TexasCHLforum.com

boomerang wrote:

OldSchool wrote:They can also simply, if the CHL program is too much trouble, .... (I can't say it.)

Find a job in the private sector? Move to Russia?

That's a thought, but no, I was thinking of something too horrible to contemplate for we of the CHL community, but also would be perfectly acceptable to the anti's.

joe817 wrote:

OldSchool wrote:Heh, you've described IMHO the ideal purpose for a real political system (as opposed to a bully, or snatch-and-grab political system...). I was going to say something glorious here about incrementally improving the laws through mutual respect and give-and-take, but it seemed corny for this day-and-age (and I am Old School), so I gave up....

OldSchool, that went out of vogue when we were in high school. My how times have changed.

There's hope: I successfully corrupted both of my kids!

Hoosier Daddy wrote: I'm a capitalist and I believe in competition. Why can't Texas offer a license at a similar price to Utah? Renewals too. Or at the worst make a CHL renewal cost the same as a DL renewal.

When banks compete, you win. The same idea applies here.

A good thought, in general. However, governments inherently don't like competition, and only have to put up with it when politically necessary. When legislators believe that a government-provided "privilege" (such as "special" licensing -- let's ignore the 2A aspect of this for this argument) "is more expensive than it's worth" (i.e., either it doesn't bring in enough money or the money can be used "better" elsewhere), then that privilege simply goes away. In fact, this just happened (again) with the firm for whom I work.

So, IMHO, it is to the political advantage of the TX CHL community to maintain reasonably affordable CHL fees, if uncompetitive, to make the program interesting for the legislature (especially if the fees help the DPS budget?). The legislators can, of course, simply shut out the "competition" entirely. They can also simply, if the CHL program is too much trouble, .... (I can't say it.)

FWIW. that's what I think, when we discuss "supporting the program."

joe817 wrote:I throw out a question for the group:

Politics working, is many times a give and take relationship. That is to say, if one legislator wants a bill passed, but in order to get that particular piece of legislation passed, another piece of legislation will have to be eliminated. For what ever the reason...budget trade off, etc.

IF Texas were to pass legislation for eliminating non-resident CHL's, would Texas CHL holders gain something in return? Such as campus carry or employer parking bills passed?

OR....is this something that Joe should just shut up about?

Heh, you've described IMHO the ideal purpose for a real political system (as opposed to a bully, or snatch-and-grab political system...).

I was going to say something glorious here about incrementally improving the laws through mutual respect and give-and-take, but it seemed corny for this day-and-age (and I am Old School), so I gave up....