That's also just the way they note changes. If any part of any section or subsection is changed, the entire text is duplicated so the reader can see it in context. It's only a single word, but they include all of §30.06(a) so that the (albeit minor) change can be viewed contextually. It's the opposite of not listing (b) ; since nothing is changed, it's not reproduced at all, so that the reader wouldn't inadvertently think that anything has been altered. It's not necessarily intuitive, as some folks here are a bit confused, but once you know the standardized way it's employed, it does make things very clear as to what's changed and what isn't!RottenApple wrote:Ok. I see the one difference between the current and modified versions, and you seem to be correct in your interpretation. It seems they added a single word, "concealed", to 30.06(a)(1). But why "amend" the rest of (a) when there's no changes?denwego wrote:Just read the bill's text cover to cover. For everyone who's in the too-long-didn't-read crowd and cares about §30.06, here's what you want to see:
THIS BILL DOES NOT CHANGE 30.06 FOR CONCEALED CARRIERS.
All it does is clarify that §30.06 applies to concealed carry. Gun busters or open-carry-banning signs have no effect on carrying concealed under this bill. Additionally, a legal sign banning open carry would not ban licensed concealed carry under a CHL. It does create a similar requirement for those wishing to ban permitted open carry, but they are mutually exclusive. An open carry sign under this bill has no more effect on concealed carry than any other invalid sign does right now.
The fact that §30.06 doesn't have anything in the bill text after (b) is because nothing is being changed. That's how amendatory bills work, so don't worry any! Nothing is being removed or altered in function about the current §30.06. If you were in the camp of "if they don't change how it is now and just add open carry, I would support it," you should be all set - people listened and it's all good now.
Search found 2 matches
Return to “HB 56 filed with text”
- Wed Jun 12, 2013 3:10 pm
- Forum: 2013 Texas Legislative Session
- Topic: HB 56 filed with text
- Replies: 23
- Views: 12698
Re: HB 56 filed with text
- Wed Jun 12, 2013 2:53 pm
- Forum: 2013 Texas Legislative Session
- Topic: HB 56 filed with text
- Replies: 23
- Views: 12698
Re: HB 56 filed with text
Just read the bill's text cover to cover. For everyone who's in the too-long-didn't-read crowd and cares about §30.06, here's what you want to see:
THIS BILL DOES NOT CHANGE 30.06 FOR CONCEALED CARRIERS.
All it does is clarify that §30.06 applies to concealed carry. Gun busters or open-carry-banning signs have no effect on carrying concealed under this bill. Additionally, a legal sign banning open carry would not ban licensed concealed carry under a CHL. It does create a similar requirement for those wishing to ban permitted open carry, but they are mutually exclusive. An open carry sign under this bill has no more effect on concealed carry than any other invalid sign does right now.
The fact that §30.06 doesn't have anything in the bill text after (b) is because nothing is being changed. That's how amendatory bills work, so don't worry any! Nothing is being removed or altered in function about the current §30.06. If you were in the camp of "if they don't change how it is now and just add open carry, I would support it," you should be all set - people listened and it's all good now.
THIS BILL DOES NOT CHANGE 30.06 FOR CONCEALED CARRIERS.
All it does is clarify that §30.06 applies to concealed carry. Gun busters or open-carry-banning signs have no effect on carrying concealed under this bill. Additionally, a legal sign banning open carry would not ban licensed concealed carry under a CHL. It does create a similar requirement for those wishing to ban permitted open carry, but they are mutually exclusive. An open carry sign under this bill has no more effect on concealed carry than any other invalid sign does right now.
The fact that §30.06 doesn't have anything in the bill text after (b) is because nothing is being changed. That's how amendatory bills work, so don't worry any! Nothing is being removed or altered in function about the current §30.06. If you were in the camp of "if they don't change how it is now and just add open carry, I would support it," you should be all set - people listened and it's all good now.