TexasCHLforum.com

The Annoyed Man wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:Both bills passed committee, both by a 7-2 vote.

Didn't SB11 pass with an amendment from Zefferini?

And Chief Acevido was a real piece of work. He told so many lies it got hard to pick out the truths from what he said. Maybe there were none?

I believe Huffman added an amendment to the open carry bill that requires the gun to be concealed on college campuses.

Zaffarini, which is a Straus buddy, said she has 12 amendments but she'll add them later, I guess on the floor.

SewTexas wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:Both bills passed committee, both by a 7-2 vote.

Didn't SB11 pass with an amendment from Zefferini?

And Chief Acevido was a real piece of work. He told so many lies it got hard to pick out the truths from what he said. Maybe there were none?

someone said earlier that they didn't wait for her amendments.

and I'm also a little confused, Dan Patrick sent out a message that the bills passed with a 7-0 vote.

Passed out of committee 7-0 repubs votes are what he is referring to. Now I have a question? Can any senator add amendments or must they be voted on to accept the amendment. I mean a bill could be amended to resemble nothing like it started.

louisf1 wrote:

SewTexas wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:Both bills passed committee, both by a 7-2 vote.

Didn't SB11 pass with an amendment from Zefferini?

And Chief Acevido was a real piece of work. He told so many lies it got hard to pick out the truths from what he said. Maybe there were none?

someone said earlier that they didn't wait for her amendments.

and I'm also a little confused, Dan Patrick sent out a message that the bills passed with a 7-0 vote.

Passed out of committee 7-0 repubs votes are what he is referring to. Now I have a question? Can any senator add amendments or must they be voted on to accept the amendment. I mean a bill could be amended to resemble nothing like it started.

I think you just answered your own question.

locke_n_load wrote: I sure hope that the retention holster amendment flops, as well as the visual identification, and the holster placement requirements.

If having a holster, and holster retention, are such important safety issues, then I am sure any serious amendment will also require non-uniformed police officers to either fully conceal their handguns, or meet the same safety standards as licensed OC'ers. Two-level or three-level for everyone?

Right?

Sure would be bummer if they required a chl badge for exposed identification after all the jokes we've made about them and tiaras.

mojo84 wrote:Should would be bummer if they required a chl badge for exposed identification after all the jokes we've made about them and tiaras.

Please don't give them ideas.

Rrash wrote:

mojo84 wrote:Should would be bummer if they required a chl badge for exposed identification after all the jokes we've made about them and tiaras.

Please don't give them ideas.

Too late. Zaffarini already has an amendment to attach to the open carry bill that will require external identification if it gets included.

I want a Police like Shield!
Seriously, that would silence a lot of antis.

mojo84 wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:Both bills passed committee, both by a 7-2 vote.

Didn't SB11 pass with an amendment from Zefferini?

And Chief Acevido was a real piece of work. He told so many lies it got hard to pick out the truths from what he said. Maybe there were none?

I believe Huffman added an amendment to the open carry bill that requires the gun to be concealed on college campuses.

Zaffarini, which is a Straus buddy, said she has 12 amendments but she'll add them later, I guess on the floor.

On the floor, amendment can be voted to be in or out.

Beiruty wrote:On the floor, amendment can be voted to be in or out.

My next question to the forum was going to be this.

mojo84 wrote:

Rrash wrote:

mojo84 wrote:Should would be bummer if they required a chl badge for exposed identification after all the jokes we've made about them and tiaras.

Please don't give them ideas.

Too late. Zaffarini already has an amendment to attach to the open carry bill that will require external identification if it gets included.

This would be akin to businesses having to post big ole 30.06 signs! Ugh! I wonder if this would be a DPS issued badge that you received once you had your license? I mean what good would it be if anyone could buy one? Seems if they weren't controlled the bad guys could use them as well. Just a horrible idea IMHO!

Can somebody please post a link to Acevedo's testimony (transcript or video). I'm hearing that he made some outrageous claims related to rape at the session. Interestingly, this wouldn't be the first time that Acevedo has shown callous disregard for victims of rape. He values the victim culture, like most liberals.

You should be able to access the archive video here once they load it. It doesn't appear to be available yet. http://www.senate.state.tx.us/avarchive/?yr=2015&mo=02" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Acevedo's testimony was about as irrational and lacking in logic as any I heard from any of the nutjobs yesterday.

I think a good sign for us is Texas Tech's chancellor. It appeared he almost conceded campus carry would become law and he was there to tried to influence some aspects of it. He also acknowledged there are already guns on campuses.

OldCannon wrote:Can somebody please post a link to Acevedo's testimony (transcript or video). I'm hearing that he made some outrageous claims related to rape at the session. Interestingly, this wouldn't be the first time that Acevedo has shown callous disregard for victims of rape. He values the victim culture, like most liberals.

He got called on the rape thing by others giving testimony. Basically, what he said was that he would rather that young women who have been assaulted take advantage of rape survivor resources after the fact, than to have to either face a homicide charge themselves, or have their gun taken from them and murdered with it. The problem is that he flatly rules out the possibility that a sexual assault victim might be able to A) shoot her assailant without having her gun taken, and B) do so without being prosecuted for it.

He was infuriating. Somebody said that his testimony was akin to the advice of some anti-gun types, that sexual assault victims should urinate on themselves to make themselves less attractive to the rapist. He tried to weasel out of that line of thought, but he continued to insist that a rape victim was better off taking advantage of rape-survivor resources than defending herself with a gun. The subtextual misogyny of the left is astounding in the face of their claim to the high ground in women's rights. It was as disgusting a display of chauvinism as I've seen in years. I have NEVER met a conservative or libertarian who thought that women should just lie back and take it, and then learn how to cope with the psychological impact of that afterward. That is just plain evil thinking.

Women who submit to this ideal agree to live as second class citizens.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

OldCannon wrote:Can somebody please post a link to Acevedo's testimony (transcript or video). I'm hearing that he made some outrageous claims related to rape at the session. Interestingly, this wouldn't be the first time that Acevedo has shown callous disregard for victims of rape. He values the victim culture, like most liberals.

He got called on the rape thing by others giving testimony. Basically, what he said was that he would rather that young women who have been assaulted take advantage of rape survivor resources after the fact, than to have to either face a homicide charge themselves, or have their gun taken from them and murdered with it. The problem is that he flatly rules out the possibility that a sexual assault victim might be able to A) shoot her assailant without having her gun taken, and B) do so without being prosecuted for it.

He was infuriating. Somebody said that his testimony was akin to the advice of some anti-gun types, that sexual assault victims should urinate on themselves to make themselves less attractive to the rapist. He tried to weasel out of that line of thought, but he continued to insist that a rape victim was better off taking advantage of rape-survivor resources than defending herself with a gun. The subtextual misogyny of the left is astounding in the face of their claim to the high ground in women's rights. It was as disgusting a display of chauvinism as I've seen in years. I have NEVER met a conservative or libertarian who thought that women should just lie back and take it, and then learn how to cope with the psychological impact of that afterward. That is just plain evil thinking.

Women who submit to this ideal agree to live as second class citizens.

I wonder if he would prefer to be armed or unarmed if Bubba was about to rape him?