permit-less carry

The 2nd Amendment








ABOUT TIME!

Would be nice to save some money

B

I don't see Texas allowing constitutional carry, they want the fees and renewal fees.

Maybe someday, but think about how long it took just to get where we are now.....

Concealed carry in Texas has only been in place since the mid 90's if I recall correctly - which was 10-15 years after many other states. Heck, I had friends in California with concealed carry permits 20 years before Texas legalized it!

Now think about the fact that it took us an additional 20 years to get open carry rights here in Texas.

Marc

main problem i see is texas giveing up permitt fee,s. but is happening i think 12 states now have permittless carry

marc they said never to concelded in texas and also to open so there is a hope,but i think it will be a few seassions and a few more states ahead of us,

Good thing is the LT Governor is behind this also.

I agree it will be about the fees

Was always about the fees.The BS part is we pay a tax to be able to use our constitutional right.

oh the stuff dreams are made of, hopefully in my lifetime constitutional carry will be allowed.

I believe that there needs to be something in place that requires anyone who wants to carry to be proficient, or at least have a clue, with how to handle a firearm.

When my wife and I went thru the class it was mind-numbing how many in the class had never fired a firearm and frankly it was obvious when we went to the range and they tried to load a fire the weapon.

These are the guys that would be allowed to carry without any oversight? Back in the day our Dad's taught us firearm safety, at least mine taught me. Nowadays most children grow up in a fatherless home with no one there to teach them gun safety and how to shoot. If you have ever been to a public range you will see these guys and girls trying to figure things out of their own pointing their weapon at everyone etc.

And you want to allow them to carry? It is our right to own and bear arms but society is different now. Just like there is now hunters ed there needs to be firearms ed as well before people should be allowed to carry.

How about passing a law that states everyone must carry a weapon. Have mandatory firearms training in high school. Then charge a fee to not carry one. Problem of fees solved.

Who does the federal constitution regulate? Not the people...

The federal government. Meaning the federal government can't make laws prohibiting your right to carry or own fire arms.

Your right to own and carry firearms is not just a 2A right but also a 10A right. Anything not relegated to the federal government is reserved to the states or the people.

In Texas we have constitutional carry.

Texas State Constitution
Sec. 23. RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS. Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defense of himself or the State; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime.

"No one is sayin you can't own a gun. NO one is saying you can't carry a gun. You just can't carry a gun..." without a license.

This right is reserved to the state and the state is well within the confines of the federal constitution to do so.

History teachers have done a huge disservice to America by not teaching the constitution correctly and our SC is proof.

Until the Texas Constitution is changed, we can cry 2A all we want, it means nothing.

wrong wrong wrong. whats not spefically in the constitution and not given to the feds is reserved to the states. the 2nd is specifally stated in the constitution just as the 1st, the state has no right regulating or requiring a license to speak freely and has no right to regulate your right to carry either.
whats in the constitution is off limits to the feds and to the states

Hate to tell you this, but you have no idea how to read the constitution.

Read the preamble to the bill of rights. It states that the limits are for the FEDERAL government.

Only four states do not have a 2A mirror in their state constitution, all 46 others have regulations concerning the keeping and bearing of arms. The only reason why Chicagos hand gun ban was ruled unconstitutional by the SC was that it exceeded the state constitution and completely did away with both keeping and bearing. The Keller decision was ruled on the constitutional provision that Washington DC is FEDERAL territory, they are not a state. If I am wrong, then every state that has CHL is in violation of the constitution and you should file a brief with the SC...you won't get far. Not because of politics, but because I'm right...there is no jurisdiction for the federal government where the regulating of arms does not remove the right to keep and bear.

Too much weight has been given to the federal government that was never intended.

And how many of those people didn't pass the test? The CHL shooting test is a pretty big joke. The class I was in rented guns out to people since they didn't own one. Is it scary? Yes. Does someone passing the CHL shooting test make me feel safer? Not really. The only part of the CHL class that is worth a damn in my opinion is the education about laws, etc. At least people can leave there knowing when they can/can't shoot/draw their weapon, etc. I asked the instructor how many people they had failed in the past and they said not a single one. Actually only one person had to take the shooting test a second time out of every class they offered. That tells me that the shooting test is worthless if on one is failing. (I know that people do fail it but it is such a small number nothing has been accomplished there.

Yes, the shooting part is a waste of time. More than likely if you had to shoot it would be from close range.

Even the Dallas police only has like a 25% hit rate when they shoot their weapons.

Not correct information. These are the annual licensing requirements for every peace officer in the state.

(1) handguns - a minimum of 50 rounds, fired at ranges from point-blank to at least 15 yards with at least 20 rounds at or beyond seven yards, including at least one timed reload;
(2) shotguns - a minimum of five rounds of ammunition fired at a range of at least 15 yards;
(3) precision rifles - a minimum of 20 rounds of ammunition fired at a range of at least 100 yards; however, an agency may, in its discretion, allow a range of less than 100 yards but not less than 50 yards if the minimum passing percentage is raised to 90;
(4) patrol rifles - a minimum of 30 rounds of ammunition fired at a range of at least 50 yards, including at least one timed reload; however, an agency may, in its discretion, allow a range of less than 50 yards but not less than 10 yards if the minimum passing percentage is raised to 90;
(5) fully automatic weapons - a minimum of 30 rounds of ammunition fired at ranges from seven to at least 10 yards, including at least one timed reload, with at least 25 rounds fired in full automatic (short bursts of two or three rounds), and at least five rounds fired semi-automatic, if possible with the weapon.
(d) The minimum passing percentage shall be 70 for each firearm.
(e) The executive director may, upon written agency request, waive a peace officer's demonstration of weapons proficiency based on a determination that the requirement causes a hardship.
(f) The effective date of this section is February 1, 2016.

I am not talking about shooting at the range, I am talking about when they actually have to use their weapon in the field.

Can't imagine it's about the fees...there are approximately 1 Mil CHL holders in TX. Some pay $70 some pay $140 to the state EVERY 5 years. That hardly pays for the administration of the process. Whether there is a license required or not...someone will have to pay for the background investigation. Don't want it coming out of my federal taxes or any state sales tax.

are you saying the state has a right to regulate the bill of rights

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

tell me how the the state has a right to regulate your right to due process, or your freedom of speech then tell me how that transfers to the right to keep and bear arms

10-4. I'd be shocked if it's that high with agencies across the state. Officers who are involved in shootouts are routinely also dealing with the foot chase, the darkness and shooting through glass. All those, as well as other factors, are going to lower the success rate. Most citizen shootouts involving an armed law abiding person and a criminal which I have responded to, are extremely close range, where proficiency with the firearm is pretty moot.

http://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2016/12/27/...campaign=buffer

I'm all for permit-less carry, just wondering how it would effect state to state reciprocity...

When I took my class, the lady next to me hit the ground with her first three shots at 3 yards. Yes, you read that correctly. The instructor came over to get a closer look at what she was doing, and she hit the ground with the 4th shot. I was glad that he removed her from the firing line.

"I've got a bad feeling about this"....

I just took the LTC class in October and still have not gotten my license. I have called a couple times and all you get is its still under review. I don't think anyone should have to pay anything until they are issued a license, but that's not the case. I'm all for carrying a gun, but I would like to see people at least have to pass a test to carry and be safe about it.

Just apply at Vermont, I thought it was like $100

Bull chit! The only requirement one should have to meet is whether they can legally own a fire arm or not. It's the "I believe" people that lost us that right many years ago.

And I believe those wanting to carry should either be active duty military, retired or prior service. Retired, active duty or prior law enforcement also meet my standards.

See how that "I believe" chit works.

I've been trained on M-14's, M-16's, M-60's, M-72's M-79's, M-102's, M-107's, M-109's, M-110's M-114's M-203's and even the lowly M-1911. That's not counting explosives training or 30 years of competition shooting with all levels of firearms and 50+ years of hunting experience.

Yet by your standard and the states I need to pass a test, that's funny!

From a personal perspective, I hope it passes. Being former LEO, I have qualified to my hearts content.

I don't see where monies/fees are an issue, get rid of the CHL and dismantle the oversight dept, or reallocate those resources to another dept. The FED can continue doing the background as those only pertain to new ownership anyway.

As far as the shooting portion of the current CHL class, I don't think shooting the bulls eye out 100% of the time is as important as demonstrating the knowledge and familiarity capable of handling a firearm, which I find hard to understand in such a short class to begin with. (No I haven't attended one, just what CHL holders have mentioned)

Prior to the CHL rules when we had the "travel/overnight" guidelines, I can't recall it being a big deal, bad guy's had guns then as well.

Liability and the rest of gun possession laws staying the same.

The only part of the LTC class I felt was worth it was the part explaining the laws, especially how to identify to LEO's that you were carrying.