[snoringbear]

I did a little googling on this awhile back. And, I found that when the Texas constitution was rewritten after the Civil War (I live in Texas, God Bless Texas) statutes addressing guns were written with the purpose of preventing recently freed blacks from possessing and carrying guns. An example; until recently, when the Texas gun law portion of the constitution was amended, it stated (paraphrasing) that “one may carry a weapon while traveling”. So, you’re thinking what’s wrong with that? Well, the definition of traveling was no spelled out. In some juristictions traveling was defined as crossing a county line others defined it as spending the night away from ones residence, others set traveling a distance of 100 miles. In other words, the definition of traveling was arbitrary - in the eye of the beholder. Consequently, the traveling law was a defense. Meaning that the law officer who pulled you over was empowered to decide on the scene if you were in compliance or not based upon his personal opinion. If you were apprehended, then you would be required to defend yourself in the local court where you were apprehended. Obviously, especially up to the past couple of decades or so, if you should not be white you would probably not only be arrested but also found guilty by the loal judge - after spending a few days in jail. Conversely, most whites would be waved on their merry way. While not a student of this, I have read enough writings n this subject to say that most state gun laws, both north and south, were rewritten after the Civil War with limiting black ownership in mind. I find it strange that today’s blacks don’t see this.....

[IYAS9YAS]

I find it strange that today’s blacks don’t see this.....

The book "Unintended Consequencs" talks about this very thing. While it is a work of fiction, the author does a nice job of weaving the truth into the story.

[HiTech RedNeck]

One would have to look at records of the practice to fully make the point, but yeah such vagueness wouldn’t even fly today.

[El Gato]

Actually it was not the State Constitution that had the traveling provision, it was statute law. But you are correct in that traveling was not defined in the law, and their was statute creep. First judges required a trip accross a county line, then an overnight stay, etc. etc.

Now the legislature has defined it, it means "going somewhere". Some big city DA's were still prosecuting, since the "traveling" thing was a defense to prosecution, not a change in the underlying law. Now it's an exemption within the law, meaning the conducted is no longer prohibited while traveling.

The Texas legislature tends to get PO'd when their clear intent is ignored.