Charles L. Cotton wrote:1. We do not have a super majority in the Senate. That's why we had to change Senate rules to allow bills to reach the floor for debate with only 19 votes.
You would surely know more about this than me, but didn't changing the rule in affect make it a super majority?
Charles L. Cotton wrote:
2. Party Platforms don't matter in the least; they are routinely ignored. It shouldn't be that way, but it is.
Agreed on all points.
Charles L. Cotton wrote:
3. Unlicensed carry will not pass in 2017. Spending one dime of political capital on it would hurt the effort to promote bills that can pass. It will be interesting to see if any of the open-carry organizations even try next session.
You are in the mix, I am not. I'll take your word.
Charles L. Cotton wrote:
4. Rendering 30.06/30.07 signs is neither desirable nor possible. Private property rights folks, most of whom are also strong Second Amendment supporters, would oppose it in huge numbers. Forcing property owners to confront people carrying handguns rather than allowing them to post enforceable signs is a concept that very few people support.
I strongly disagree.
#1> Private business give up certain rights when they are open to the public. I have a book of city and state codes that prove it.
#2> I cannot find one case in any open carry state where someone went haywire when they were asked to leave. In addition, I feel that implying that this could be a problem discounts the stellar record of LTC holders.
#3> I won't post it again, but there are many, many states where signs have no force of law. It hasn't been a problem in these states, and like most Texans I just think we are better than them!
Charles L. Cotton wrote:
5. Removing the duty to disclose your LTC to a LEO was overwhelmingly opposed in 2009 and that's why we removed all penalties by adding that language to the DPS sunset bill.
Chas.
I personally do not have a problem with disclosing, and will continue to do it whether it is the law or not. 20% due to the fact I have great respect for LEO's and 80% due to the fact I would prefer not to accidentally get shot on the side of the road over an avoidable misunderstanding. That being said, forcing LTCers to disclose is just another law that penalizes the law abiding citizens. Much like a 30.06/30.07 sign won't keep a criminal from carrying a gun past it, forcing law abiding citizens to disclose they are carrying does nothing to protect officers against criminals.
I understand the desire to reduce off limit areas, but I am quite pessimistic about it. Didn't we clarify the public area where LTCers could carry last session, and even added penalties? Yet many cities and counties have thumbed their nose note only the TXLeg but the AG as well? What makes anyone think they all the sudden a new law will keep people from continue to post unenforceable 30.06/30/07 signs?
IMHO, the real answer is to both take the teeth out of 30.06/30.07 AND expand areas where we can carry. This way once the areas we can carry are expanded, even if city/counties/etc. post 30.06/30.07 we would be risking a small (let say $25 Class C). This would also allow some cases to go to court and set some much needed precedent.
