TexasCHLforum.com

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

puma guy wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

JJVP wrote:SB 8 Author: Patrick
Last Action: 07/30/2013 S Filed
Caption: Relating to certain offenses relating to carrying concealed handguns on property owned or leased by a governmental entity; providing a civil penalty.

http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83 ... navpanes=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sen. Patrick who wants to be Lt. Governor certainly wants to distance himself from his part in the killer amendment to HB508 (identical to SB9) that killed it in the House. Unfortunately, HB508 was sure to pass and the current SB8 has no chance of passing since it's not on the call. Poor attempt at damage control in my view.

Chas.

I missed your post about Patrick's involvement in the amendment to HB508 (83R). I checked to be sure it was filed by Carona, but I didn't realize Patrick was involved in the "killer" amendment (good term). What was Patrick's part in it if I may ask? I agree SB8 has no chance of passing, but was unaware of what the the motive might be for filing it.

I'm going to write an article about it, but here's the short version. In 2011, Patrick filed SB905 that would allow Senators and Representatives to carry handguns everywhere. It passed the Senate but didn't get anywhere in the House. When HB508 passed the House and went to the Senate, it was assigned to Sen. Hinojosa to "carry" in the House. Sen. Patrick convinced Sen. Hinojosa to let him carry HB508 in the Senate. This gave him a lot of control over what amendments were offered and accepted and it put him on the Senate/House Conference Committee. Sen. Carona wound up offering what became a killer amendment and Sen. Patrick accepted it. There's more to the story, some of which I cannot disclose, but that's Sen. Patrick's involvement.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

JJVP wrote:SB 8 Author: Patrick
Last Action: 07/30/2013 S Filed
Caption: Relating to certain offenses relating to carrying concealed handguns on property owned or leased by a governmental entity; providing a civil penalty.

http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83 ... navpanes=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sen. Patrick who wants to be Lt. Governor certainly wants to distance himself from his part in the killer amendment to HB508 (identical to SB9) that killed it in the House. Unfortunately, HB508 was sure to pass and the current SB8 has no chance of passing since it's not on the call. Poor attempt at damage control in my view.

Chas.

Bladed wrote:

puma guy wrote:

Bladed wrote:

puma guy wrote:I am happy to see the bill filed, buy I have doubts it will make it to a vote. HB 9 on the other hand will will probably fly through. Most politicians are no longer representatives of their constituencies and are only interested in furthering their own causes and issues, from the local to the Federal level. IMHO

Did you follow the regular session at all?

Regardless, neither bill will receive a vote unless Perry adds a relevant issue to the special session call.

If you're asking if I followed every bill in regular session, NO. I'm not sure how that is relevant to my post about these two bills. I know we got some favorable bills passed. I did follow HB 508 similar to Patrick's SB 8 that was hijacked by a Senate amendment at the last minute that would have given elected officials and attorneys and others as outlined in HB 9 special carry privileges. The House refused to sign off and the bill died in regular session. My point is when push comes to shove most politicians do not hold the wishes of the people they represent foremost. That's a generality I know, but that's my opinion. If they followed what the majority of people want legislation such as Obama Care would have never passed.

My point is that the House of Representatives originally passed SB 508 (now SB 8) by a wide margin and only rejected it after Patrick added his "legislators are special" amendment (similar to HB 9 but including legislators). That seems to fly in the face of your suggestion that legislators would be more likely to pass HB 9 than SB 8. There are plenty of self-serving legislators, but we shouldn't write off the whole bunch just because a few push self-serving bills/amendments.

Bladed wrote:

puma guy wrote:I am happy to see the bill filed, buy I have doubts it will make it to a vote. HB 9 on the other hand will will probably fly through. Most politicians are no longer representatives of their constituencies and are only interested in furthering their own causes and issues, from the local to the Federal level. IMHO

Did you follow the regular session at all?

Regardless, neither bill will receive a vote unless Perry adds a relevant issue to the special session call.