2013 Legislative Section is now open

This sub-forum will open for posting on Sept. 1, 2012.

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

2013 Legislative Section is now open

Postby Charles L. Cotton » Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:32 am

Bills are being pre-filed so I've opened the 2013 Texas Legislative Session sub-forum. The Bill Status Report is open and already has two pro-gun bills filed. The Bill Status Report will remain locked to make it easier for people to check the status of bills, but feel free to start threads for any of the bills. I'm not trying to limit comment on any bills, I'm just trying to keep the Bill Status Report easy to use.

Chas.
Image
User avatar
Charles L. Cotton
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12980
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
Location: Friendswood, TX

Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open

Postby AEA » Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:11 pm

Thanks Charles, that's a good idea!
Alan - ANYTHING I write is MY OPINION only.
Certified Curmudgeon - But, my German Shepherd loves me!
NRA-Life, USN '65-'69 & '73-'79: RM1
1911's RULE!
User avatar
AEA
Senior Member
 
Posts: 5112
Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 12:00 pm
Location: North Texas

Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open

Postby johnferg69 » Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:56 pm

I know this is a sore topic on here but I'll take the plunge.
Any chance of CHL holder being allowed to open carry?
johnferg69
Member
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 12:28 pm
Location: Almost to the goat lovers!

Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open

Postby AEA » Tue Nov 13, 2012 7:30 pm

I would say that that has about the same chance as CHL holders being allowed to carry everywhere LEO's can.

Even with documented evidence that CHL holders are more responsible than LEO's (percentage wise).
Alan - ANYTHING I write is MY OPINION only.
Certified Curmudgeon - But, my German Shepherd loves me!
NRA-Life, USN '65-'69 & '73-'79: RM1
1911's RULE!
User avatar
AEA
Senior Member
 
Posts: 5112
Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 12:00 pm
Location: North Texas

Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open

Postby bizarrenormality » Tue Nov 13, 2012 7:48 pm

AEA wrote:I would say that that has about the same chance as CHL holders being allowed to carry everywhere LEO's can.

Even with documented evidence that CHL holders are more responsible than LEO's (percentage wise).

:iagree: Anti-RKBA prejudice takes many forms.
"Also if you can not be trusted with a pistol after a few drinks you can't be trusted with a pistol period. Booze is liquid bad judgment no doubt but it shouldn't make you into a darn moron. If you are a moron sober I don't know what to tell you." - BurnedOutLEO
User avatar
bizarrenormality
Senior Member
 
Posts: 945
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 7:40 pm

Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open

Postby 77346 » Tue Nov 13, 2012 9:13 pm

No Campus Carry pre-filed? :shock:
Alex
NRA Patron Life & TSRA Life Member
Bay Area Shooting Club Member
CHL since 7/12 | 28 days mailbox-to-mailbox
User avatar
77346
Senior Member
 
Posts: 562
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 5:49 pm
Location: Atascocita, TX

Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open

Postby Charles L. Cotton » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:00 am

bizarrenormality wrote:
AEA wrote:I would say that that has about the same chance as CHL holders being allowed to carry everywhere LEO's can.

Even with documented evidence that CHL holders are more responsible than LEO's (percentage wise).

:iagree: Anti-RKBA prejudice takes many forms.


Constructive discussions, not tin foil hat stuff. I'm not kidding. There's too much work to do to be distracted by this stuff.

Chas.
Image
User avatar
Charles L. Cotton
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12980
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
Location: Friendswood, TX

Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open

Postby Charles L. Cotton » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:03 am

77346 wrote:No Campus Carry pre-filed? :shock:


Not yet, but don't let that worry you. Most bills aren't pre-filed and sometimes it's a better tactical decision not to do so. With campus-carry, it's not a big deal either way because it certainly won't be a surprise to those who oppose the entire concept.

Chas.
Image
User avatar
Charles L. Cotton
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12980
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
Location: Friendswood, TX

Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open

Postby johnferg69 » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:49 am

77346 wrote:No Campus Carry pre-filed? :shock:


I doubt it, that would make people uncomfortable. It's all about staying under the rock...oh, I mean radar and telling ourselves how much were changing public opinion.
johnferg69
Member
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 12:28 pm
Location: Almost to the goat lovers!

Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open

Postby tornado » Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:19 pm

Charles, is it likely that any campus-carry bills will only cover college campuses? My kids aren't that old yet, so I'd sure like all schools removed from the no-go list. (Although I've been around long enough to understand when we have to go one step at a time.)
User avatar
tornado
Senior Member
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 7:00 pm
Location: Pflugerville

Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open

Postby Rrash » Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:45 pm

I'd love to see some sort of bill that either penalizes municipalities that invalidly post 30.06 and/or some sort of immunity of prosecution of an invalid sign for CHL's.
Rrash
Senior Member
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 1:25 am
Location: McKinney

Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open

Postby Heartland Patriot » Wed Nov 14, 2012 8:00 pm

Rrash wrote:I'd love to see some sort of bill that either penalizes municipalities that invalidly post 30.06 and/or some sort of immunity of prosecution of an invalid sign for CHL's.


I can agree with that part. It would seem very hard to find a way to penalize municipalities, though I'm sure it can be done if the right smart and focused team puts their minds into it. However, it would seem a lot simpler to amend the law to make it VERY EXPLICIT that if a business does not post the correct signage, that the CHLer cannot be prosecuted if all other parts of the law(s) were followed, excepting refusal of spoken word warning to leave the premises.
“If you don’t read the newspaper, you’re uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you’re misinformed“.---Mark Twain
User avatar
Heartland Patriot
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2453
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:15 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open

Postby bizarrenormality » Fri Nov 16, 2012 9:33 pm

Heartland Patriot wrote:
Rrash wrote:I'd love to see some sort of bill that either penalizes municipalities that invalidly post 30.06 and/or some sort of immunity of prosecution of an invalid sign for CHL's.


I can agree with that part. It would seem very hard to find a way to penalize municipalities, though I'm sure it can be done if the right smart and focused team puts their minds into it. However, it would seem a lot simpler to amend the law to make it VERY EXPLICIT that if a business does not post the correct signage, that the CHLer cannot be prosecuted if all other parts of the law(s) were followed, excepting refusal of spoken word warning to leave the premises.

The law already explicitly says what language is required on the sign and how big the letters must be. What more do you guys want?
"Also if you can not be trusted with a pistol after a few drinks you can't be trusted with a pistol period. Booze is liquid bad judgment no doubt but it shouldn't make you into a darn moron. If you are a moron sober I don't know what to tell you." - BurnedOutLEO
User avatar
bizarrenormality
Senior Member
 
Posts: 945
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 7:40 pm

Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open

Postby Heartland Patriot » Fri Nov 16, 2012 9:54 pm

bizarrenormality wrote:
Heartland Patriot wrote:
Rrash wrote:I'd love to see some sort of bill that either penalizes municipalities that invalidly post 30.06 and/or some sort of immunity of prosecution of an invalid sign for CHL's.


I can agree with that part. It would seem very hard to find a way to penalize municipalities, though I'm sure it can be done if the right smart and focused team puts their minds into it. However, it would seem a lot simpler to amend the law to make it VERY EXPLICIT that if a business does not post the correct signage, that the CHLer cannot be prosecuted if all other parts of the law(s) were followed, excepting refusal of spoken word warning to leave the premises.

The law already explicitly says what language is required on the sign and how big the letters must be. What more do you guys want?


I want to know that I am protected under the law as long as I am not violating the law. Right now, it seems that there is absolutely nothing preventing a situation similar to what happened to one of our (former?) members. He didn't do anything wrong but he sure got put through the ringer before he got it all straightened out, or so it seemed to me. The law should be both a sword and a shield.
“If you don’t read the newspaper, you’re uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you’re misinformed“.---Mark Twain
User avatar
Heartland Patriot
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2453
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:15 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open

Postby smoothoperator » Sat Nov 17, 2012 1:21 pm

I don't understand the urge to clarify something that's already crystal clear. I think it would be like spending effort to push through a law that says people can't be arrested for drunk driving if they're not operating a vehicle.
smoothoperator
Senior Member
 
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 8:15 pm

Next

Return to 2013 Texas Legislative Session

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest