TexasCHLforum.com

Lynyrd wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:17 pm

Charles L. Cotton wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 10:18 am

rtschl wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 9:30 am

Charles L. Cotton wrote: Mon Jun 18, 2018 10:15 am 1. Remove all off-limits areas for LTCs;
2. Exempt volunteer security personnel protecting schools and students from the Texas Private Security Act.

Chas.

Removing off limits areas for LTC's needs to be an all out effort by all 2A groups! The Ft.Worth Paper online has had multiple articles on Constitutional Carry being the next big gun law in Texas. While I am for it, it needs to take a back seat this next year to removing off limit areas. Let's spend our political capital wisely.

The bill I have written 1) creates unlicensed-carry; 2) moves all of TPC §46.035 to §46.03; and 3) exempts LTC's from §46.03. The benefit of this approach is that it creates so-called constitutional carry while preserving a big incentive to get an LTC. The Legislature does not like unlicensed-carry, but providing an incentive to get an LTC along with its education/training will help make it more palatable.

I know, I know. The more hardcore open-carry/unlicensed-carry folks are going to cry foul because they would not be able to carry where LTCs would be able to carry. Sorry, sometimes you have to wake up and realize we live in the real world, not Utopia.

Chas.

If that bill succeeds, you will be the man of year!

Papa_Tiger wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:42 am

SewTexas wrote: Mon Jun 18, 2018 8:59 pm I would really like for it to be possible for those who attend church on school property, public and private, to be able to legally carry to their church services.

Exempt LTC holders from TPC 46.03 and 46.035 or remove TPC 46.03 and 46.035 from the penal code and that will happen.

Charles L. Cotton wrote: Mon Jun 18, 2018 10:15 am 1. Remove all off-limits areas for LTCs;
2. Exempt volunteer security personnel protecting schools and students from the Texas Private Security Act.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 10:18 am
The bill I have written 1) creates unlicensed-carry; 2) moves all of TPC §46.035 to §46.03; and 3) exempts LTC's from §46.03. The benefit of this approach is that it creates so-called constitutional carry while preserving a big incentive to get an LTC. The Legislature does not like unlicensed-carry, but providing an incentive to get an LTC along with its education/training will help make it more palatable.

I know, I know. The more hardcore open-carry/unlicensed-carry folks are going to cry foul because they would not be able to carry where LTCs would be able to carry. Sorry, sometimes you have to wake up and realize we live in the real world, not Utopia.

Chas.

Ruark wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 5:38 pm

Charles L. Cotton wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 10:18 am
The bill I have written 1) creates unlicensed-carry; 2) moves all of TPC §46.035 to §46.03; and 3) exempts LTC's from §46.03. The benefit of this approach is that it creates so-called constitutional carry while preserving a big incentive to get an LTC. The Legislature does not like unlicensed-carry, but providing an incentive to get an LTC along with its education/training will help make it more palatable.

I know, I know. The more hardcore open-carry/unlicensed-carry folks are going to cry foul because they would not be able to carry where LTCs would be able to carry. Sorry, sometimes you have to wake up and realize we live in the real world, not Utopia.

Chas.

Yeah, they're going to whine about old Charlie being anti-2nd Amendment, etc. But I'm wondering.... what kind of revised (again) signage would this generate?

Charles L. Cotton wrote:"The bill I have written 1) creates unlicensed-carry; 2) moves all of TPC §46.035 to §46.03; and 3) exempts LTC's from §46.03. The benefit of this approach is that it creates so-called constitutional carry while preserving a big incentive to get an LTC. The Legislature does not like unlicensed-carry, but providing an incentive to get an LTC along with its education/training will help make it more palatable."

Ruark wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 5:38 pm

Charles L. Cotton wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 10:18 am
The bill I have written 1) creates unlicensed-carry; 2) moves all of TPC §46.035 to §46.03; and 3) exempts LTC's from §46.03. The benefit of this approach is that it creates so-called constitutional carry while preserving a big incentive to get an LTC. The Legislature does not like unlicensed-carry, but providing an incentive to get an LTC along with its education/training will help make it more palatable.

I know, I know. The more hardcore open-carry/unlicensed-carry folks are going to cry foul because they would not be able to carry where LTCs would be able to carry. Sorry, sometimes you have to wake up and realize we live in the real world, not Utopia.

Chas.

. . . But I'm wondering.... what kind of revised (again) signage would this generate?

Charles L. Cotton wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:35 pm
I'm not including any changes in my bill, other than repealing the 51% sign. It's quite possible, if not likely, that there will be no new signs. This would leave 30.06 for concealed-carry by LTCs and 30.7 for open-carry by LTCs. TPC §30.05 will apply to all non-LTCs just as it does now.

Chas.

jason812 wrote: Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:10 pm

Charles L. Cotton wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:35 pm
I'm not including any changes in my bill, other than repealing the 51% sign. It's quite possible, if not likely, that there will be no new signs. This would leave 30.06 for concealed-carry by LTCs and 30.7 for open-carry by LTCs. TPC §30.05 will apply to all non-LTCs just as it does now.

Chas.

Does moving TPC46.035 to TPC46.03 remove the force of law for the much beloved 30.06 & 30.07 signs? By my logic, 30.06 and 30.07 are referenced in TPC46.035 and moving the reference to TPC46.03 and excluding LTC from TPC46.03, effectively LTC holders can ignore the signs. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I would love to go see a baseball game and not have to worry about walking from the parking lot. Much the same with hospitals, the crimes take place in the parking lots.

ELB wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:53 pm Charles’ bill needs a catchy name, and we need to come up with it before the anti-gun press does.

I propose

“Common Sense Gun Law”

Or

“Common Sense Carry”.

Branding is important.

ELB wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:53 pm Charles’ bill needs a catchy name, and we need to come up with it before the anti-gun press does.

I propose

“Common Sense Gun Law”

Or

“Common Sense Carry”.

Branding is important.

Charles L. Cotton wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:35 pm

Ruark wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 5:38 pm

Charles L. Cotton wrote: Tue Jun 19, 2018 10:18 am
The bill I have written 1) creates unlicensed-carry; 2) moves all of TPC §46.035 to §46.03; and 3) exempts LTC's from §46.03. The benefit of this approach is that it creates so-called constitutional carry while preserving a big incentive to get an LTC. The Legislature does not like unlicensed-carry, but providing an incentive to get an LTC along with its education/training will help make it more palatable.

I know, I know. The more hardcore open-carry/unlicensed-carry folks are going to cry foul because they would not be able to carry where LTCs would be able to carry. Sorry, sometimes you have to wake up and realize we live in the real world, not Utopia.

Chas.

. . . But I'm wondering.... what kind of revised (again) signage would this generate?

I'm not including any changes in my bill, other than repealing the 51% sign. It's quite possible, if not likely, that there will be no new signs. This would leave 30.06 for concealed-carry by LTCs and 30.7 for open-carry by LTCs. TPC §30.05 will apply to all non-LTCs just as it does now.

Chas.

https://www.tasb.org/Services/Legal-Ser ... operty.pdf
The federal law prohibition does not apply to the possession of a firearm:

When the carrier is licensed:
If the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the state in which the school zone is located or by a political subdivision of the state, and the law of the state or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the state or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license