TexasCHLforum.com

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Strat9mm wrote:By the way, you guessed wrong.

Bad guy with knife would have either left, picked another store, or not killed anyone on that particular day, or got shot for his troubles.

Your logic assumes bad guy with knife, in full view of an armed police officer, would still maim, injure and kill.

Your logic, is more of a lack thereof.

Whether it's a law-enforcement officer, or someone licensed and OC'ing, the effect is the same.

And even if the bad guy goes ahead with his plan, the OC law didn't hurt anyone, and logically, would have probably helped.

If arguments aren't logical, they are useless.

Is this directed to me? If so, I'll respond, otherwise not.

Chas.

I suspect it's directed at me. I chose not to respond.

It doesn't matter what is passed, there will always be some that would find something to complain about.

There are very few that have the ability to quick draw at the speed necessary to make a significant difference in the outcome of a situation. I think all this quick draw talk stems from childhood memories of watching old westerns with the main street duels.

Now, IF we ever get to the point where there are ten to fifteen+ people in a bank or store carrying their guns in open view, that may serve as a deterrent and cause a bad guy to have a second thought. One person carrying won't have much, if any, impact. I just don't think a regular person is going to have the same deterrent effect as a visible uniformed cop that is carry his weapon.

I like OC for the occasional time that I need or want to remove my cover garment or not have to worry about tucking my shirt over my gun. In other words, convenience and comfort, is why I like it.


Just my opinion.

Cautiously optimistic but it does sound good.

Like I said, I do not intend any disrespect towards the NRA. Nor do I think they got hoodwinked. I do recognize Strauss has many masters he must serve and gun rights is not his number one issue. Nor is it the number one issue of some of his many masters. There just isn't enough money in gun rights to make him go to the mat for them. I also realize even the NRA is not infallible and perfect. Nor do I expect them to be.

Jasonw560 wrote:FWIW, he has an A rating fom the NRA.

No disrespect to the NRA, I don't put much stock in there ratings. Check out Straus' and others. I think many of the legislators have figured out a way to make sure the dirty work gets done without much diet ending up on them.

I consider the NRA ratings a starting point and go from there. I also need to add, Straus has done some limited good for gun rights. He just had too many cronies to pander to.

Provided SB 17 gets out of the house and to the governor.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

TVGuy wrote:

Winchster wrote:Can somebody tell me what the logic was that allowed this to be put off until next January?

Estes approved it because DPS requested him to move the date to give them more time to prepare.

Prepare for what?

Renewal classes for Texas CHL instructors. We can't renew until after the legislative session is over so an effective date of 9/1/15 would mean instructors would be teaching CHL classes without the information about open-carry.

Chas.

Ahhhh, OK. That makes sense. Thanks

SewTexas wrote:well, if you think about it, you know how many cops and instructors don't know the current chl law, I'm guessing they just want some time to make sure they are able to instruct LEOs on whatever changes occur during this leg.

What is there to train for? Same people carrying guns that carry them now. Now they will be able to see them. A few months should be ample time to prepare and train. On the flip side, how much more training will they be able to do with the additional three months?

TVGuy wrote:

Winchster wrote:Can somebody tell me what the logic was that allowed this to be put off until next January?

Estes approved it because DPS requested him to move the date to give them more time to prepare.

Prepare for what?

Charles L. Cotton wrote:The Houston Chronicle's online version posted an article about SB17 passing to engrossment. Note the photo they ran with the article.

Chas.

http://www.chron.com/news/politics/texa ... 136705.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Actually, they posted a bunch of photos of people carrying long guns. That's the liberal chronicle for you.

Where is Charles when we need him to give us a civics lesson?

Today was a lesson in how things are done behind the scenes prior to going to the floor for debate and vote. The floor debate and vote is just making the results of what has been done behind the scenes public.

TVGuy wrote:What did Huffines say? I missed that part and am one of his constituents.

He bloviated about "constitutional" carry and how that is the only right way to go but he is going to vote for SB 17.

Seems to me like they will have to now combine the original bill and amendments and then hold a vote for it in its entirety including the amendments. I may be dead wrong though.

I just knew they were going to vote today. Bummer.

jerry_r60 wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:Who is the guy talking now? He sounds like a TV evangelist.

Dan Huffines

Kory Watkins alter ego.