TexasCHLforum.com

And now, in today's Killeen Daily Hearald Newspaper, we have CJ taking all the credit for getting this bill passed. Says that nothing would have happened on OC without him, OCT and OCTC. Give me a break. He and his followers are the reason it has been so hard to get it done.

Now let us hope for no drama on the concurrance vote and Governor Abbot's signature.

On to SB-11!

K5GU wrote:

stash wrote:I have been gone since this morning. Would someone kindly tell me where 910 is now? Has it been sent to the house and or is the house working today?

The Senate voted and it passed. I haven't seen it on a House calendar yet but it will probably show up as soon as the analysis, amendment, budget board report, etc. get printed and published. It needs a motion to concur in the House then on to the Gov.

Just to expand on what you said, for anyone who is watching for the bill, the bill will be listed on the "Items Eligible for Consideration" calendar, not the daily calendar. It will be eligible 24 hours after the Senate amendments and the analysis of those amendments are printed and distributed to the members of the House.

TVGuy wrote:

safety1 wrote:Some are intentionally spreading misinformation. I'd suspect
those doing so are not in support of what has happend.
More or less wanting to rain on the parade

What are you referring to?

Various comments, stating misinformation.
its a fsct that this fourm is trolled by the other side.

AF-Odin wrote:And now, in today's Killeen Daily Hearald Newspaper, we have CJ taking all the credit for getting this bill passed. Says that nothing would have happened on OC without him, OCT and OCTC. Give me a break. He and his followers are the reason it has been so hard to get it done.

Now let us hope for no drama on the concurrance vote and Governor Abbot's signature.

On to SB-11!

Terry Holcomb is claiming credit for it, also, on the Texas Carry page.

I think it's a team effort.

Bladed and K5GU - thanks for the info.

AF-Odin wrote:And now, in today's Killeen Daily Hearald Newspaper, we have CJ taking all the credit for getting this bill passed. Says that nothing would have happened on OC without him, OCT and OCTC. Give me a break. He and his followers are the reason it has been so hard to get it done.

Now let us hope for no drama on the concurrance vote and Governor Abbot's signature.

On to SB-11!

I thought he only supported unlicensed OC. Oh well, he cannot OC a handgun away due to be ineligible for a CHL.

nightmare69 wrote:

AF-Odin wrote:And now, in today's Killeen Daily Hearald Newspaper, we have CJ taking all the credit for getting this bill passed. Says that nothing would have happened on OC without him, OCT and OCTC. Give me a break. He and his followers are the reason it has been so hard to get it done.

Now let us hope for no drama on the concurrance vote and Governor Abbot's signature.

On to SB-11!

I thought he only supported unlicensed OC. Oh well, he cannot OC a handgun away due to be ineligible for a CHL.

The Big Lie on the front page of their website today:
http://www.opencarrytexas.org/

"Our members have worked hard the past two years to make this happen," remarked OCT President CJ Grisham. "Obviously, it's not everything we've been fighting for, but if you don't fight, you can't win. Anyone in business will tell you that you never ask for what you think they're going to give you. You always ask for more and you might be surprised with what you get."

That is a man with much to be ashamed of, and no shame about any of it whatsoever.

How I feel with OCT...

So, SB11 must be on House calendar by 10:00PM Sunday night -- is this correct? Any word on that side of the fight?

TexasJohnBoy wrote:So, SB11 must be on House calendar by 10:00PM Sunday night -- is this correct? Any word on that side of the fight?

I'm not sure of the timeline/deadline. But the Calendars Committee has not published their minutes for yesterday, May 22. So it might(hopefully, keep your fingers crossed, lol) be on that one. Also, the House will prolly call for a calendars committee meeting on the floor of the House today, to schedule a calendar for the early part of next week, and here again, it might be on that one.

Note: Don't hold me to anything I say, because I haven't figured all this mess out yet...if ever.

Bottom line: I have no idea.

SB 11 is not on any House calendar through next Tuesday. The Tuesday calendar shows only 1 bill so I suspect additional bills will be added by Calendars Committee tomorrow.

Texas Senate Democrats help 'open-carry' amendment

The bill is headed back to the House, where its original author on Sunday said he will concur with the changes made in the Senate. Many Republicans are afraid of primary challenges from their right, so they seem likely to go along with Rep. Larry Phillips, R-Sherman, the author of House Bill 910.

...

On Sunday, Phillips said he didn't know when HB 910 will come back to the House, but it's expected sometime next week — the last full week of the legislative session.

Some House members said they are taking another look at the bill.

Rep. Bryan Hughes, R-Mineola, said he got a call from his mother, who said she was asking as a constituent whether HB 910 as amended is a good idea. Hughes said he hadn't decided whether it is.

If the House concurs with the Senate, the bill goes to Gov. Greg Abbott for his signature or his veto.

SB11 is on house daily for Tuesday, 5/26

Owens wrote:SB11 is on house daily for Tuesday, 5/26

Yes, it is on "Major State"

Last session, only 1 of 3 bills on "Major State" on the same day last session passed.

This year there are 4 ...
206
9
11
575
And Campus Carry is the bill before #SB575.
We are ahead of 575 insurance/prolife bill, which was added on 3rd calendars meeting of the day, after not making calendar on first and 2nd calendars meetings

so SB 11 should get reached, I doubt 575 will be reached ... it is in that order....
Both Campus Carry and 575 may, or may not have to have LONG debates .... I think it is in that order....for a reason

see below

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/ ... 150526.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

REVISED

**************************************************************************
Daily House Calendar

Tuesday, May 26, 2015

**************************************************************************




********** EMERGENCY CALENDAR **********
SENATE BILLS
SECOND READING

SB 19 Taylor, Van / et al.

SP: Cook / Harless / Oliveira

Relating to the ethics of public officers and employees, the disclosure of certain political contributions, and related requirements and procedures; creating criminal offenses.


********** MAJOR STATE CALENDAR **********
SENATE BILLS
SECOND READING

SB 206 Schwertner / et al.

SP: Burkett / Price / Raymond / Dutton / Gonzales, Larry

Relating to the continuation and functions of the Department of Family and Protective Services and procedures applicable to suits affecting the parent-child relationship, investigations of child abuse and neglect, and conservatorship of a child; affecting fee amounts and authorizing an administrative penalty.

SB 9 Hancock / et al.

SP: Otto / Bonnen, Greg / Ashby / Burkett / Gonzales, Larry

Relating to limitations on the rate of growth of appropriations for certain categories of spending.

SB 11 Birdwell / et al.

SP: Fletcher

Relating to the carrying of handguns on the campuses of and certain other locations associated with institutions of higher education; providing a criminal penalty.

SB 575 Taylor, Larry / et al.

SP: Farney

Relating to health plan and health benefit plan coverage for abortions.

jmra wrote:

sig-sog wrote:Does HB910 as approved last night allow cities with a population greater than 750K to enact ordinances preventing OC? Rumors are flying everywhere.

No. This confusion comes from the voting on the house floor before the house passed it on to the senate. An amendment (# 8 I think) was proposed to allow cities with a population of more than 1,000,000 to opt out. Before the amendment was tabled a vote was taken to lower the 1,000,000 requirement in the amendment to 750,000 which passed changing the wording of the amendment (this was labeled amendment 9). A vote was then taken to table amendment 8 which made the passage of amendment 9 of no consequence.
So in short, amendment 9 (which passed) was an amendment to amendment 8 (which failed). So, no opt out.

Just my personal opinion here but I'm glad the portion allowing big cities to opt out wasn't in the final version. All that was in my opinion was a move on the liberal's part playing politics with San Antionio and Houston. GARAUNTEED you would have those two cities and maybe another saying "oh, okay, well we opt out!" and you throw the second amendment in the trash.

Remove all the limitations, I say, starting with the ridiculous post office one.