed to uphold the laws and protect your citizens. Not give them bad advice. You know as well as I do that if someone were to OC in Shertz they will get arrested.
|
Rush Creek
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Nov 1st, 2009 05:11 pm |
|
DLofton - I believe there are many LEO's who share your perspective.
Lawful OC presently is do-able in Texas , but it requires maturity, common-sense, prudence, and some spine. You are not ill-advising anyone. There are many LEO's in Texas that agree with your perspective.Those who have insight, purpose of mind, and a desire to bring about change will reflect on what you have expressed. One size does not fit all when it comes to this subject.
Some concepts require the ability to step back a bit and analyze situations and expand the range of one's perceptive skills - or even explore new paths - sometimes referred to as the "pioneer spirit". There are some folks that cut paths for others to follow. Some folks just travel on well-worn paths. Some folks have more respect for the "stay off grass" signs than the very grass the signs were designed to protect.
|
XtremeDuty.45
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Nov 2nd, 2009 05:06 am |
|
Rush Creek wrote: DLofton - I believe there are many LEO's who share your perspective.
Lawful OC presently is do-able in Texas , but it requires maturity, common-sense, prudence, and some spine. You are not ill-advising anyone. There are many LEO's in Texas that agree with your perspective.Those who have insight, purpose of mind, and a desire to bring about change will reflect on what you have expressed. One size does not fit all when it comes to this subject.
Some concepts require the ability to step back a bit and analyze situations and expand the range of one's perceptive skills - or even explore new paths - sometimes referred to as the "pioneer spirit". There are some folks that cut paths for others to follow. Some folks just travel on well-worn paths. Some folks have more respect for the "stay off grass" signs than the very grass the signs were designed to protect.
Ahh yes the "pioneer spirit" that will get you arrested and a hefty lawyers fee.
Rush Creek,
I have read alot of what you have said on the OC topic in Texas. Just because you read it the way you do does NOT make it legal. Trust me, I wish it were but its not. If you are so confident in your reading of the law, please feel free to come to SA and cut out a path for me to follow.
DLofton,
When I get arrested for OCing here in the greater San Antonio are may I tell the arresting officer that you said it was ok to OC? If I do he will surely let me go as I was follwing the advice of a LEO and not the letter of the law.
Last edited on Mon Nov 2nd, 2009 05:10 am by XtremeDuty.45
|
Current time is 02:03 am | Page: 1 2   |
|
|
|
