Concealed Carry

Doggtyred said:
Nice thing about concealed carry (and as of Jan 1, 2016 - open carry) in Texas.. There are very specific signs that MUST be displayed in order to enforce a no-weapons stance at private business. A picture of a pistol silhouette with a red line through it means nothing in Texas. Nor does a "No guns" sign or my favorite "Buffalo Wild Wings does not allow guns".

All of those signs are meaningless in Texas and I carry anyways.

Proper notice in Texas consists of the aforementioned signs (referred to as 30.06 and 30.07 signs), or being handed a card with the language required on the signs, or being verbally told that weapons are not allowed. Thats it. Period. Nothing else is legally binding in Texas. So when I carry concealed, nobody knows I'm carrying to tell me its not ok. And without the proper language, I'm legally covered against unlawful carry/trespass by concealed weapons holder.

The one place one has to be careful is with regards to establishments that serve alcohol. If its a bar or a club or someplace that typically makes 51% or more of their revenue from alcohol sales, they are in a discrete licensing category with the liquor bureau (TABC), and its a felony to carry there (licensed or not). If the establishment falls under the 50% threshold (restaurant or other establishment that also happens to serve alcohol) then licensed carry is legal unless otherwise prohibited by proper signage.

If you want to prohibit both concealed and open carry, BOTH signs must be posted, and they take up a lot of real estate. And they must be posted at every entrance.

2585050.jpg


Texas_Penal_Code_30.07-White.png


7081123_orig.jpg
Click to expand...


In Minnesota they'd probably require ten different languages. You'd have to dedicate a wall or multiple doors to the notices.
 
nddons said:
I did some training at an FBI facility in the 1980s. The lead instructor, who also lead their SWAT team for the Midwest, said that the scariest part of his job was doing training for local police departments and their annual qualification exercises. He said that he knows that many of those LEOs never practice, even once, in between their required quals.
Click to expand...

Absolutely this. Most cops I've met practice only when they need to qualify. Yet the CCW people I meet practice on a fairly regular basis and actually enjoy shooting.

Also, my Glock 19 has never gone off by itself. Only seems to shoot when I squeeze the trigger. They are very safe, but like anything else, you have to use it properly.
 
nddons said:
I'm sure the ACLU will join the other plaintiffs in an Appeal.

Oh, that's right, they only handle the OTHER civil liberties. :mad2:
Click to expand...

They have been on the correct side a couple of times. But those were cases dealing with rights, not taxation.
 
LDJones said:
In Minnesota they'd probably require ten different languages. You'd have to dedicate a wall or multiple doors to the notices.
Click to expand...

Hmong ;-)

MN requires a sign dark arrial font on white background 4-6 ft off the ground 187 square inch in size that reads 'XYZ company bans guns on these premises' .
 
Last edited:
weilke said:
They have been on the correct side a couple of times. But those were cases dealing with rights, not taxation.
Click to expand...


The ACLU has been on the pro-Second Amendment side of cases? Do you have an example? I've just never seen that.
 
denverpilot said:
If one had unlimited time to waste, it would seem that a FOIA request or their State equivalent, would be able to answer that.
Click to expand...

Probably not. FOIA only applies to documents that exist. It doesn't require the government to generate the statistics or even research whether such data exists. Unless the commonwealth has commissioned a study on such an impact (which I can probably assure they haven't), there's nothing to FOIA.
 
Mason said:
[FONT=&quot]Liberal Buys A Gun:


LINK [/FONT]
Click to expand...


Wow, the guilt, self-doubt, and conflict that this guy suffered just because government won't stop gun violence. I feel so sorry for him. Plus, he will probably be shunned at the next cocktail party with his fellow liberals, the poor bastard.
 
Had a CC for SC... moved to NC... so SC no longer valid... Picking up a purchase permit this afternoon and Concealed carry class for NC is on Jan 2nd... What a pain in the A$$...!!!!
 
N6399A said:
Oh, and stay out of Wal-mart. They're CCW un-friendly. They seem to like the law abiding citizens to leave weapons in the car. :dunno:
Click to expand...
How would they know that you are carrying if it's concealed? :dunno:
 
Fearless Tower said:
Saying that Glocks are only a danger to 'less trained' people kinda doesn't jive with the recent data showing considerably higher inadvertent discharge rates that Glocks suffer as compared to other brands among police departments.
Click to expand...

I was being generous. ;)
 
nddons said:
Revolvers have been around for > 100 years as well. Pull the trigger and they go bang.

As a CCW holder, my Glock never leaves it's holster unless the SHTF. Re-holstering is not a daily activity. I take my holster off with the firearm still in the holster (either an IWB or paddle holster).
Click to expand...

Don't really get your point about revolvers. My point was that the grip safety was well known at the time Glocks came to market. But they ignored it and continue to ignore it.

Sure, I take my gun off still holstered too - at home.

But when I practice drawing from concealment at the range it requires reholstering. Not that big a deal even with a Glock... if you're trained and careful.

What most people call accidental discharges are really negligent discharges caused by people who are untrained or just being careless. If a guy racks a semi-auto with his finger inside the guard, well, safeties can't fix stupid.

I'm not a Glock basher. I've shot many. They're great. But I prefer the grip safety. In the hands of a trained person, either one is going to be very safe... or deadly if you're on the open end. :D
 
petrolero said:
Don't really get your point about revolvers. My point was that the grip safety was well known at the time Glocks came to market. But they ignored it and continue to ignore it.

Sure, I take my gun off still holstered too - at home.

But when I practice drawing from concealment at the range it requires reholstering. Not that big a deal even with a Glock... if you're trained and careful.

What most people call accidental discharges are really negligent discharges caused by people who are untrained or just being careless. If a guy racks a semi-auto with his finger inside the guard, well, safeties can't fix stupid.

I'm not a Glock basher. I've shot many. They're great. But I prefer the grip safety. In the hands of a trained person, either one is going to be very safe... or deadly if you're on the open end. :D
Click to expand...


My point was that Glocks are as stupid-simple as a revolver. Pull the trigger and you fire a round.

As for why Glock skipped the grip safety, I have no idea. Perhaps they sought to build a better mousetrap.

When you reholster, do you ensure that the web of your hand is off the grip safety? If you don't make that conscious effort to change your grip before reholstering, wouldn't that make your grip safety plastic pistol functionally the same as a Glock?
 
My M & P's do not have grip safeties either....:goofy:
 
Last edited:
Anthony said:
Why is that sad? Why should government mandate that it is "mandatory"? It should be up to your father, grand father, uncle, brother or yourself to get the appropriate knowledge to safely use a firearm, and hunt game.

In my state, I needed both a hunter's safety course, and a license to hunt. It is all about the FEES, period.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't object to basic competency demonstration, and could easily ne done with little to no fees. I had to submit a copy of my CC class that cost I think $20 online.. This could have easily been accomplished at the local range and have some guy say I can hit a 10" at 10' without shooting my eye out.
 
It's not clear what the grip safety does that the internal safety on my sig doesn't do. There is no way the Sig is firing if you don't pull the trigger. The trigger, in addition to releasing the hammer sear, releases the firing pin block.
 
DRUG & GUN. Great name for a store. It's almost as good as the one I want to open called Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (if we don't have it, you can get along without it).
 
Fearless Tower said:
The article sounds like the issue is background checks....meaning you might not be eligible to get a permit in VA due to some legal history, but you could get one in another state and then concealed carry into VA.
Click to expand...

Their reasoning is dishonest.

The items they have cited regarding prohibiting reasons are already addressed by federal law and apply to all states equally.

They MIGHT have a legitimate line of reasoning with the "differences in training standards" but certainly have no leg to stand with regards to their other reasons.
 
flyingron said:
DRUG & GUN. Great name for a store. It's almost as good as the one I want to open called Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (if we don't have it, you can get along without it).
Click to expand...

Reminds me of the store in colorado: Master Bait and Tackle
 
No the Virginia law lists a dozen things (like DUIs and multiple misdemeanors in the past five years) that bar you from a concealed permit. A strict reading of the reciprocity statute says that you have to meet two conditions:

1. Have an online database of issued permits (most have this, MD uses it to make warrantless stops to abuse permit holders whether they are carrying or nto).
2. Have rules that prevent your state from issuing permits that would not be issued in Virginia.

Given the rather arcane set of Virginia disqualifiers, yep, it's probably within the statute to disqualify the other states. The AG sent letters to the other states asking them to verify that they are indeed not compatible with the statute.

This one is going to take some legislative activity to reverse.

Frankly, I think honoring other states for those who are residents of those states makes the most sense, but that's just my opinion.
 
flyingron said:
No the Virginia law lists a dozen things (like DUIs and multiple misdemeanors in the past five years) that bar you from a concealed permit. A strict reading of the reciprocity statute says that you have to meet two conditions:

1. Have an online database of issued permits (most have this, MD uses it to make warrantless stops to abuse permit holders whether they are carrying or nto).
2. Have rules that prevent your state from issuing permits that would not be issued in Virginia.

Given the rather arcane set of Virginia disqualifiers, yep, it's probably within the statute to disqualify the other states. The AG sent letters to the other states asking them to verify that they are indeed not compatible with the statute.

This one is going to take some legislative activity to reverse.

Frankly, I think honoring other states for those who are residents of those states makes the most sense, but that's just my opinion.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm....I'd love to know more bout that. I've not heard that one....and my cop friends say nothing but good regarding CC'rs. But, I do live in the conservative part of the state.....:rolleyes2:
 
Here, LEO do not know who has a permit, that information isn't available for them to look up during a traffic stop.

I always voluntarily give them mine with my DL.
 
fiveoboy01 said:
Here, LEO do not know who has a permit, that information isn't available for them to look up during a traffic stop.



I always voluntarily give them mine with my DL.
Click to expand...


Same in Colorado. Law requires showing permit and identifying as armed only when asked. I will do so when asked or before getting out of the vehicle if asked, and not before.
 
nddons said:
The ACLU has been on the pro-Second Amendment side of cases? Do you have an example? I've just never seen that.
Click to expand...

The ACLU was the plaintiff in the case that allowed permanent residents in South Dakota to re-gain the right to a carry permit.

Smith vs. Milstead, around 2011
 
nddons said:
As for why Glock skipped the grip safety, I have no idea. Perhaps they sought to build a better mousetrap.
Click to expand...

The wiki article on Glock, particularly the "history" subsection, has the answer.

The original Glock was designed to meet a spec to replace Austria's then-current issue pistol. There were numerous criteria in the bid spec, including:

"The pistol's construction may not exceed 58 individual parts (equivalent of a P38)"


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock
 
Last edited:
weilke said:
The ACLU was the plaintiff in the case that allowed permanent residents in South Dakota to re-gain the right to a carry permit.

Smith vs. Milstead, around 2011
Click to expand...
Based on the 14th, not the 2nd. The ACLU has been involved in a few cases where they're asserting other issues such as 4th and 5th amendment rights in the context of guns, but they're on record as being against the individual-right theory of the 2nd.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
Meh....those were out of state gun owners....who did not have reciprocity in MD. Ya, MD is a liberal state.....:nono::rolleyes:
Click to expand...

MD honors nobody's handgun permits. Interfering with someone just because they are from out of state is still unconstitutional even before you get into the second amendment issues.
 
flyingron said:
MD honors nobody's handgun permits. Interfering with someone just because they are from out of state is still unconstitutional even before you get into the second amendment issues.
Click to expand...
True....I thought you were referring to MD residence....and LEO harassing them.:yikes:
 
flyingron said:
MD honors nobody's handgun permits. Interfering with someone just because they are from out of state is still unconstitutional even before you get into the second amendment issues.
Click to expand...


We're all equal Citizens... Unless we hail from somewhere the politicians were bought off by Billionaire Bloomberg. Hmm. Interesting isn't it.
 
weilke said:
Hmong ;-)

MN requires a sign dark arrial font on white background 4-6 ft off the ground 187 square inch in size that reads 'XYZ company bans guns on these premises' .
Click to expand...

Yep. Very easily ignored if I HAVE to go in there. If optional I take my business elsewhere.
 
Doggtyred said:
Nice thing about concealed carry (and as of Jan 1, 2016 - open carry) in Texas.. There are very specific signs that MUST be displayed in order to enforce a no-weapons stance at private business. A picture of a pistol silhouette with a red line through it means nothing in Texas. Nor does a "No guns" sign or my favorite "Buffalo Wild Wings does not allow guns".

All of those signs are meaningless in Texas and I carry anyways.

Proper notice in Texas consists of the aforementioned signs (referred to as 30.06 and 30.07 signs), or being handed a card with the language required on the signs, or being verbally told that weapons are not allowed. Thats it. Period. Nothing else is legally binding in Texas. So when I carry concealed, nobody knows I'm carrying to tell me its not ok. And without the proper language, I'm legally covered against unlawful carry/trespass by concealed weapons holder.

The one place one has to be careful is with regards to establishments that serve alcohol. If its a bar or a club or someplace that typically makes 51% or more of their revenue from alcohol sales, they are in a discrete licensing category with the liquor bureau (TABC), and its a felony to carry there (licensed or not). If the establishment falls under the 50% threshold (restaurant or other establishment that also happens to serve alcohol) then licensed carry is legal unless otherwise prohibited by proper signage.

If you want to prohibit both concealed and open carry, BOTH signs must be posted, and they take up a lot of real estate. And they must be posted at every entrance.

2585050.jpg


Texas_Penal_Code_30.07-White.png


7081123_orig.jpg
Click to expand...

The law is a bit simpler in the state of Washington. Here I cannot carry a pistol (CPL or not) in the part of a restaurant that is off limits to people under 21. For example, when we go to Red Robin I can carry in the main restaurant, but if we want to sit in the bar area (which we usually do, faster to get a table there) that space is off limits to minors, so no carry there. And, it does have to be posted.
 
Ghery said:
The law is a bit simpler in the state of Washington. Here I cannot carry a pistol (CPL or not) in the part of a restaurant that is off limits to people under 21. For example, when we go to Red Robin I can carry in the main restaurant, but if we want to sit in the bar area (which we usually do, faster to get a table there) that space is off limits to minors, so no carry there. And, it does have to be posted.
Click to expand...

Another perfect example of an absolutely retarded gun law. This restriction literally does not make any sense at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top