Where did the push for open carry come from?

[flywise]

I watch a lot of first 48 on A&E and never once seen a punk walking around open carrying
I believe they all CC...maybe the cops should just ask every punk they see to strip...just to make sure they dont have a weapon

[JW]

I watch a lot of first 48 on A&E and never once seen a punk walking around open carrying

How do you know they are punks? Cuz of the way they dress? [emoji38]

[flywise]

How do you know they are punks? Cuz of the way they dress? [emoji38]

Pretty much

[tvc184]

More like,
unless a there is some probable cause why should a officer have the right to ask?

I understand completely that officers have a difficult job to do but As a law biding American citizen I have a right to not be bothered.
(i have already mentioned that I have no hand gun or CC and will likely not have either anytime soon)

It is not a right but an authority to ask.

Next, probable cause is never needed to lawfully detain someone. It only requires reasonable suspicion.

It is not even difficult to justify a detention. The current law in TX (46.02) says that it is illegal to carry a handgun outside of your own home, your vehicle or going between your home and vehicle. There is no exemption even listed in 46.02 for a CHL.

Reasonable suspicion did not end January 1, 2016.

HB195 in the last legislature would have nullified that as it would have for the most part done away with 46.02 UCW. It would require no license to carry in any manner. If that were to exist, an officer would not have reasonable suspicion to stop a person merely because the officer saw a handgun, illegal knife or club as they would be legal to display just as a pair of jeans or a baseball. Since that bill did not even get out of committee, carrying a handgun outside of your home and not in your vehicle (or watercraft) is still against the law. A visibly carried handgun without further knowledge is still against the law. About a 30 second detention to determine if the person is breaking the law under UCW or fits one of the exemptions listed in 46.15 is therefore legal in my opinion.

I believe there is a very good reason that up until the last day when the bill was passed that many legislators wanted it put into the law that the police could not enforce UCW for open carry. I believe they fully understood that an officer could stop to make sure that you were not breaking a weapons law.

A check of a person is not to check his license status which would be a regulatory function but to enforce a law that is still on the books. People are trying to make this a "checking your status" issue when in fact it is a criminal issue of a current law.

[flywise]

It is not a right but an authority to ask.

Next, probable cause is never needed to lawfully detain someone. It only requires reasonable suspicion.

It is not even difficult to justify a detention. The current law in TX (46.02) says that it is illegal to carry a handgun outside of your own home, your vehicle or going between your home and vehicle. There is no exemption even listed in 46.02 for a CHL.

Reasonable suspicion did not end January 1, 2016.

HB195 in the last legislature would have nullified that as it would have for the most part done away with 46.02 UCW. It would require no license to carry in any manner. If that were to exist, an officer would not have reasonable suspicion to stop a person merely because the officer saw a handgun, illegal knife or club as they would be legal to display just as a pair of jeans or a baseball. Since that bill did not even get out of committee, carrying a handgun outside of your home and not in your vehicle (or watercraft) is still against the law. A visibly carried handgun without further knowledge is still against the law. About a 30 second detention to determine if the person is breaking the law under UCW or fits one of the exemptions listed in 46.15 is therefore legal in my opinion.

I believe there is a very good reason that up until the last day when the bill was passed that many legislators wanted it put into the law that the police could not enforce UCW for open carry. I believe they fully understood that an officer could stop to make sure that you were not breaking a weapons law.

A check of a person is not to check his license status which would be a regulatory function but to enforce a law that is still on the books. People are trying to make this a "checking your status" issue when in fact it is a criminal issue of a current law.

Well, that seems like a very good explaination. I'm going to assume it is 100% correct because It does not and likely will not ever effect me personally.
I dont see a problem with open carry and I really dont see police officers harassing people just because they see a weapon. I believe most officers know that if it is open carried it is very unlikely to be a criminal.

[thegrouse]

It is not even difficult to justify a detention. The current law in TX (46.02) says that it is illegal to carry a handgun outside of your own home, your vehicle or going between your home and vehicle. There is no exemption even listed in 46.02 for a CHL

The new updates showed that 1/1/16 they carved out a 46.02 exemption for a chl. But you gotta ask him or her to find out if they are exempt.

[tvc184]

The new updates showed that 1/1/16 they carved out a 46.02 exemption for a chl. But you gotta ask him or her to find out if they are exempt.

[JW]

Pretty much

Well that's just wrong.

[Casey]

Do those of you that are opposed to being asked to see your CHL if carrying openly feel the same way about the Game Warden asking to see your hunting/fishing license while you are apparently hunting/fishing? I've not seen anyone really make an argument against the Game Wardens doing the EXACT SAME THING that they make against LEO. I think it's the exact same scenario and most of us are not as vehemently opposed to the GW as we are the LEO checking a license.

I realize with guns it's like a bit more emotional with regards to rights. But, it's no different and I'm willing to bet most of the opponents to being checked will not complain about a Game Warden requiring the same.

[tvc184]

The new updates showed that 1/1/16 they carved out a 46.02 exemption for a chl. But you gotta ask him or her to find out if they are exempt.

I have even had officers tell me that they didn't think that they could lawfully check for a CHL and started in with Terry v. Ohio.

Great and I agree on Terry... but......

I ask them to go back this last summer or months before open carry came to Texas. Let's say they were on patrol and saw a guy with a handgun cutting across a parking lot or walking across a city park with a handgun. Would they stop the person. They all said, "sure".

Hmmm..... but what if it turned out to be an off duty police officer who is way more exempt than any CHL and no UCW or Prohibited Places laws apply. They all said that once they found out it was an officer he would be released as he is exempt (Nonapplicability 46.15).

Great. That is the setup however. i then ask them how much the off duty officer can sue them for because his rights were violated since he is exempt from that set of laws and you detained a person who later turned out to be legal.

Every one of them came back with, "But I didn't know it was an officer when I stopped him and he could have been someone breaking the law".

I rested my case.

[mbfranklin]

Just curiously what is the difference between asking to see a chl or stopping every person driving a car to see if they have a license?

[Mike D]

How does that officer know you are participating in a legal activity if he/she doesn't see your license. Referencing that to licenses to drive is completing on the other side of the park.



Not saying they should check everyone all the time or that its not your right, but I wouldn't bother me, and I would show them no questions asked. Its kind of a respect thing. Put yourself in that LEO spot, if you cant imagine that I would suggest you go to your local law enforcement and ask for a ride- along, It will put it into perspective a little more.

The same way he would know whether or not I was driving legally? What's so hard to understand about that? Both are illegal to do without a license although they dang sure turn the other cheek for driving without one, especially if they are illegal.

But I digress. [emoji57]

[Mike D]

Where did the push for open carry come from?

It is not a right but an authority to ask.



Next, probable cause is never needed to lawfully detain someone. It only requires reasonable suspicion.



It is not even difficult to justify a detention. The current law in TX (46.02) says that it is illegal to carry a handgun outside of your own home, your vehicle or going between your home and vehicle. There is no exemption even listed in 46.02 for a CHL.



Reasonable suspicion did not end January 1, 2016.



HB195 in the last legislature would have nullified that as it would have for the most part done away with 46.02 UCW. It would require no license to carry in any manner. If that were to exist, an officer would not have reasonable suspicion to stop a person merely because the officer saw a handgun, illegal knife or club as they would be legal to display just as a pair of jeans or a baseball. Since that bill did not even get out of committee, carrying a handgun outside of your home and not in your vehicle (or watercraft) is still against the law. A visibly carried handgun without further knowledge is still against the law. About a 30 second detention to determine if the person is breaking the law under UCW or fits one of the exemptions listed in 46.15 is therefore legal in my opinion.



I believe there is a very good reason that up until the last day when the bill was passed that many legislators wanted it put into the law that the police could not enforce UCW for open carry. I believe they fully understood that an officer could stop to make sure that you were not breaking a weapons law.



A check of a person is not to check his license status which would be a regulatory function but to enforce a law that is still on the books. People are trying to make this a "checking your status" issue when in fact it is a criminal issue of a current law.

So if I'm understanding correctly having a CHL or LTC is in essence a "defense to prosecution" as it were (not meaning that verbatim) and not a "right" so to speak?

If so what's poorly written law. Seems we were duped again. [emoji19]

[thegrouse]

So if I'm understanding correctly having a CHL or LTC is in essence a "defense to prosecution" as it were (not meaning that verbatim) and not a "right" so to speak?

If so what's poorly written law. Seems we were duped again. [emoji19]

No sir that is not the case. The legislature granted an exemption to the chl holders under the 46.02 statute. An officer just has to make sure you are exempt from the law that they would arrest a non chl holder under.

[krisw]

So starting today, you are basically going to continue the assumption that someone open carrying a handgun is doing something illegal?

Completely off topic tvc, but how many lawsuits have you been named in? I was reading another forum talking about something and an officer said they were sued all the time. Is that true?