TexasCHLforum.com

Opinion piece by the Cedar Park police chief: Bills waiving permit and safety provisions endanger Texas

A recent poll released by two organizations — the Texas chapter of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, and Everytown for Gun Safety — found that 91 percent of Texans support the permitting system, including 90 percent of gun owners and 94 percent of current permit holders. This isn’t surprising. Texas has a long and proud history of responsible gun ownership, thanks in part to common-sense gun laws like the LTC system.

I’m disappointed that our lawmakers are attempting to push this reckless policy. My opposition to these bills is not a matter of being partisan or anti-Second Amendment; it is matter of being concerned for the public safety and welfare of our communities.

I urge everyone to join me in persuading our lawmakers to reject House Bills 375 and 1911. Our laws have real repercussions, not only for us but for our children. As a police chief, I have spoken with too many grieving families and seen too many traumatized communities. The time to speak up is now.

"I'm not anti-2A. It's just a coincidence that I'm aligned with Bloomberg's gun control group that wants to export New York's gun bans & carry bans to every other state."

When a big city police chief (i.e. a Democrat) says "I support our current LTC law" it's pretty much guaranteed to be a lie, much like Wendy Davis claiming to support Open Carry (which she admitted after the election was a lie). What they really think but won't say loudly is "Texas should go may-issue and deny permits to 99.99% of applicants like California does".

RossA wrote:

ralewis wrote:
What seems to me to be the issue here is the philosophical view that the 2nd Amendment should not require a license. Practically speaking, the 2A says what the courts say it says, and the best we have now is the Licensing system which (again to me) seems a reasonable compromise that contributes to putting the public more at ease with the idea of carrying in public.

That's the biggest problem of all. Instead of just following the Constitution and not infringing upon the right to keep and bear arms, we have allowed the left to force us into "reasonable compromise" of our Constitutional rights all along.
Maybe some are willing to compromise their rights, but I am not.

"A right delayed is a right denied."

apostate wrote:

RossA wrote:

ralewis wrote:
What seems to me to be the issue here is the philosophical view that the 2nd Amendment should not require a license. Practically speaking, the 2A says what the courts say it says, and the best we have now is the Licensing system which (again to me) seems a reasonable compromise that contributes to putting the public more at ease with the idea of carrying in public.

That's the biggest problem of all. Instead of just following the Constitution and not infringing upon the right to keep and bear arms, we have allowed the left to force us into "reasonable compromise" of our Constitutional rights all along.
Maybe some are willing to compromise their rights, but I am not.

"A right delayed is a right denied."

Idealogical vs practical perspectives don't always result in progress IMO. Certainly have no problem with the perspective that any infringement is abhorrent, but courts have pretty consistently ruled that some infringement is ok with respect to 'rights'. As a philosophical position to win elections and advance policy positions, I think it's a fine strategy. At the end of the day, you have to deal with the world the way it is.

"Reasonable"

So is there enough support/time for 1911 to pass?

Rvrrat14 wrote:So is there enough support/time for 1911 to pass?

I'm predicting death in the Calendars Committee, but I am no where near the know, let alone in it.

IIRC, Thursday May 11, is a magic deadline day... which is too close for comfort

Upcoming #txlege deadlines:
Monday: Last day House cmtes can report House bills
Thursday: Last day House can consider non-local House bills
In other words, if there's a House bill you're following that doesn't make it to the floor by Thursday, it's dead

TexasJohnBoy wrote:

Rvrrat14 wrote:So is there enough support/time for 1911 to pass?

I'm predicting death in the Calendars Committee, but I am no where near the know, let alone in it.

If it isn't on the calendar Monday or Tuesday it probably dies in calendars.

Papa_Tiger wrote:

TexasJohnBoy wrote:

Rvrrat14 wrote:So is there enough support/time for 1911 to pass?

I'm predicting death in the Calendars Committee, but I am no where near the know, let alone in it.

If it isn't on the calendar Monday or Tuesday it probably dies in calendars.

Has to at least get a first reading, yeah?

TexasJohnBoy wrote:

Papa_Tiger wrote:

TexasJohnBoy wrote:

Rvrrat14 wrote:So is there enough support/time for 1911 to pass?

I'm predicting death in the Calendars Committee, but I am no where near the know, let alone in it.

If it isn't on the calendar Monday or Tuesday it probably dies in calendars.

Has to at least get a first reading, yeah?

Second. First was when they read the caption and sent it to committee. Second is when it comes up for floor debate after being reported favorably from committee. Third reading is final passage from that chamber.

Papa_Tiger wrote:

TexasJohnBoy wrote:

Papa_Tiger wrote:

TexasJohnBoy wrote:

Rvrrat14 wrote:So is there enough support/time for 1911 to pass?

I'm predicting death in the Calendars Committee, but I am no where near the know, let alone in it.

If it isn't on the calendar Monday or Tuesday it probably dies in calendars.

Has to at least get a first reading, yeah?

Second. First was when they read the caption and sent it to committee. Second is when it comes up for floor debate after being reported favorably from committee. Third reading is final passage from that chamber.

Yeah, I guess that makes sense!

TexasJohnBoy wrote:

Rvrrat14 wrote:So is there enough support/time for 1911 to pass?

I'm predicting death in the Calendars Committee, but I am no where near the know, let alone in it.

I called this a couple of weeks ago. Charles called it before the session even started.

There isn't a lot of incentive for lawmakers to pass permit-less carry at this time.

The one good thing that has come out of 1911 making it far enough to get some media attention has forced a few "closet antis" to make public statements. Many of their public statements (like the police chief above) have been showing support for our current LTC system. What they are saying (in essence) is; "we have a means for responsible citizens to carry, and it's working great. We don't want to change that system because it works so well." These statements can be used against them when they come out against the HB560 of next session. I know I'm archiving some of these statements to use later.

Welp, if that's the case, the best thing we might be getting out of this session is a reduced fee for something right that is guaranteed in the national and state constitutions. If there is a larger strategy that I'm missing here then I would really like to hear it. I believe that my NRA and TSRA memberships are of little use.

canvasbck wrote:

TexasJohnBoy wrote:

Rvrrat14 wrote:So is there enough support/time for 1911 to pass?

I'm predicting death in the Calendars Committee, but I am no where near the know, let alone in it.

I called this a couple of weeks ago. Charles called it before the session even started.

There isn't a lot of incentive for lawmakers to pass permit-less carry at this time.

The one good thing that has come out of 1911 making it far enough to get some media attention has forced a few "closet antis" to make public statements. Many of their public statements (like the police chief above) have been showing support for our current LTC system. What they are saying (in essence) is; "we have a means for responsible citizens to carry, and it's working great. We don't want to change that system because it works so well." These statements can be used against them when they come out against the HB560 of next session. I know I'm archiving some of these statements to use later.

This is why, if they truly wanted to free up LTC holders, then they would have presented, 1911, first, and then if it got the backlash they anticipated, then had 560 as the "compromise."
What the left says during this session, is meaningless, next session. They are counting on their constituents to either have short memories, or be so uninformed that they go along with whatever is said.

My problem this session, in not with the left, or anti gun police chiefs, their statements are predictable, and are the same every session, it is with the so called "right" They had the opportunity, before the session started to sign on as co sponsors of HB560, and chose not to do so, even after a concerted effort by LTC holders across the State. I even had conversations with my reps, telling them that 1911, while a good bill, would be much tougher battle, and would still not help settle the questions regarding carry, in "arms length rented government property, carry in courthouses, and a myriad of other things to give freedoms to the most law abiding group in the State.
Not to mention, the stupidity, of waiting on an opinion from the AG, whenever a new issue came up.

I think it is time for us as a group to not only work to rid the Legislature of left wing Democrats, which should be our goal, every time we can vote, but to put a more concerted effort into cleaning out the Rhino's who have permeated the legislature. No Republican, or Libertarian, running for office will get our support, based solely on their party affiliation. JMHO

I think it will go nowhere, sadly. One shred of hope was that my rep talked to me yesterday and he told me not to write it off just yet, that there is a chance still that a heavily amended version of 1911 will go through.

I'm not going to hold my breath however.