TexasCHLforum.com

I've been out A&M for a couple of years now (class of 11') but I do remember not long ago the student body voted in favor of campus carry. According to the bill that passed students are only one variable in the equation of deciding which areas of campus are off limits and it remains to be seen just how much of an influence they have. I read somewhere on this forum the chancellor of A&M wasn't outright opposed to the bill so if I were a betting man I would put money on A&M students fairing better than our austin friends.

TinaMiB wrote:This went out to UT Faculty and Staff this afternoon. I am sure they are receiving a few phone calls.

Hmmm doesn't sound too promising for tu students...

This is my opinion from a simple observance of the outcome of the possible paths which HB910 can take. This is in no way a dig at anyone, mearly my opinion.

So right now as it stands, the best possible path forward is a vote for concurrence in the house (regardless of how you feel about the Huffine amendment). This path puts the bill on the Gov's desk for most likely his signature.

Then there is the vote for nonconcurrence. This gives HB910 the possibility to die in conference committee if no agreement can be made, as well as the possibility to die in the senate due to a filibuster. So in essence, when law enforcement advocates for the house to vote for nonconcurrence, they are essentially voting for the worst case scenario for HB910 in its entirety? To me, a stand today against a concurrence vote means a stand against the entire effort to pass open carry. Again this is mearly my observation and opinion and is not meant as a slight against any one group or another.

jmra wrote:If there is an accident involving someone OCing when the officer asks for ID the OCer has to provide his CHL. Deans argument doesn't hold water.

Precisely!!!

Where are his pink sneakers?
Someone get him some pronto!

How does he go from this capitol has attracted emotionally disturbed people openly carrying, how can capitol police protect us to what about children touring the capitol, have you thought about that (to huffines).

30.06 signage amendment tabled!

Zaffirini "opt in" amendment withdrawn. Estes to Zaffirini, "do you remember talking about this a few weeks ago" Zaffirini "yes it was tabled" Estes "then I move to table." Hahaha

No stinking badges! Amendment withdrawn.

Estes is completely correct. No one is saying this amendment doesn't have merit, but it needs to be analyzed as to what impacts to other state reciprocity it would have and offered as its own standalone bill.

Jasonw560 wrote:No, Rodriguez. No holster amendment. No shiny badge amendment.

SB11 won't be offered as an amendment as the house will bring it up soon. Estes said he would have accepted it.

HB910 just now brought up!!!!

mojo84 wrote:PTSD, stress, hormones and alcohol.

MDA be like -
Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling!
Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes.....
The dead rising from the grave!
Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Aggie_engr wrote:Charles earlier you said it's a done deal. I heard CJ say he would be the last one from OCT because they told everyone else (from OCT) they don't need to testify. Is he operating on the same information and trying to shorten the time it takes to get through testimony?

I have no idea why he and Holcomb told their groups not to testify, but I don't recall either OCT or Carry Texas every having many people testify. I suspect they simply cannot muster many witnesses. Neither Grisham nor Holcomb are "connected."

Chas.

Thanks Charles!
And here i was thinking CJ did one thing somewhat helpful for a 2A bill.