TexasCHLforum.com

I have posted an article titled "HB560 by Rep. Springer: The Most Important Self-Defense Bill Since 2007" on the TFC website. Included is a TFC Short-Shot audio. I just uploaded the audio file and iTunes and Stitcher won't have it available for a while. It depends on when they scan for update, but it should be available on both by tomorrow morning. The audio file is available on the TFC website now.

Remember, everything I'm doing on TFC, TFC Podcats and Tex. Leg. Reports are geared toward people who do not know as much about current law as do Forum Members. Therefore, some of the article and the audio file will cover information you folks already know. PLEASE send a link to the article to everyone on your email lists and your Facebook page. We must have a massive response to calls-to-action on this Bill, if we are to have any chance of passing it without being gutted in committee.

Chas.

I will do my part, and I will ask my peeps to pass it on to their peeps.

shared publicly on on FB page. Rep, Senator and Rep Springer were all emailed

My concern is that without something done about government owned property posting 30.06 signs, this bill will be severely limited. Most of the statutory off limits areas are government owned or built with my tax dollars or built with a portion of tax dollars. I see signs going up at all professional sporting events even though most if not all of the stadiums are funded with tax dollars to some degree. These stadiums are also located in unfriendly territory and local law enforcement may not be on our side.

I have another question but that can wait until the bill has passed.

Please tell me this is in the works as well or how I am wrong or delete if inappropriate to ask at this time.

jason812 wrote:My concern is that without something done about government owned property posting 30.06 signs, this bill will be severely limited. Most of the statutory off limits areas are government owned or built with my tax dollars or built with a portion of tax dollars. I see signs going up at all professional sporting events even though most if not all of the stadiums are funded with tax dollars to some degree. These stadiums are also located in unfriendly territory and local law enforcement may not be on our side.

I have another question but that can wait until the bill has passed.

Please tell me this is in the works as well or how I am wrong or delete if inappropriate to ask at this time.

Something is being done to fix "Fines for Signs." Even if it were not changed, HB560 will still make a big difference! The only time AG Opinion KP-108 is a problem is when a private person or entity is in total control of government property.

Chas.

Emailed my rep, I'll call tomorrow.

In plain language, what places where we can't carry now would we be able to carry with this bill? After reading through different things, I haven't been able to figure it out. All of the legalese makes my brain hurt. It almost reads that if there is a 30.06 /07 sign nothing changes.

doncb wrote:In plain language, what places where we can't carry now would we be able to carry with this bill? After reading through different things, I haven't been able to figure it out. All of the legalese makes my brain hurt. It almost reads that if there is a 30.06 /07 sign nothing changes.

Try this.

https://www.texasfirearmscoalition.com/ ... since-2007

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

jason812 wrote:My concern is that without something done about government owned property posting 30.06 signs, this bill will be severely limited. Most of the statutory off limits areas are government owned or built with my tax dollars or built with a portion of tax dollars. I see signs going up at all professional sporting events even though most if not all of the stadiums are funded with tax dollars to some degree. These stadiums are also located in unfriendly territory and local law enforcement may not be on our side.

I have another question but that can wait until the bill has passed.

Please tell me this is in the works as well or how I am wrong or delete if inappropriate to ask at this time.

Something is being done to fix "Fines for Signs." Even if it were not changed, HB560 will still make a big difference! The only time AG Opinion KP-108 is a problem is when a private person or entity is in total control of government property.

Chas.

For some reason my brain was picturing schools posting signs too. I wouldn't put it past some to try. I guess I've become use to anything associated with the government at any level to not act correctly.


I do think this bill goes along way for us. I can see the progression from this to no signs to constitutional carry.

Thanks Mr. Cotton, not only for the work you do but for having the patience to explain and teach us that have a hard time following legalese (I hope that was the correct word and if not, it would be fitting).

troglodyte wrote: Try this.
https://www.texasfirearmscoalition.com/ ... since-2007

Thank you. That did help.

Unfortunately, I still won't be able to carry into the various hospitals that my job takes me to during the day. Bummer.

doncb wrote:

troglodyte wrote: Try this.
https://www.texasfirearmscoalition.com/ ... since-2007

Thank you. That did help.

Unfortunately, I still won't be able to carry into the various hospitals that my job takes me to during the day. Bummer.

I believe this will allow us to carry into Government owned hospitals. Many hospitals that are part of the government university systems such as UTMB are allowed to post and enforce 30.06 signs. Even though they are part of the state university system, they claim exemption through §46.035(b)(4), which is slated for deletion. I am not quite sure how it will effect places like MD Anderson in Houston which claims to be a part of the UTMB system. Private hospital systems like those in the Methodist system will still be allowed to post but this is a start.

Breaking up the victim zones in places like the Houston Medical Center needs to be done, That whole area has turned into one huge crime zone because they know that all their victims are rendered harmless and defenseless my the medical community.

doncb wrote:In plain language, what places where we can't carry now would we be able to carry with this bill? After reading through different things, I haven't been able to figure it out. All of the legalese makes my brain hurt. It almost reads that if there is a 30.06 /07 sign nothing changes.

If these signs are on privately owned property, it will not change. The property owners rights remain intact, as they should be.

Russell wrote:On a different note, I hope we invest about 90% of our lobbying efforts towards this bill. I am personally way more interested in seeing this pass than constitutional carry this session.

I'm also far more interested in this than eliminating the LTC fees. I'll take both (and CC) of course, but hope we don't use all our chips on the others.

Is HB 560 going to be this session's HB 308, or will last session's HB 308 also be filed? Is one better than the other, or are they similar enough that it doesn't matter?

Scott Farkus wrote:

Russell wrote:On a different note, I hope we invest about 90% of our lobbying efforts towards this bill. I am personally way more interested in seeing this pass than constitutional carry this session.

I'm also far more interested in this than eliminating the LTC fees. I'll take both (and CC) of course, but hope we don't use all our chips on the others.

Is HB 560 going to be this session's HB 308, or will last session's HB 308 also be filed? Is one better than the other, or are they similar enough that it doesn't matter?

HB 560 (TX-85) is significantly more expansive than HB 308 (TX-84) was.