TexasCHLforum.com

seamusTX wrote:
BTW, most ranges prohibit multiple targets and moving while shooting. There isn't a range in my county (Galveston) that allows them.

- Jim

If there were demand for those activities, as there would be if it were a requirement of the state test, there would be places that would meet that demand.

Russell wrote:The reason we have these odd age laws, are because PARENTS are not raising their children to be responsible. Hence, the government has to step in and be the parent for them. It stinks, it's not right, but that's the way it is because we have these liberal parents that believe in time-outs and parenting books instead of a good old fashioned spanking.

Think about it. Go to any of your local public High Schools. Do you want ANY of those High School Juniors able to carry a handgun on them?

I know darn well at the High School I went to I wouldn't. They need time to grow up, go to college, get a job, and get out into the real world before they are trusted with the responsibility of carrying a firearm on them

I agree. You could even talk me into making the age for a CHL 25.

seamusTX wrote:Sorry, my memory was faulty.

There are other bases for private parties to sue each other in federal court besides civil rights violations. I don't exactly what they are.

You could write state law in such a way as to relieve someone of civil liability if his actions were taken in self defense, but not otherwise.

I'm pretty sure that's how current Texas law will be interpreted.

If, for example, you accidentally shot someone, you could not be charged or found not guilty in criminal court, and still be sued. That is probably as it should be.

- Jim

Accidental shootings are not presently covered by the TX civil immunity statute. I don't have the exact wording handy, but to have civil immunity one's actions need to conform the requirements of the use of force statute for lawful use of force.

This statute does not address the accidental use of force.

So even if there was an accidental killing, and for whatever reason the DA declined to prosecute (for manslaughter for instance), and/or the grand jury no billed the actor, the actor could still be sued for wrongful death.

My proposed change would not affect this in any way.

seamusTX wrote: OJ was sued in federal court. That could still happen no matter what a state does.

- Jim

I don't think so. My understanding is that OJ was sued in a CA court for "wrongful death". He was found civilly liable.

http://www.cnn.com/US/OJ/simpson.civil.trial/

Also, as Stephan has pointed out, to be sued in federal court for a civil rights violation, you need to be acting under the color of the law. This wouldn't apply to a private citizen using force in lawful defense.

It's correct that with my proposed modification to the civil immunity law, OJ would get off scott free. But he would probably have gotten off with the current law as well.

I would allow for both open and/or concealed carry in all public places, public accommodations, workplaces, and businesses. An exception would be any place that set up a "sterile environment" where people were screened for weapons on the way in. Such places would require armed security manning the screening points, and provide for people to be able to check their guns in a secure facility, retrieving them when they leave.

Also, prisons, secure areas of airports, courtrooms, etc. would continue to be off limits.

To obtain a LTC, a person would have to take a course that covered:

1) Self defense and the law

2) The safe handling of firearms

3) Shooting proficiency

Persons would have to demonstrate proficiency in each of these areas before a LTC is issued.

Basic gun safety and safe gun handling would also be taught in public schools.

I would also change the laws on carrying while intoxicated so that they would apply to LEO's as well as non-LEO's. The new law would incorporate a 0.08% BAC standard for intoxication.

I would also broaden the Castle Doctrine law so that civil immunity would apply if someone was either not charged or if they were no billed after the lawful use of force or deadly force.