Texas' open carry legislation got sidetracked temporarily yesterday because computerized records were messed up. Seems somebody appeared before a committee and during their testimony, the changed their mind about it. I don't know if they switched from backing it to opposing it or the other way around, but the record didn't properly reflect their final position, so the powers that be tabled the measure until it got sorted out. The question I have is why anyone would appear to testify for or against any proposed legislation if it was not clear in their mind what their position was. Anybody who can't make up their mind on such matters has no business putting their name on the agenda, INMHO.
I have no position on open carry, though I note open carry is permissible in quite a few states and it hasn't resulted in mass mayhem. It's reported you can even carry openly in the people's democratic republic of Vermont, though I haven't personally witnessed it in my visits to that beautiful state. I'm licensed for concealed carry, which I understand will be required for open carry. I'm not sure I want to advertise the fact I'm armed, but if my weapon shows, open carry will protect me from trouble. But in a conversation with like-minded people last night, there seemed to be a feeling that having a weapon on your belt with no effort to conceal it would be unsettling to many people and seem threatening to some.
Like I say, I'm not sure I want a bad guy to know I'm armed, because it might make me the first target, among other things. In his mind, if he took me out, then anybody else would be easy. i'm too darned old to react with grest speed, so I'd need all the time I could get, I guess.
I'd welcome other views on this subject.