TexasCHLforum.com

boba wrote:

mgood wrote:moar.

Nice.

Read in the Senate today. Senate refused to concur and requested a conference.

Was anyone listening today? I wonder why they refused to concur. Hopefully the House and Senate can work something out in committee or else it's going to die yet again.

The amendment adopted today doesn't substantially alter the bill, as far as I can tell. I just clarifies that immunity from liability does not extend to any person who causes injury with the firearm. Such immunity was never in the bill to begin with, so I don't know why the amendment was necessary, but it doesn't change anything.

Text Here

Hookemhorns1997 wrote:so does the bill have to go back to the senate now, or does it go to the govenor?

I think Charles has answered that question twice already.

Eiland is speaking again about the fact that contractors are not covered. He seems to understand that this bill is the best we can do. I think he's just trying to cover himself with his constituents - showing he made an effort to get contractors included. He and Kleinschmidt agree the best approach is to pass this bill, then amend it next session to cover contractors.

Record vote... Passed 117-29!

austinrealtor wrote:who is this moron? asking about employees who have to undergo anger management being allowed to carry a firearm on the premises? This is NOT ABOUT PREMISES!!!!

"I support your bill, Mr. Kleinschmidt, but here are all the reasons I oppose it..."
And one of those reasons is that this bill would "allow" disgruntled persons to come in and shoot up the place... Ugh...

Still, I'm hoping for a Tuesday two-fer. Lets' get this passed in the House and Campus Carry through the Senate today!

SB321 still in debate on the House floor.

Live video here