TexasCHLforum.com

seamusTX wrote:

Liberty wrote:30.06 is pretty much your friend.

Yes and no. 30.06 is very specific. If you violate it, it's a class A misdemeanor and you can kiss your CHL goodbye for seven years.

In many states, the offense is equivalent to spitting in public, a citation with a small fine.

- Jim

Two different contexts:

Yes, the 30.06 sign SPECIFICATION and requirements are our friend -- about the best law (AFAIK) in the US. So picky that someone posted (today?) about a security manager who purposely posted one to AVOID restricting CHL, and allow feel good "no guns" signs without any effect.

No, if you violate one, get caught, get charged, and the DA wants to make a point.

It's over punished for a simple infringement, i.e., no aggravating behavior, like committing a violent crime.


Texas has pretty good laws, keep improving them (although slowly), and does TEND to follow rather than lead. FL usually gets the credit for "Modern Shall Issue Concealed Carry". Several states were faster on Castle Doctrine, and Texas is still behind on protecting (Lawful owners or CHL holders for) locked storage in an automobile in a parking lot owned by an employer etc.

Maybe the problem is related to the way legislative sessions are schedule in Texas???

Alaska redid their CHL law to just make the whole thing optional, in some ways making the Alaskan law "better" than the (nearly) "No law" case in Vermont.

Alaskans get the CHOICE of a CHL (for reciprocity etc purposes), but they have the option of carrying without obtaining 'a license' from the government; this is similar only better than in Vermont.

Vermont citizens, with all their freedom, have a serious issue when they travel -- almost no one will consider a Vermont DL as the same as a CHL.

Freedom is good. Choice is good.

HerbM wrote:Texas has pretty good laws, keep improving them (although slowly), and does TEND to follow rather than lead....
Maybe the problem is related to the way legislative sessions are schedule in Texas???

That, plus the shortness of the session. Most of the session is spent on the budget, which has to pass before anything else happens. The time for introducing and debating new bills is short. If they aren't passed in that time, they die. One bill that we wanted (I forget which) missed the deadline that way in the last session. It probably would have passed if the session had been a little longer.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:

HerbM wrote:Texas has pretty good laws, keep improving them (although slowly), and does TEND to follow rather than lead....
Maybe the problem is related to the way legislative sessions are schedule in Texas???

That, plus the shortness of the session. Most of the session is spent on the budget, which has to pass before anything else happens. The time for introducing and debating new bills is short. If they aren't passed in that time, they die. One bill that we wanted (I forget which) missed the deadline that way in the last session. It probably would have passed if the session had been a little longer.

- Jim

Right. So it usually takes at least twice as long, and sometime 3-4 times as long to get a bill passed due to the every other year, short sessions, and other items on the schedule that take precedence.

Kentucky, bar none, has the most liberal carry laws (obviously excluding Alaska and New Hampshire, who require nothing other than breathing). If I didn't like Texas so much, I'd move back to my roots in a heartbeat.

Jason73 wrote:hmmmmm.........seems to me that if Texas doesnt get on the ball pretty soon regarding its CHL laws (employer parking lots asnd 30.06 restrictions being my main issues) the idea relocating to one of these more gun friendly states is going to become more attractive to a lot of people - Im already thinking about it myself because I love the idea of open carry being an option and I dont ever see that happening in Texas.