Dallas ‘Swats’ Deadly CSGV Advice on Open Carry

By David Codrea

Even an anti-gun newspaper recognizes the danger posed by "swatting." Meanwhile, the Dallas PD warns against exactly the "advice" CSGV is dispensing to its followers. (The New York Times/Twitter )
Even an anti-gun newspaper recognizes the danger posed by “swatting.” Meanwhile, the Dallas PD warns against exactly the “advice” CSGV is dispensing to its followers. (img: The New York Times/Twitter )
AmmoLand Gun News
AmmoLand Gun News

USA –  -(Ammoland.com)-  The City of Dallas has released a video and a “Frequently Asked Questions” guide to advise the public about changes to Texas open carry laws that will go in effect on January 1, The Dallas Morning News reported.

Citizens with concealed carry permits will be allowed to openly carry handguns in non-prohibited areas.

Realizing that the change will take some people time to get used to, the city is seeking to calm and educate the public, and to ensure its police officers know how to respond to calls about armed citizens. True, Texas law still requires a permit and it still provides for “gun free zones,” but this shows the citizen disarmament lobby isn’t the only side that can advance goals through incremental gains.

Knowing that there are some so angered by this setback to their agenda that they’re willing to put lives (of others) at risk to throw a wrench into things, the city felt it necessary to add a question and answer to its FAQ. The following specifically addresses danger caused by those who would rather see people dead than armed through the evil practice of “swatting”:

Does DPD have a strategy to detect fake 911 calls? For example, there is a group that has told its members to call 911 and report that persons openly carrying are committing a crime to get a police response.

911 will be trained to handle these types of calls.

What group might they be referring to? One that’s been pointed out numerous times over the past several months is the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, which last July posted the following “advice” on its Facebook page:

Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, calls for swatting of innocent gun owners.
Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, calls for swatting of innocent gun owners.

After doubling down on their stance in September, CSGV repeated the invitation to disaster last week.

What does Dallas have to say on the matter in its FAQ?

Before calling, take time to observe what the person is doing. Ask yourself whether the person is doing anything that looks suspicious. Just because the person is openly carrying a handgun does not mean he has no right to do so. If you call 911 to verify whether a person is lawfully openly carrying a handgun, officers will come based on 911 training and information provided on the call.

The dangers of the CSGV approach should be clear. Both citizens and police are unnecessarily placed at heightened risk by hysterical and/or malicious 911 calls.

As even The New York Times — no friend to gun owners — has reported, “Internet trolls have learned to exploit our over-militarized police. It's a crime that's hard to stop — and hard to prosecute.”

“This should be done in a thoughtful manner. And no false reporting,” CSGV backpedaled when reminded of a fatal apparent swatting of a black shopper who was holding a pellet gun on sale at Walmart. But the afterthought attempt at plausible deniability rings hollow.

“It's insane that the people of Akron, Ohio should have to tolerate this dangerous degenerate in their community,” CSGV railed, making no attempt to mask its seething hatred for an open carrier who had broken no laws, and who was even willing to sit down and explain his thoughts on firearms and freedom to an anti-gun bigot who had screamed profanities at him.

“NRA laws are allowing potential mass shooters to confront our families without any fear of being disarmed prior to opening fire.”

In other words, they’re furious that there are legal restraints to discourage police from drawing down on a citizen simply for having a gun, because of what someone could do. Using their rationale, this shows it doesn’t matter if that gun is openly carried or concealed. The more properly-named Coalition to Initiate Gun Violence doesn’t want you to be allowed to do either.  The bottom line is, if you carry a gun, they consider you a threat justifying an armed police response, and all the lethal dangers that entails.

Using that rationale, everyone with hands is a potential strangler and everyone with matches a potential arsonist. And guess what that makes every male…?

The video prepared by the City of Dallas elaborates on the new Texas open carry law. Isn't it revealing that self-designated “gun safety” groups have not seen fit to share it or the FAQ with their followers?

Also see:

David Codrea in his natural habitat.

About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating / defending the RKBA and a long-time gun rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament.

He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” and also posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

  • 32 thoughts on “Dallas ‘Swats’ Deadly CSGV Advice on Open Carry

    1. I personally believe that ALL 911 dispatchers be REQUIRED to obtain the name and all pertinent contact information from every caller with a “gun” related call. No information from the caller, simply respond that “Without the required information from you, we will NOT respond to your report.” If the caller refuses, hand up a report of a potential “False Filing of a Police Report” to the office of the ADA. If the caller gives a public phone booth (yeah-right!) number, or a cell number if they are mobile, require them to contact the first responder at that exact location they are calling from and provide ALL additional personal information PRIOR to sending units to the scene.
      This may provide sufficient information for bankrupting some real dirt bag libs.

    2. Demanding Moms put in phony swat calls because someone is carrying in a holster? I think Texas needs to HANG their worthless asses! as for “Gun Free zones…tell me exactly, WHO IN HELL has the right to violate my 2nd amendment rights by telling me I can’t carry? and lastly, you include churches in the no carry places? Has anyone been paying attention at the nut cases attacking churches because the cowards think no one is armed? SCREW THAT!

    3. I have openly carried a variety of folding belt knives and pocket clip knives, to include balisongs and other switchblades since it became legal to do so in Texas. I have been given to understand that others doing the same have been inappropriately hassled for doing the same, usually under substitute knife for gun circumstances in article above.

      Candice Bergen’s “This is Texas, everybody has a gun,” line is stereotypical but it is close enough to true that Dallas and other PD’s are going to not going to take “swatting” well. What I want to see is if “minority group Texans” are stopped and have their licenses checked when carrying openly in statistically significant higher numbers than White Texans, how responsibly people carrying without a license behave (especially those caught out in “necessity knows no law” circumstances), and other data that will be useful in the next legislative session to push for Constitutional carry.

    4. The video is mostly accurate. It is, however, NOT illegal to enter places of worship carrying either openly or concealed unless the premises has one or both of the penal code 30.06 or 30.07 signs posted against carry. After watching several “informational” videos done by cities to prepare citizens, most are inaccurate in some statement. Please take the time to look up the law and refer to the State of Texas’ own website for more accurate info.

    5. Tim Torian: First and foremost your opinion has absolutely no fact to back it up. And while you’re entitled to your opinion if you really want to contribute to the discussion try using reasoned fact. In Virginia we’ve had open carry for more than 150 years and, strangely enough, your predictions have failed to materialize.

    6. Hahaha, I’ve called 911 on an idiot walking around a store with a gun on his hip. Buh-bye, threw his ass out of the store!!

    7. You need to listen to the video again. It says “when properly secured in a holster”. It doesn’t say anything about a “secured” holster. Two different things.

    8. There is an error in Dallas’ video that may lead to officer misunderstanding. The new law does not permit open carry in a “secured” holster. It DOES permit open carry in a “holster.” There is no requirement in the wording of the law to use a “secured” holster. Many holsters are simply made and have no method of “securing” the handgun other than the fact that they are a holster, as was the intent of the legislature, who refused to pass an amendment requiring a security device be on the holsters.

    9. 911 calls and the notes typed in by the dispatchers, along with the radio traffic, are usually public record that can be obtained by written request. A good counter by the pro gun people would be to bombard 911 centers with requests for that info whenever there is an attempted SWAT. It would force the centers to be on notice that they have to respond correctly, or else they are liable. A bonus would be that we would get the name and phone number of the gun control people as a check kn their liable behavior. Not many. people realize that in most states all of that info can be obtained by public request.

    10. Open carry is not for everyone, that is YOUR call.

      I OC from time to time, I can’t at my job as I work for a university off campus but the building still counts as school grounds, we are a back office function not educational. My p/t job prohibits any firearms on us or in our cars.

      Had somebody make a complaint that I have guns in my old car, they searched it (HR and Managers),
      all they found was my used silhouette targets, HR and Managers and security guy all said nice shooting!

    11. I open carry on the 2nd of every month in support of #Every2ndcounts #Everysecondcounts. Some carriers do not support open carry feeling it gives away an advantage or scares the populace unnecessarily, but I’ve been approached by more people interested in lawful carry than haters. Being able to help spread a positive word has been well worth the two police responses I’ve had, yet even those were positive in showing people I was doing nothing wrong while laughing with responding officers.

      Not all open carry has to be conducted like the antagonistic, constitution rights quoting, “I refuse to give ID or answer questions” Youtube sensationalist. You may be surprised at how positive a response you get… or by how many people never notice you walking around with a sidearm.

    12. The advocating of calls of an active shooter is conspiracy to commit murder or attempted murder, by the caller and those egging it on.

      Anyone caught/identified making such a call should be put in jail for 25 to life. If someone dies because of the call they should be on Death Row for the shortest stay possible.

    13. its obvious you’ve never been to Phoenix Arizona.
      open carry with no permit has been the law there for decades. only recently have they initiated concealed carry and THAT riequires a permit.
      pontificate much do you?

      1. Same thing here in Virginia. There is no law against open carry, so lots of people have been doing it for a very long time. In fact, anyone who can legally own a gun can openly carry. You only need a permit for concealed carry. That means the people here are used to it and no one gives it a second thought. It’s nothing to see people carrying in Wal Mart, on motorcycles or walking down the street.

        It’s situations like Texas finally “allowing” people to open carry that has the anti’s knickers in a twist. If it had been allowed all along they wouldn’t be in this situation.

    14. This is pretty impressive news. That the city officials would make sure to inform the public about change, even more, that the NEW YORK TIMES would honestly print facts about it. It’s almost hard to believe.

    15. Tim next they will take away your right to dissent against those who do openly dissent against you.
      Do what you will but unless you are one of them you should not call the ones on your side NUTS.
      You are part of the problem. Sad but true.

    16. I believe any firearm owner who engages in open carry when not engaged in some form of combat is nuts. Who will the criminal shoot first? Who will some ignorant citizen shoot thinking he’s doing good. How many cops will it needlessly upset? They are called concealed carry permits for a reason. There is no need to disturb the average person just because you can.

    17. I don’t think police are overly equipped. If I were a Texas permit holder since there is no requirement for open carry I would keep it concealed for two specific reasons. One is above, there are people who don’t understand or refuse to understand other peoples right to self-protection. The other reason is surprise for the bad guy if you ever have to draw. Just saying… I feel no need to advertise even if the law has been changed.

    18. Anti-gun groups such as the Demanding Moms have even advocated SWATing carriers by calling in “active shooter” calls when they see someone simply carrying a holstered handgun.

    19. I will be happy to sue anyone who violates my rights in such a way, and see that they are prosecuted for filing a false report. Your paranoia is not equal to violating my rights to move about peacefully and with freedom wherever I am legally allowed to be!

    20. I would think that those who make 911 calls for the purpose of SWATTING can be sued in a civil court for damages especially in the event of a death or inury. State and federal laws must be enacted to criminalize such acts. We are at war against those who will stop at nothing to to disarm us, and until we act as warriors we may lose.

      1. Jaque

        It is a criminal act, but not much of one. I was involved in a swatting investigation when one of my clients was the victim of a swatting incident that resulted in a 20 man SWAT team deploying to their home and holding an unarmed woman at gunpoint. The police were almost as upset about the whole thing as the victims (I say almost because they weren’t the ones with 20 M4’s pointing at them). The perpetrator could only be charged with “Falsely reporting a crime” to the police. Not exactly a major felony.

        However, it was faithfully investigated (police hate to be scammed like this) and because the perp had actually originated the call from an adjoining state, it became a Federal FBI investigation but it was still only a false report of a crime. Civil action was taken however, and the guy was pretty well financially ruined by the time it was over, so yes . . take them to court for all sorts of causes.

    Comments are closed.