TexasCHLforum.com

jamminbutter wrote:Not for HB910 unless this amendment is removed.

Sec.A411.2035.AAMUNICIPAL REGULATION OF OPENLY CARRYING
HANDGUN. A license holder may not openly carry a handgun in a
municipality with a population of more than 750,000 that has
adopted an ordinance prohibiting a license holder from openly
carrying a handgun within the boundaries of the municipality

That was Amendment 9 which was an amendment to Amendment 8 which was ultimately tabled. This language does not appear anywhere in the bill sent to the Senate. You can read the full version, as engrossed and sent to the Senate for consideration here:

http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/84 ... navpanes=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm trying to look at this somewhat optimistically.

I have to believe there is the support for campus carry in the House however it will never make it to the floor with Strauss as the gatekeeper of the Calendars Committee.

The Senate already approved campus carry, so it isn't too much of a stretch to see it added as an amendment to the HB 910.

As I said previously, this looks like an end run around Strauss. I applaud people for finding ways of working within the system to achieve their desired result.

Beiruty wrote:Would we get that house amendment for no-reason to stop an OCer?

The version of HB910 sent to the Senate that would be amended with Campus Carry was essentially the Senate version of the bill with the following amendments by the House:

1) OC does not constitute Probable Cause for a license check stop
2) Class C misdemeanor for missing a 30.06 or 30.07 sign
3) Change from Nursing Home to Nursing facility

Well that is one way to get around Strauss and the UT regents and it allows the Senate to look like heroes even though the bill that eventually passes will originate from the House.

I have certainly received quite an education in politics watching this session and these bills in particular.