TexasCHLforum.com

Keith, that comma makes all the difference.

Thanks. If I would have read the bill slower it would have saved me one heck of a lot of typing.

Charles, this bill is much better than either HB 992 or HB 220 from last session. I appreciate the efforts of everyone involved with getting this bill put together and filed.

I do, however, have a couple of problems with this bill.

During the last legislative session all Texans benefited from two outstanding pieces of legislation that were signed into law by Governor Perry.

First and foremost was the Castle Doctrine Bill (SB 378). One of the changes to the Texas Penal Code enacted by SB 378 had to do with determining when deadly force is justified:

Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON.

(a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:

(1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:

(A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or

(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.

(b) The actor's belief under Subsection (a)(2) that the deadly force was immediately necessary as described by that subdivision is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:

(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the deadly force was used:

(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;

(B) unlawfully and with force removed, or was attempting to remove unlawfully and with force, the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment; or

(C) was committing or attempting to commit an offense described by Subsection (a)(2)(B);...

The highlights are mine. Note that Texas law equates an individuals vehicle or place of employment with their habitation when it comes to justification for using deadly force. Note also that an individual does not need to have a CHL to be justified in the use of deadly force.

HB 1815, the Motorist Protection Act, was another quality piece of Texas legislation that became law during the last session. HB 1815 basically, for the law abiding Texan, decriminalized the act of carrying a concealed handgun inside a vehicle.

Texas law recognises an individuals vehicle is an extension of their castle. An officer of the law must have a warrant, probable cause, or permission to search a private vehicle. Texas law also recognises an individuals right to keep and bear arms while in their vehicle. Texas law should protect that same individual from an employer who would attempt to punish an employee for exercising this basic human right. It should not matter if the individual has a CHL or not.

That being said, this is a good bill and at first glance really does not adversely affect most folks who do not have a CHL and currently have a firearm in their vehicle.

I just feel that all law abiding Texans who carry a firearm in their vehicle under the the Motorist Protection Act should be protected under this bill also.