TexasCHLforum.com

Russell wrote:I see zero chance unlicensed individuals will be permitted to carry into school functions and the other "high risk (in their minds)" areas.

I predict if everything goes well, unlicensed folks will be permitted to carry at a few places, mainly private businesses, while licensed will be permitted to carry in many more areas.

Actually, I can't think of any valid reason why the government should restrict carry by anyone on private property (including private businesses). If I can carry on my property without a license why can't I extend that same right to a friend who is otherwise legally able to own a gun?

RossA wrote:I fully support HB 1911. HB Glock, not so much.

Let's hope the legislature does not wander into the Glock vs 1911 debate. They will definitely get nothing done if that happens.

I am hedging my bets by owning both Glocks and 1911s.

I initially was thinking that it would be confusing to have two different set of carry rules depending on whether one had an LTC, or was relying on constitutional carry. But then again, that is the situation today.

Without a license, one can carry in their home, in their car, to their car from their home, from their car to a shooting range, or hunting property, and in / to any other property they control, such as a business, or a rented hotel room, to/from an airport, among others. Having a license just opens up some other areas you can carry in addition to those listed above. It also allows you to carry in some other states that have reciprocity (you can carry in "constitutional carry" states without a license).

So if both pass, we will still have a dual system where you are able to carry in more places if you have an LTC. The difference will be that both sets of potential carry locations will be greatly expanded.