5290436693f0d.image_1

“During the 2015 legislative session, lawmakers approved the open carrying of handguns by licensed Texans,” kbtx.com reports. “As the 2017 session approaches, some in law enforcement are asking those lawmakers to revise the current law.” Some? Well, at least one . . .

The executive director of the Combined Law Enforcement Associations of Texas says they won’t push for a repeal of the law, but will make suggestions for changes to help law enforcement.

Brazos County Chief Deputy Jim Stewart [above] says he supports revisions to the open carry law.

“The open carry is focused more on pistols, and in my personal experience, I’ve seen one person since the law went into effect openly carrying a pistol. I think these folks with the long guns, with rifles slung over their shoulders, that is of concern of me,” said Stewart.

“That’s not covered under open carry. They’ve been able to do that for years, but particularly as we experienced in Dallas where the shooter was shooting with a long gun, how are they to know who the shooter actually was when you have so many people going around with long guns?”

Note to Chief Deputy Stewart: the guy shooting at innocent people is the bad guy. And the fact is that the Texas licensed open carry law didn’t need to cover the open carry of long guns because it was already legal.

Even in Texas, statists gotta state.

57 Responses to Executive Director of the Combined Law Enforcement Associations of Texas Calls for Long Gun Open Carry Ban

  1. How in the hell do these people reach positions of authority when they cannot read and understand simple English?

    “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.” (emphasis mine)

    • Unfortunately, some in law enforcement like this man have an ‘us against them’ mentality in which they view all civilians, including those of us who are 100% law abiding, with suspicion. Officer convenience and/or safety does not justify a violation of our Constitutional rights.

      • Correct. Also, there is generally no way to conceal a scoped 700, so he’s advocating a complete prohibition of all long guns. And, of course, as usual, I did not note him saying that TX law enforcement should lead the way, selling all of their long guns. I am calling for his resignation and disarmament, he is a tyrant-in-waiting.

    • One reason why I am staying in NC–no permit needed for open carry, even in a vehicle (must be in plain sight)–I recently have traveled in 25 of the lower 48 states, and I must admit that I was not impressed with Texas–it seems that, for now at least, the Southern states have their act together the most–maybe why most of the gun manufactures are going there–in Mayodan, NC, where Ruger put their 3rd plant & where I live, they have been a tremendous benefit in all ways–also, our county sheriff ordered the REMOVAL of almost every ‘No Weapons’ in the entire county; yes they did come down–this is how things should be

  2. “How do we know who the bad guys are…” I think they might be the ones shooting at you dumbass.

  3. I was born in Brazos County, and lived there until 1988. That’s just pure totalitarian fantasy. Update your resume, Sheriff – the next election isn’t too far off.

    • Tom in PA: I believe we know each other. Especially if I make a comment about a metal fabrication shop on Dellwood Street prior to you leaving the area.

  4. They’ve been able to do that for years

    Then why did you idiots harass and arrest CJ Grisham in Temple, TX? Morons.

    • The Temple Waco area is basically Hazard County and crooked as heck. Did the Mayor ever go to jail? Or was it the city council? I forget.

  5. “….as we experienced in Dallas where the shooter was shooting with a long gun, how are they to know who the shooter actually was when you have so many people going around with long guns?”

    As we experienced at University of Texas Tower, we figured it out somehow, didn’t we? Asshat.

  6. “The open carry is focused more on pistols, and in my personal experience, I’ve seen one person since the law went into effect openly carrying a pistol. I think these folks with the long guns, with rifles slung over their shoulders, that is of concern of me,” said Stewart.

    So, open carry is all well and good as long as he doesn’t see it, often.
    I guess free speech is ok as long as we keep our mouth shut too.

  7. So by his Reasoning. If there is a report of a Drunk Driver on the Highway, then by reasoning all Drivers are drunk and need to be pulled over.

    • You don’t see them anymore (at least that I know of…there may have been a court ruling), but police almost everywhere used to routinely do exactly that. They’d set up a drunk-driving checkpoint, and literally everyone on a particular road got stopped and checked.

      I’m sure they’re still perfectly willing to assume we’re all guilty until proven innocent.

      • Actually under his logic, to prevent drunk drivers all cars should have an alcohol interlock installed and as soon as someone blows hot it should immobilize the car and call law enforcement.

  8. It seems to me that he’s admitting to being poorly trained.

    Basically he doesn’t like OC because he doesn’t think that cops can follow ROE stating that you only get to shoot at people who are shooting at you or innocent people.

    I guess taking a second to assess a situation is something he thinks most cops can’t handle.

  9. CLEAT = Those pesky folks who call you at dinnertime to get a contribution in return for a “Free To Speed” sticker for your car. They ignore Do Not Call status.

  10. Yhea, and our founding fathers always carried around their rifles in nice Cordura and Pelican cases…

    Amazing how far we’ve strayed from what should be normal.

    O2

  11. Uh oh Texas, please don’t let the bastion of gun rights fall victim to irrational gun hysteria. PLEASE!

    If I woke up one morning and found the great state of Texas has instituted new anti gun laws, well, I might just lose the will to have barbecue…… for at least, a day.

    Seriously, send letters to this man and tell him he is a silly silly thing, and only dummies would think every long gun open carrier was a bad guy during an attack. Get on top of this situation now, Texas, lest your state starts looking more like mine.

    • We have Governor Badass. California has Governor Moonbeam. We’ll be just fine, regardless what some old coot of a Sheriff wants, but thanks for thinking of us.

  12. People with rifles slung over their shoulder, not a concern. People carrying at the low ready, that Chipotle ninja bullshit needs to be smacked down.

    • “People with rifles slung over their shoulder, not a concern. People carrying at the low ready, that Chipotle ninja bullshit needs to be smacked down.”

      So much this.

      I consider it brandishing. There is *zero* difference between low ready and a pistol in the hand…

      • Except the Chipotle Ninja thing was not them “carrying around at low ready.”

        They posed for a picture.

        Everyone there…manager, customers, cops that were present…knew they were JUST posing for a picture.

        This is the TRUTH about guns, so it would be really nice if we would stop spreading this UNTRUTH about how those guys were behaving in that Chipotle.

        • Fair criticism, I was unaware it was posed.

          That said, if I saw someone out-and-about at low ready, I would consider that brandishing…

  13. He can move to Mexico if he feels that way. I would strut with an AR around town but there is no need for a law against it.

  14. “…how are they to know who the shooter actually was when you have so many people going around with long guns?”

    First, how many people, besides the shooter and the cops, were carrying rifles at the protest in Dallas? One? Two? If that’s his idea of “so many people”, this guy must be from a REALLY small town. In any case, they seemed to sort it out pretty quickly when the OCer didn’t shoot at them, and the killer did.

    Second, I’ve lived in Texas for more than a dozen years. In all that time, I’ve seen exactly zero openly-carried rifles with my own eyes. I understand, thanks to YouTube, that it happens occasionally, but it’s incredibly rare. And, to my knowledge, no spree shooters or the like have ever started their rampage by walking around the town square with their rifle slung on their back, attracting attention. They tend to want to keep things on the down-low until they start their attack. So how is this a problem that needs legislative attention?

    • Same here. The only open carry of rifles I’ve ever seen has always been in obvious context, like people going to and from cars for hunting trips or range visits, or else at political demonstrations.

      In the latter case, I’ve never seen anyone wield a weapon in anything resembling a threatening stance. It’s usually a father with his rifle slung over his shoulder, muzzle down, no magazine, chamber flagged, often with a small, sleeping child in his arms.

      Not quite what I’d consider a terrifying tableau, but who knows how little it takes to make some old hick cop pee his pants? Still, that sounds like a personal problem in need of professional attention, not a legislative solution.

  15. “That’s not covered under open carry. They’ve been able to do that for years, but particularly as we experienced in Dallas where the shooter was shooting with a long gun, how are they to know who the shooter actually was when you have so many people going around with long guns?”

    Note to Chief Deputy Stewart: the guy shooting at innocent people is the bad guy.”

    So many masks, so much mask slipping.

    I thought the hunters would be left alone, the most left alone of all the “not who we’re going after” because that’s all tradition and stuff. Yet, no mention by Sheriff Fudd of a carve out for hunters, hunting rifles (vs. those bad, evil, weapons of war (How you gonna tell the difference, sparky?)), or people schlepping gear from trunk to range.

    How you gonna hunt without “open carrying?”

    Anybody talks about a carry restriction, any carry restriction, without a carve out for hunting and practice in the same breath ain’t so much about “just the bad guys.” They don’t think of the carve out, because there are no good guys with guns. Ever. Except for them.

  16. ahm a-thinkin’ these fellers are worried ifn alotta folks have long guns, police might jes hezytate tryin’ tuh figger out if someone else might be one of the bad guys.

  17. Weirdo. Laws shouldn’t permit freedom. Freedom should be the default and laws restrict particulars that involve victims.

  18. As has been said here numerous times.
    Its the bad guy who is the one doing the shooting Sherriff.
    Time for this guy to look for a new and safer job then pushing paper and opening his yap.

  19. Just thinking about it from a combat perspective (small unit tactics), would not one want to be able to determine that other openly armed individuals on scene are not on the verge of supporting “the bad guy shooting innocent people”? Would it be prudent (sensible) to automatically ignore the possibility that a coordinated attack by multiple shooters is underway, where one shooter draws attention and others flank the police? Wouldn’t it be quite normal for a cop to skip a beat trying to evaluate and discard non-shooting open carriers as not being a threat? Would that moment of hesitation (or analysis/evaluation) be a help or hindrance to police?

    • “possibility that a coordinated attack by multiple shooters is underway, where one shooter draws attention and others flank the police?”

      Despite the obvious possibility and the fact that it has been reported several times recently (as in Dallas), I do not recall an instance of this actually happening in America. Perhaps cops should not assume that every call is an attempt to kill them, or, if they do assume that, find another job. The job is about protecting the public in general, if it were about protecting only yourself, the public should save their money and fire them all.

      • But is it prudent for the populace to demand police ignore the possibility (there have been quite a few notable events that never happened before, until it did) that it could ever happen? Is it reasonable to demand that police not take that infinitesimal moment to “clear” their flanks before seeking other targets? Will we be happy when the “hasn’t happened” becomes reality, and it was the pressure from the public that created the risk?

        I don’t know that there is a good answer here, but completely dismissing any consideration of “the unthinkable” seems grossly short-sighted.

  20. Every cop is afraid of a bad shoot. The more open carry, the more bad shoots.
    If open carry is outlawed, anyone with a visible weapon at a crime scene is a criminal. Problem solved.

    • Anyone with a visible weapon…….who isn’t a cop, you mean, right?

      Sooo……all a spree shooter has to do is wear a light coat, concealing an easy-to-fabricate officer’s uniform. He can then toss that aside and he’ll get a free pass to shoot because he looks like a cop?

      When your stroke of genius solution can be foiled by a guy with a badge made of aluminum foil and black shirt and pants, then your stroke of genius starts to look more like just a stroke.

      • Masquerading as a cop isn’t what he is talking about (that is already being done). He is saying that any non-cop (yes, someone might fake the costume) with a long gun at a crime scene would self-identify as a bad guy. If only bad guys openly carry long guns (or pull one from under a coat), that becomes their enemy “uniform”, allowing unrestricted attack by police. Cops do face the possibility of encountering the same problem sorting friend from foe in combat. We love to talk about “kill them all and let God sort them out” when we have soldiers in foreign lands. But we do not acknowledge that police have the same problem among civilians here.

        We may not have an agreeable solution for misidentifying good guys with long guns, but is it prudent to pretend the problem does not exists?

        • After Dallas, I would say yes. Yes, it is prudent to *acknowledge* the problem does not exist. Multiple persons were present with “assault weapons”, none were misidentified, fired on, whatever, even while the cops on scene were certain they were being fired on by multiple shooters from multiple locations. There could not be a more perfect example, the cops were *ESCORTING* people with ARs when the shooting began, the nutbars would tell you that those cops would obviously kill all those guys first. But it did not happen.

        • The point was that if “good guys” could not openly display a long gun, then anyone who has one in a crowd is automatically a target for police. Do you find any fault in that logic? “Only bad guys would have long guns displayed; shoot the bad guys.”

          Don’t drag in that whole RTKBA argument. Is the logic of limiting possible targets flawed as a combat tactic?

  21. I live in Texas, so far I have seen maybe 2 open carry and all the police I speak with have seen maybe a few more here and there. They do not have a problem with it and the people committing crime with guns are not CHL holders who open carry.

    I do not understand what these morons do not understand about it? The only reason I wanted open carry was not to worry about printing and some idiotic soccer mom calling police on me because I have a gun.

    • Now that it’s gotten hot here, been carrying open (pistol) more often than concealed with absolutely no problems.
      Jacka$$es like Dem. deputy chief Stewart gotta bray dontcha know.

  22. While not advocating violence against law enforcement that Deputy Sheriff’s citizens need to give him a blanket party, using clear plastic.

    • All police should be legally obliged to be apolitical i.e. entitled to their own beliefs but not entitled to use their professional position to propagate those beliefs?

      I remember asking a Royal Air Force Police corporal what she thought of the Oscar Pistorius/Reeva Steenkamp case just as conversation over lunch but whilst we were on MOD property and she was in uniform, and she said they weren’t allowed to discuss anything that might be misconstrued as the opinion of their force.

  23. Law enforcement in Texas is the big reason why gun rights bills see resistance being passed. The police unions regularly flex their legal muscle to oppose gun rights.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *