TexasCHLforum.com

So now there is a 2nd Unlicensed Carry Bill, HB1911, with the support of Alice Tripp, filed. With her backing, which makes me think that the TSRA and possibly NRA support this bill, I would think that unlicensed carry has a much better chance of passage this year.

I wonder if unlicensed carry passed first, if it would make passing 560 (removal of off-limit areas of license holders) much more difficult to pass, since that would mean any person not prohibited from owning a firearm would be able to carry a handgun in places like a school. I personally believe that it should be allowed, but I'm sure some of our congress critters would not agree.

Or would they amend 560 to give license holders the ability to carry in those original off-limit areas, and people without a license would still be barred?

Just some thoughts of mine. I really hope both pass in an order that gives Texan's more of their rights back. I also don't want there to be a huge rift between these supporters so that neither pass.

ETA: Before Scott jumps in here, carrying in a school without a license would be violating the GFSZA! But imagine in other areas that would be deemed "sensitive" by the legislature.

I initially was thinking that it would be confusing to have two different set of carry rules depending on whether one had an LTC, or was relying on constitutional carry. But then again, that is the situation today.

Without a license, one can carry in their home, in their car, to their car from their home, from their car to a shooting range, or hunting property, and in / to any other property they control, such as a business, or a rented hotel room, to/from an airport, among others. Having a license just opens up some other areas you can carry in addition to those listed above. It also allows you to carry in some other states that have reciprocity (you can carry in "constitutional carry" states without a license).

So if both pass, we will still have a dual system where you are able to carry in more places if you have an LTC. The difference will be that both sets of potential carry locations will be greatly expanded.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:I initially was thinking that it would be confusing to have two different set of carry rules depending on whether one had an LTC, or was relying on constitutional carry. But then again, that is the situation today.

Without a license, one can carry in their home, in their car, to their car from their home, from their car to a shooting range, or hunting property, and in / to any other property they control, such as a business, or a rented hotel room, to/from an airport, among others. Having a license just opens up some other areas you can carry in addition to those listed above. It also allows you to carry in some other states that have reciprocity (you can carry in "constitutional carry" states without a license).

So if both pass, we will still have a dual system where you are able to carry in more places if you have an LTC. The difference will be that both sets of potential carry locations will be greatly expanded.

The way the constitutional carry bill is worded, basically every time TPC says "license holder" it is replaced by "license holder or otherwise not prohibited person". So basically, if both pass and 560 passes first and 1911 is updated for that passage, a licensed and non-licensed person will be able to carry in the exact same places in Texas w/out regards to Federal law, so there would not be 2 different sets of rules.

HB1911... say no more, I support the 1911

Sorry, I had to.

TexasJohnBoy wrote:
Sorry, I had to.

Good choice for the photo, as it is of an actual m1911 and not a m1911a1

I fully support HB 1911. HB Glock, not so much.

RossA wrote:I fully support HB 1911. HB Glock, not so much.

Let's hope the legislature does not wander into the Glock vs 1911 debate. They will definitely get nothing done if that happens.

I am hedging my bets by owning both Glocks and 1911s.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

RossA wrote:I fully support HB 1911. HB Glock, not so much.

Let's hope the legislature does not wander into the Glock vs 1911 debate. They will definitely get nothing done if that happens.

I am hedging my bets by owning both Glocks and 1911s.

I would pay to watch that debate in the Senate or House, by current, sitting reps!

The way I read it.
HB560 amended section 46.15 (a), which related places guns are forbidden. Exception of 46.02 and 46.03
while HB1911 amended section 46.15 (b), which means carry handgun is legal. Exception of 46.02 only.

locke_n_load wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote: The way the constitutional carry bill is worded, basically every time TPC says "license holder" it is replaced by "license holder or otherwise not prohibited person". So basically, if both pass and 560 passes first and 1911 is updated for that passage, a licensed and non-licensed person will be able to carry in the exact same places in Texas w/out regards to Federal law, so there would not be 2 different sets of rules.

We have spent enough political capital on open carry. We need to spend that capital this year working on removing restrictions on LTC. After the OCT crowd and their actions last session, I personally don't think that the legislature would pass constitutional carry any time soon.

I am all for HB1911 and glad that TSRA is apparently involved. Hope NRA backs it in a big way as well.

As for HB560 and HB1911, heaven forbid the TX leg pass TWO good gun bills in one session

Russell wrote:I see zero chance unlicensed individuals will be permitted to carry into school functions and the other "high risk (in their minds)" areas.

I predict if everything goes well, unlicensed folks will be permitted to carry at a few places, mainly private businesses, while licensed will be permitted to carry in many more areas.

That's kind of what I'm thinking would happen.

HB560: LTC holders are exempted from 46.03 which includes schools, polling place, racetrack, all the while 46.035 (UCW by LTC) gets bars, sporting events, etc. actually removed from the code (this code is just deleted).

Then HB1911 allows carry for non-LTC except in areas in 46.03 and what's left of 46.035 (pretty much no OC at colleges).

Basically, non-LTC holders get to carry in a few more places than LTC holders can now, and LTC holders could then carry in a lot more places than previously allowed.

Roger Howard wrote:We have spent enough political capital on open carry. We need to spend that capital this year working on removing restrictions on LTC. After the OCT crowd and their actions last session, I personally don't think that the legislature would pass constitutional carry any time soon.

If it was up to me, I'd rather see HB560 passed first.