TexasCHLforum.com

No gutting amendments! The lives of college students are in the legislators' hands.

SewTexas wrote:most/many community colleges have dual enrollment, hadn't even occurred to me, honestly the majority of these kids are homeschooled

I think you are actually incorrect on this. I only know from my experience with Austin CC and their dual enrollment program, but every one of the kids I know of that is enrolled is in a regular high school. They do the enrollment through the high school counselors and use agreements with the school for evening classes. My kids are getting dual credit for some of their classes - it counts as both their high school English 4 class and three college classes for example (the standard comp and lit I and II plus a second year British Lit class).

And I did not think of this either, but I really don't think it is a problem. For example, San Marcos High school and Luling High School are both used for ACC classes. But since the bill only exempts colleges and does not change the fact that high schools are still banned, I would guess that the school status is not changed. I would also guess that the other way does not change, a high school class that is on a college campus is part of the college (and I guess this is where they are worried about). But if the building has both high school and college students, it really does not change the fact that we are normally talking about the faculty being licensed, or the more mature adult who is returning to school after working for a living for a while. The average "immature" traditional student will graduate from any community college before hitting 21.

I plead totally unaware of any night time dual enrollment classes I have known of some schools bringing students over to a college for a class, all of the dual enrollment classes I've ever been aware of have been held during the day, and I truly think you would be surprised at the numbers....but that isn't the issue, you're correct...the issue is if concealed is concealed, then what is the difference between a community college and a mall, church or anywhere else?

This amendment, as well as the on by Senator Van De Putte are only aimed and gutting this bill as much as possible. I'm especially troubled by Van De Putte's amendment to exempt schools connected to a hospital. So there goes UT Health Science Center San Antonio, UT Health Science Center Houston, UT Southwestern. I'm not even sure why a hospital has anything to do with the CHL law considering that hospitals are not "off-limits" to CHL holders unless properly posted. I wrote my Senator (Wentworth) and asked him to reconsider this amendment and also asked him say no to all other amendments.

srothstein wrote:But if the building has both high school and college students, it really does not change the fact that we are normally talking about the faculty being licensed, or the more mature adult who is returning to school after working for a living for a while. The average "immature" traditional student will graduate from any community college before hitting 21.

Maybe Lucio's district has a lot of high school students who are 21 or older, and he's worried they will be able to get a CHL and carry in high school without his amendment. That's the only thing that makes logical sense to me. Otherwise he's saying college professors shouldn't be able to carry if they have any high school students in their class, and that' makes no sense logically.

Ameer wrote:

srothstein wrote:But if the building has both high school and college students, it really does not change the fact that we are normally talking about the faculty being licensed, or the more mature adult who is returning to school after working for a living for a while. The average "immature" traditional student will graduate from any community college before hitting 21.

Maybe Lucio's district has a lot of high school students who are 21 or older, and he's worried they will be able to get a CHL and carry in high school without his amendment. That's the only thing that makes logical sense to me. Otherwise he's saying college professors shouldn't be able to carry if they have any high school students in their class, and that' makes no sense logically.

No, most people that old have dropped out already.

I with we could see the amendment. Maybe, just maybe, some provisions of it will be rescinded in the House.

will381796 wrote:This amendment, as well as the on by Senator Van De Putte are only aimed and gutting this bill as much as possible. I'm especially troubled by Van De Putte's amendment to exempt schools connected to a hospital. So there goes UT Health Science Center San Antonio, UT Health Science Center Houston, UT Southwestern. I'm not even sure why a hospital has anything to do with the CHL law considering that hospitals are not "off-limits" to CHL holders unless properly posted. I wrote my Senator (Wentworth) and asked him to reconsider this amendment and also asked him say no to all other amendments.

As a student that would be affected by Van de Putte's amendment, I called and expressed my great disappointment that her amendment would deny me the ability to protect myself not only at school, but also on Houston public transportation to and from school each day.

Hopefully they'll fix these little glitches when it reaches the House.

After thinking about it, it would behoove these Senators politically neuter this bill.

Ironic thing is, a school shooting could happen again. And the cycle of "we have to do something" will start all over again.

Jasonw560 wrote:Hopefully they'll fix these little glitches when it reaches the House.

Maybe it will be buried with HB 750 by the calendars committee.

IMHO, the often cited "Virginia Review Panel" needs to be shown for what it is.

Since Virginia Tech had "legal concealed carry" on campus, but instituted "policies" against it and failed to correct those policies which could save lives after receiving the 2002 "Preventing School Shootings" data
and still failing in 2006 after the incident that August and a CHL printing an article about it and a professor stating she'd "feel safer" too if the CHL student was armed back in 2006.

The Review Panel was just an attempt post-2007 massacre to limit the school's damages they'd have to pay, which is in the millions in settlements so far, and 2 cases still pending. Ask any attorney if "independent" experts can be hired to present whatever position you desire.

At this point, VT changing horses prior to the other two lawsuits ending, although not an admission, would probably seem so to jurors, therefore they can't yet and have to stick to the "broken system" which has failed at least twice so far at that very school.

If any Legislator ever practiced trial law .... they SHOULD "get this" (understand/comprehend) if presented to them correctly.

Trial "Experts"
http://www.lexisnexis.com/expert-witness-profiles/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(I like the red insert language on this one ... "Noted expert, or nutty professor? You need to know.")

http://marketcenter.findlaw.com/expert_witnesses.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://thetrialexperts.com/default.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.lawinfo.com/index.cfm/fuseac ... al-Experts" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.roundtablegroup.com/about/ex ... 7AodvVMHDQ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://ttla.officialbuyersguide.net/?gc ... 2godKxfwDQ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;