TexasCHLforum.com

State Affairs video feed just went live again.
http://tlcsenate.granicus.com/MediaPlay ... nt_id=1345" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

safety1 wrote:

NotRPB wrote:cross post

‏Per> @chucklindell now50 seconds ago

#HB910 will be substituted to REMOVE House amendment banning police stops solely to check CHL for open carry, @EstesForTexas says. #txlege

Figured this was coming...and I'm ok with it. if you are not doing anything wrong, what does it matter?

Same argument for not consenting to a search of your home, or allowing the NSA to collect data without a warrant.

The "nothing to hide" argument.

I don't agree with removing the amendment, but I can't do anything about it. And it still results in a net gain for the 2nd Amendment. So if that's what has to happen to get it passed, so be it.

deleted!

safety1 wrote:If this happens, does HB910 go back to the House for a simple concurrence vote, up/down...bam,done off to Gov. Abbott's desk??

This is my understanding, yes. It goes to the House for a concurrence vote on a simple majority. Concurrence votes do not need to be scheduled. If the house concurs, off to Abbott. If not, it goes to a joint committee to work out the kinks.

I don't think it would have any issues getting the votes on the House floor for concurrence, even without the Dutton amendment.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

safety1 wrote:

mikeloc wrote:I'm not okay with it. This is not a police state.

Then tell Stickland and OCT thanks for publicly claiming the Dutton/Rinaldi Amendment essentially created unlicensed open-carry.

Stripping that amendment will have no impact on policing. Either the 5th Circuit will adopt the Black decision or it will not. That's what will make the determination. Even then, it's very easy to add one more fact to the scenario to get beyond the prohibition on detaining someone solely because they are openly carrying a handgun.

[venting]Folks, there was a strong push for some legal of retention holster and that was avoided. The was a far less likely push for some type of visible CHL identification, and that too was avoided. I would have hoped that, by now, the all-or-nothing approach would have been recognized for what it is -- a pipe dream. I will renew my question from two years ago, "was the push for open-carry really worth it?" My answer is a resounding NO! It was far too expensive. It will have been a symbolic victory with very little practical application for all but the tiny percentage of gun owners. The battle cost us other bills that impact countless Texans, including some that were not even filed.[/venting]

Chas.

Thank's Charles what you said is what I was trying to say in my last post.

mr1337 wrote:

safety1 wrote:

NotRPB wrote:cross post

‏Per> @chucklindell now50 seconds ago

#HB910 will be substituted to REMOVE House amendment banning police stops solely to check CHL for open carry, @EstesForTexas says. #txlege

Figured this was coming...and I'm ok with it. if you are not doing anything wrong, what does it matter?

Same argument for not consenting to a search of your home, or allowing the NSA to collect data without a warrant.

The "nothing to hide" argument.

I don't agree with removing the amendment, but I can't do anything about it. And it still results in a net gain for the 2nd Amendment. So if that's what has to happen to get it passed, so be it.

I don't agree with removing it either, but I'll take the 2nd advanced also.

safety1 wrote:

mikeloc wrote:I'm not okay with it. This is not a police state.

Charles, I TOTALLY MISS READ THE OP, I thought it stated "I'm OK with it"
My apologies sir!

I DO NOT AGREE WITH THAT STATEMETN FOR THE RECORD.
I'm OK with it, I do not believe it makes a police state, or that Texas is a police state.
My sincere apologies to ALL!!

safety1 wrote:

safety1 wrote:

mikeloc wrote:I'm not okay with it. This is not a police state.

Charles, I TOTALLY MISS READ THE OP, I thought it stated "I'm OK with it"
My apologies sir!

Thanks, I deleted my post.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote: ...
[venting]... It will have been a symbolic victory with very little practical application for all but the tiny percentage of gun owners. The battle cost us other bills that impact countless Texans, including some that were not even filed.[/venting]

Chas.

Thank you for putting into words what many of us were thinking.

If I'm understanding these posts correctly, we'll have the following options come Jan 1.

Open Carry: Cops lying in wait every 10 feet to disarm, cuff and wait hours for our CHL to be confirmed as valid every time we open carry, which will be limited because 30.07 will be a thing. This appears to have been the main focus of the 2A crowd this session, to the downfall of several other bills, and will probably benefit the least amount of people.

Concealed Carry: Exactly the same thing that we've been doing for the past 20 years.

Yeah, I can see where the frustration level lies

Idiot moms showed up in force and are now threatening the lawmakers with scripted threats.

Is there a time limit to the public testimony this time around?

TXBO wrote:Is there a time limit to the public testimony this time around?

2 minutes per testimony. Not sure about the day.


Alice just nailed why I want open carry to pass. Removal of my jacket and incidental times I may chose to uncover. Thanks Alice.

mojo84 wrote:

TXBO wrote:Is there a time limit to the public testimony this time around?

2 minutes per testimony. Not sure about the day.


Alice just nailed why I want open carry to pass. Removal of my jacket and incidental times I may chose to uncover. Thanks Alice.

Same here. I'd like to walk to my mailbox across a sidewalk without worrying about covering up.

Completely agree. I was completely in the pro OC camp, until damage control cost us everyting else.

Also, stripping the Dutton amendment is really no issue at all. If open carry becomes even somewhat commonplace by level headed individuals (those not affiliated with OCT/OCTC, ect.) who simply show their CHL when requested, LE will eventually stop bothering to check. If LEO checks rise to the point of becoming harrassment, document the occurances and lodge a complaint.

I know I am preaching to the choir here, but if you are asked for your CHL by LEO while OCing, simply comply without all of the "am I being detained?" and "am I suspected of committing a crime?" malarchy. If you decide to OC after it becomes legal, remember that, like it or not, you are representing the CHL community. OC of handguns can have a desensitizing effect on the general public IF done by the right people and done the right way! Unfortunately, the public has only seen/heard from the segment of the firearms community that happens to be the WRONG people doing it the WRONG way. There are times that I will probably OC, just for convenience sake. There are also times that I go out to breakfast dressed like a slob. I will make sure that those two events never happen at the same time.