So there's still a chance that they'll slip one in that bans 30.06 signs from hospitals?Charles L. Cotton wrote:Things aren't always as dead as they may appear.
![evil :evil2:](./images/smilies/evil-2.gif)
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
So there's still a chance that they'll slip one in that bans 30.06 signs from hospitals?Charles L. Cotton wrote:Things aren't always as dead as they may appear.
When SB 354 was offered as an amendment to SB 5, in order for it to be germane to SB 5, it had to apply to public institutions only (because that's what SB 5 applied to.) The same was true when it was offered as an amendment to SB 1581. Once SB 5 was offered as an amendment to SB 1581 and passed, SB 354 immediately became germane to the bill, because that parliamentary determination had already been made in the previous battle.terryg wrote:This is truly great to hear.
I don't like the political process - underhanded deals - sneaking this amendment in here and another one there - blocking bills in committee because you know they would pass on the floor - etc and so on.
But to think that campus carry might have a chance to pass WITHOUT the private exemption?!?!?!? As an employee of private institution, I wanted campus carry to pass but had no real hope that it could actually impact me. It is truly unbelievable.
I understand why SB5 as an amendment paved the way for SB354 as an amendment. But can someone explain to me why the private opt out had to be struck? I like it ... but I don't understand it.
Yes, I may have mis-understood. But that is what others are saying happened earlier in this thread:baldeagle wrote:I think you have misunderstood what's in the bill. Private universities will still be able to ban guns on their campuses. SB 354, as amended and passed as an amendment to SB 1581, only applies to public institutions. So I'm afraid you may have been left out in the cold unless the House amends it include private institutions (which could happen, but I don't know all the dynamics of that.)
RPB wrote:I think that's correct, Zaffrini FORCED Wentworth to remove private school opt out so it would be broad enough to be germane.Hoi Polloi wrote:Does this mean there was no private school opt-out?
I'm just catching up for today. IIRC, to make it germane to Zaff's bill, he couldn't have the private school opt-out. I'm wondering if that carried over.
Then she opened the door for him.
I had to look it up, too. I found a really cool website!OldSchool wrote:Great news to hear on the tarmac in LA!!! (Is that irony, or what?)
Uh, what is "engrossment" (seriously)?
I love the Princess Bride!!!!!!Hoi Polloi wrote:The conversation at our house tonight about Campus Carry passing the Senate brought to mind this clip:
Argh! I could only find one other copy of that clip online and that one apparently can't be embedded, either. Frustrating!terryg wrote:I love the Princess Bride!!!!!!Hoi Polloi wrote:The conversation at our house tonight about Campus Carry passing the Senate brought to mind this clip:
(but the clip can't be embedded ...)
Wentworth's amendment to SB1581 is not available online yet, but the original amendment from SB5 is here. The amendment makes no distinction between public or private institutions. In fact, it does not use the terms "public institution" or "private institution" at all. The result is that it decriminalizes carrying on all institutions of higher education, and prevents the same institutions from adopting any policies against carrying. So, assuming that today's amendment is the same as the one previously attached to SB5, Terryg is correct that it applies equally to both public and private campuses.baldeagle wrote:When SB 354 was offered as an amendment to SB 5, in order for it to be germane to SB 5, it had to apply to public institutions only (because that's what SB 5 applied to.) The same was true when it was offered as an amendment to SB 1581. Once SB 5 was offered as an amendment to SB 1581 and passed, SB 354 immediately became germane to the bill, because that parliamentary determination had already been made in the previous battle.terryg wrote:This is truly great to hear.
I don't like the political process - underhanded deals - sneaking this amendment in here and another one there - blocking bills in committee because you know they would pass on the floor - etc and so on.
But to think that campus carry might have a chance to pass WITHOUT the private exemption?!?!?!? As an employee of private institution, I wanted campus carry to pass but had no real hope that it could actually impact me. It is truly unbelievable.
I understand why SB5 as an amendment paved the way for SB354 as an amendment. But can someone explain to me why the private opt out had to be struck? I like it ... but I don't understand it.
I think you have misunderstood what's in the bill. Private universities will still be able to ban guns on their campuses. SB 354, as amended and passed as an amendment to SB 1581, only applies to public institutions. So I'm afraid you may have been left out in the cold unless the House amends it include private institutions (which could happen, but I don't know all the dynamics of that.)
In order for Wentworth's amendment to be germane to SB 5, he had to remove the language that included private colleges in campus carry legislation. I doubt that he was able to add them back in to his amendment to SB 1581, but we'll know tomorrow when the bill is posted with its amendments.TrueFlog wrote:Wentworth's amendment to SB1581 is not available online yet, but the original amendment from SB5 is here. The amendment makes no distinction between public or private institutions. In fact, it does not use the terms "public institution" or "private institution" at all. The result is that it decriminalizes carrying on all institutions of higher education, and prevents the same institutions from adopting any policies against carrying. So, assuming that today's amendment is the same as the one previously attached to SB5, Terryg is correct that it applies equally to both public and private campuses.baldeagle wrote:When SB 354 was offered as an amendment to SB 5, in order for it to be germane to SB 5, it had to apply to public institutions only (because that's what SB 5 applied to.) The same was true when it was offered as an amendment to SB 1581. Once SB 5 was offered as an amendment to SB 1581 and passed, SB 354 immediately became germane to the bill, because that parliamentary determination had already been made in the previous battle.terryg wrote:This is truly great to hear.
I don't like the political process - underhanded deals - sneaking this amendment in here and another one there - blocking bills in committee because you know they would pass on the floor - etc and so on.
But to think that campus carry might have a chance to pass WITHOUT the private exemption?!?!?!? As an employee of private institution, I wanted campus carry to pass but had no real hope that it could actually impact me. It is truly unbelievable.
I understand why SB5 as an amendment paved the way for SB354 as an amendment. But can someone explain to me why the private opt out had to be struck? I like it ... but I don't understand it.
I think you have misunderstood what's in the bill. Private universities will still be able to ban guns on their campuses. SB 354, as amended and passed as an amendment to SB 1581, only applies to public institutions. So I'm afraid you may have been left out in the cold unless the House amends it include private institutions (which could happen, but I don't know all the dynamics of that.)
Zaffrini insisted on that .... else it wouldn't be "Germane"The result is that it decriminalizes carrying on all institutions of higher education, and prevents the same institutions from adopting any policies against carrying.