TexasCHLforum.com

CJD wrote:

K5GU wrote:

CJD wrote:

mr1337 wrote:Oooo, secret Democrat meeting. Wonder what they have up their sleeves.

Vote for the campus carry amendment so the Senate will kill it!

Huh?

The more things that get attached to the bill, the less likely the Senate will concur.

That doesn't make sense to me though. The senate has already passed its own campus carry and open carry bill. I don't see why the Senate wouldn't concur with something the house did when they passed a functionally equivalent piece of legislation barely a month ago

CJD wrote:

K5GU wrote:

CJD wrote:

mr1337 wrote:Oooo, secret Democrat meeting. Wonder what they have up their sleeves.

Vote for the campus carry amendment so the Senate will kill it!

Huh?

The more things that get attached to the bill, the less likely the Senate will concur.

I think it would be much easier to get this through the Senate than getting campus carry through the house.

dru wrote:

CJD wrote:

K5GU wrote:

CJD wrote:

mr1337 wrote:Oooo, secret Democrat meeting. Wonder what they have up their sleeves.

Vote for the campus carry amendment so the Senate will kill it!

Huh?

The more things that get attached to the bill, the less likely the Senate will concur.

That doesn't make sense to me though. The senate has already passed its own campus carry and open carry bill. I don't see why the Senate wouldn't concur with something the house did when they passed a functionally equivalent piece of legislation barely a month ago

I think this is a different version though.

They are going to play some games to cause a bad vote so they can object.

CJD wrote:

dru wrote:

CJD wrote:

K5GU wrote:

CJD wrote:

mr1337 wrote:Oooo, secret Democrat meeting. Wonder what they have up their sleeves.

Vote for the campus carry amendment so the Senate will kill it!

Huh?

The more things that get attached to the bill, the less likely the Senate will concur.

That doesn't make sense to me though. The senate has already passed its own campus carry and open carry bill. I don't see why the Senate wouldn't concur with something the house did when they passed a functionally equivalent piece of legislation barely a month ago

I think this is a different version though.

Can you elaborate? I'm not sure of the key differences between this and SB 11

House is taking a Big Mac break until 3:30 (in actuality meaning 4 pm).

i've been out running errands....looks like it's just now getting interesting

Could someone explain amendment 9? http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLook ... Bill=HB910

It says "adopted" and reads that a city of over 750,000 can ban open carry.

dru wrote:

CJD wrote:

dru wrote:

CJD wrote:

K5GU wrote:

CJD wrote:

mr1337 wrote:Oooo, secret Democrat meeting. Wonder what they have up their sleeves.

Vote for the campus carry amendment so the Senate will kill it!

Huh?

The more things that get attached to the bill, the less likely the Senate will concur.

That doesn't make sense to me though. The senate has already passed its own campus carry and open carry bill. I don't see why the Senate wouldn't concur with something the house did when they passed a functionally equivalent piece of legislation barely a month ago

I think this is a different version though.

Can you elaborate? I'm not sure of the key differences between this and SB 11

Maybe not, I just looked at it quickly again.

Amendment 9 was an amendment to # 8 which was tabled.

Pawpaw wrote:Could someone explain amendment 9? http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLook ... Bill=HB910

It says "adopted" and reads that a city of over 750,000 can ban open carry.

The amendment to amendment was adopted. The amendment itself was tabled.

Pawpaw wrote:Could someone explain amendment 9? http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLook ... Bill=HB910

It says "adopted" and reads that a city of over 750,000 can ban open carry.

It was adopted to #8. 1 million lowered to 750,000. It was tabled.

Pawpaw wrote:Could someone explain amendment 9? http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLook ... Bill=HB910

It says "adopted" and reads that a city of over 750,000 can ban open carry.

It was an amendment to an amendment that was ultimately tabled. Have no fear.

As I remember it, the original Amendment 8 had left out "open" (as in open carry) in one place in the law text, which someone hand wrote in. Amendment 9 replaced Amendment's 8 text with a typed version (altho it had its own handwritten instructions on it about where to place it in the law).

and as noted below, the population change, which was the more substantive reason any way.

In any case, the big city preemption amendment was tabled.

Pawpaw wrote:Could someone explain amendment 9? http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLook ... Bill=HB910

It says "adopted" and reads that a city of over 750,000 can ban open carry.

I bet this is what their meeting is about. Johnsons earlier try at this was tabled.

dru wrote:

CrimsonSoul wrote:What does amendment tabled mean anyway?

It means the amendment is effectively dead

It's laid on the table, it's not being voted on unless there is a motion with enough votes to bring it back up off the table. That's how I think that works.