HB553 - Preservation of the Second Amendment
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
-
Topic author - Site Admin
- Posts in topic: 6
- Posts: 17787
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
- Location: Friendswood, TX
- Contact:
HB553 - Preservation of the Second Amendment
Rep. Otto's HB553 takes a unique approach to the issue of enforcement of certain federal laws, regulations and presidential executive orders (collectively referred to as "federal provisions"). Unlike many bills filed and/or passed around the country, HB553 creates an offense for any Texas peace officer enforcing or assisting in the enforcement of such federal provisions. The Bill also creates a separate offense for federal agents doing likewise, but those provisions are clearly unconstitutional and will not be enforceable.
If HB553 passes, Texas peace officers will have every reason to refuse to participate in the enforcement of these federal provisions. It's important to note that merely allowing a federal officer to use a Texas peace officer's office, telephone, computer, or city map would expose the Texas officer to criminal prosecution. Most COPS I know would love to see this pass and would be even happier to tell a federal agent "sorry, I can't help you." Undoubtedly, the Texas COP's face would look something like this .
I must admit that I've come full circle on the issue of passing legislation that purports to invalidate federal laws and/or creating offenses for federal agents enforcing federal provisions. Those laws are unconstitutional without question, but a number of states are filing such bills and if enough of them are passed, it sends a strong signal to Washington. I think it is important that we educate Texans on the fact that they are not going to be enforceable so they do not engage in acts that violate federal law and will land them in a federal prison.
Chas.
If HB553 passes, Texas peace officers will have every reason to refuse to participate in the enforcement of these federal provisions. It's important to note that merely allowing a federal officer to use a Texas peace officer's office, telephone, computer, or city map would expose the Texas officer to criminal prosecution. Most COPS I know would love to see this pass and would be even happier to tell a federal agent "sorry, I can't help you." Undoubtedly, the Texas COP's face would look something like this .
I must admit that I've come full circle on the issue of passing legislation that purports to invalidate federal laws and/or creating offenses for federal agents enforcing federal provisions. Those laws are unconstitutional without question, but a number of states are filing such bills and if enough of them are passed, it sends a strong signal to Washington. I think it is important that we educate Texans on the fact that they are not going to be enforceable so they do not engage in acts that violate federal law and will land them in a federal prison.
Chas.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 2058
- Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 1:59 pm
- Location: Houston
Re: HB553 - Preservation of the Second Amendment
I'm thrilled to see that this bill employs a method which will avoid a constitutional conflict, but still achieve most of our goals. This is great news, I look forward to doing whatever lobbying is needed to help it pass.
I'll quit carrying a gun when they make murder and armed robbery illegal
Houston Technology Consulting
soup-to-nuts IT infrastructure design, deployment, and support for SMBs
Houston Technology Consulting
soup-to-nuts IT infrastructure design, deployment, and support for SMBs
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 5776
- Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 5:01 pm
- Location: Austin area
Re: HB553 - Preservation of the Second Amendment
I agree MOST cops will be happy to NOT enforce unConstitutional Federal "laws". However, doesn't this just put the cops in a pickle if their chief says "go do this (help the Feds)?" I could see chiefs of police in Houston, Austin, Dallas not being willing to tell the FEds "no" (I'm just making broad assumptions, other than the Austin chief and his past actions - I don't know the particular personal proclivities of the Houston or Dallas chiefs).Charles L. Cotton wrote: If HB553 passes, Texas peace officers will have every reason to refuse to participate in the enforcement of these federal provisions. It's important to note that merely allowing a federal officer to use a Texas peace officer's office, telephone, computer, or city map would expose the Texas officer to criminal prosecution. Most COPS I know would love to see this pass and would be even happier to tell a federal agent "sorry, I can't help you." Undoubtedly, the Texas COP's face would look something like this .
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 7863
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am
- Location: Richmond, Texas
Re: HB553 - Preservation of the Second Amendment
If it is against Texas law then the chiefs are guilty of a crime?A-R wrote:I agree MOST cops will be happy to NOT enforce unConstitutional Federal "laws". However, doesn't this just put the cops in a pickle if their chief says "go do this (help the Feds)?" I could see chiefs of police in Houston, Austin, Dallas not being willing to tell the FEds "no" (I'm just making broad assumptions, other than the Austin chief and his past actions - I don't know the particular personal proclivities of the Houston or Dallas chiefs).Charles L. Cotton wrote: If HB553 passes, Texas peace officers will have every reason to refuse to participate in the enforcement of these federal provisions. It's important to note that merely allowing a federal officer to use a Texas peace officer's office, telephone, computer, or city map would expose the Texas officer to criminal prosecution. Most COPS I know would love to see this pass and would be even happier to tell a federal agent "sorry, I can't help you." Undoubtedly, the Texas COP's face would look something like this .
I see this as an opportunity for some undercover stings to nail the unscrupulous higher ups who seek to undermine our constitutionally enumerated freedom!
Anygunanywhere
"When democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizen still gets to vote." Mike Vanderboegh
"The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." – Ayn Rand
"The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." – Ayn Rand
-
Topic author - Site Admin
- Posts in topic: 6
- Posts: 17787
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
- Location: Friendswood, TX
- Contact:
Re: HB553 - Preservation of the Second Amendment
No, officers cannot obey an order to do an illegal act. Plus, any ranking officer who orders one of their subordinates to violate the statute would also be in violation. I agree that some chiefs may want to aid the feds, but few if any will risk prosecution.A-R wrote:I agree MOST cops will be happy to NOT enforce unConstitutional Federal "laws". However, doesn't this just put the cops in a pickle if their chief says "go do this (help the Feds)?" I could see chiefs of police in Houston, Austin, Dallas not being willing to tell the FEds "no" (I'm just making broad assumptions, other than the Austin chief and his past actions - I don't know the particular personal proclivities of the Houston or Dallas chiefs).Charles L. Cotton wrote: If HB553 passes, Texas peace officers will have every reason to refuse to participate in the enforcement of these federal provisions. It's important to note that merely allowing a federal officer to use a Texas peace officer's office, telephone, computer, or city map would expose the Texas officer to criminal prosecution. Most COPS I know would love to see this pass and would be even happier to tell a federal agent "sorry, I can't help you." Undoubtedly, the Texas COP's face would look something like this .
Chas.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 331
- Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 4:43 pm
- Location: Coppell, TX
Re: HB553 - Preservation of the Second Amendment
I like this. It fits nicely with the administrations efforts to get Arizona law enforcement to stop enforcing federal immigration law. How can the Feds defend telling local law enforcement that you must enforce Federal law X, but not Federal law Y?
[Insert pithy witicism here]
Proudly carrying since 09/10.
Proudly carrying since 09/10.
Re: HB553 - Preservation of the Second Amendment
Whoa, there. We don't need any of your highfalutin logic.SlickTX wrote:I like this. It fits nicely with the administrations efforts to get Arizona law enforcement to stop enforcing federal immigration law. How can the Feds defend telling local law enforcement that you must enforce Federal law X, but not Federal law Y?
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 885
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 6:02 pm
- Location: Ft Worth
- Contact:
Re: HB553 - Preservation of the Second Amendment
Ewe...interesting. That is definitely a nice spin on the bill here in Texas. It will be interesting to see the outcome of some of these bills and whether they pass or not.Charles L. Cotton wrote:...HB553 creates an offense for any Texas peace officer enforcing or assisting in the enforcement of such federal provisions. The Bill also creates a separate offense for federal agents doing likewise...
Alliance Arsenal - Firearms and transfers in north Ft. Worth
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 3081
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 4:11 pm
- Location: Comal County
Re: HB553 - Preservation of the Second Amendment
Is there a link to more information about this creative approach?Charles L. Cotton wrote:Rep. Otto's HB553 takes a unique approach to the issue of enforcement of certain federal laws, regulations and presidential executive orders (collectively referred to as "federal provisions"). Unlike many bills filed and/or passed around the country, HB553 creates an offense for any Texas peace officer enforcing or assisting in the enforcement of such federal provisions. The Bill also creates a separate offense for federal agents doing likewise, but those provisions are clearly unconstitutional and will not be enforceable.
If HB553 passes, Texas peace officers will have every reason to refuse to participate in the enforcement of these federal provisions. It's important to note that merely allowing a federal officer to use a Texas peace officer's office, telephone, computer, or city map would expose the Texas officer to criminal prosecution. Most COPS I know would love to see this pass and would be even happier to tell a federal agent "sorry, I can't help you." Undoubtedly, the Texas COP's face would look something like this .
I must admit that I've come full circle on the issue of passing legislation that purports to invalidate federal laws and/or creating offenses for federal agents enforcing federal provisions. Those laws are unconstitutional without question, but a number of states are filing such bills and if enough of them are passed, it sends a strong signal to Washington. I think it is important that we educate Texans on the fact that they are not going to be enforceable so they do not engage in acts that violate federal law and will land them in a federal prison.
Chas.
Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 574
- Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:18 pm
- Location: Grapevine
Re: HB553 - Preservation of the Second Amendment
I love this approach. It's a model for the other states to follow. Well done!
Re: HB553 - Preservation of the Second Amendment
That is exactly what I was talking with my dad about yesterday. They want the stat's help with this, but not that? I don't think so. Looks like a whole bunch of states are also having a problem with that logic in addition to the constitutional issue.SlickTX wrote:I like this. It fits nicely with the administrations efforts to get Arizona law enforcement to stop enforcing federal immigration law. How can the Feds defend telling local law enforcement that you must enforce Federal law X, but not Federal law Y?
I am not and have never been a LEO. My avatar is in honor of my friend, Dallas Police Sargent Michael Smith, who was murdered along with four other officers in Dallas on 7.7.2016.
NRA Patriot-Endowment Lifetime Member---------------------------------------------Si vis pacem, para bellum.................................................Patriot Guard Rider
NRA Patriot-Endowment Lifetime Member---------------------------------------------Si vis pacem, para bellum.................................................Patriot Guard Rider
-
Topic author - Site Admin
- Posts in topic: 6
- Posts: 17787
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
- Location: Friendswood, TX
- Contact:
Re: HB553 - Preservation of the Second Amendment
There's a link to the bill in the Bill Status Report.JALLEN wrote:Is there a link to more information about this creative approach?Charles L. Cotton wrote:Rep. Otto's HB553 takes a unique approach to the issue of enforcement of certain federal laws, regulations and presidential executive orders (collectively referred to as "federal provisions"). Unlike many bills filed and/or passed around the country, HB553 creates an offense for any Texas peace officer enforcing or assisting in the enforcement of such federal provisions. The Bill also creates a separate offense for federal agents doing likewise, but those provisions are clearly unconstitutional and will not be enforceable.
If HB553 passes, Texas peace officers will have every reason to refuse to participate in the enforcement of these federal provisions. It's important to note that merely allowing a federal officer to use a Texas peace officer's office, telephone, computer, or city map would expose the Texas officer to criminal prosecution. Most COPS I know would love to see this pass and would be even happier to tell a federal agent "sorry, I can't help you." Undoubtedly, the Texas COP's face would look something like this .
I must admit that I've come full circle on the issue of passing legislation that purports to invalidate federal laws and/or creating offenses for federal agents enforcing federal provisions. Those laws are unconstitutional without question, but a number of states are filing such bills and if enough of them are passed, it sends a strong signal to Washington. I think it is important that we educate Texans on the fact that they are not going to be enforceable so they do not engage in acts that violate federal law and will land them in a federal prison.
Chas.
Chas.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 569
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 5:49 pm
- Location: Atascocita, TX
Re: HB553 - Preservation of the Second Amendment
Chas,
When I first read about HB553 and the WY bill, I thought that was silly... but as you, I've also come to understand that it's about making a statement. I have contacted Dan Huberty, my state representative, asking that he supports this bill.
When I first read about HB553 and the WY bill, I thought that was silly... but as you, I've also come to understand that it's about making a statement. I have contacted Dan Huberty, my state representative, asking that he supports this bill.
Alex
NRA Benefactor Life & TSRA Life Member
Bay Area Shooting Club Member
CHL since 7/12 | 28 days mailbox-to-mailbox
NRA Benefactor Life & TSRA Life Member
Bay Area Shooting Club Member
CHL since 7/12 | 28 days mailbox-to-mailbox
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 2574
- Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:27 pm
- Location: Vernon, Texas
Re: HB553 - Preservation of the Second Amendment
Now THIS is the EXACT sort of thing that I was hoping for...doesn't "invalidate" Federal law, it just keeps them from getting any help from the law enforcement resources of this state or its political subdivisions...and good luck fully enforcing the thing with ONLY Federal resources. I LIKE IT, A LOT!
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 1276
- Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 12:00 am
- Location: Dallas
- Contact:
Re: HB553 - Preservation of the Second Amendment
It's actually a bit stronger and clearer than you stated. In the Arizona immigration case, the administration makes the claim that states MAY NOT enforce federal law.C-dub wrote:That is exactly what I was talking with my dad about yesterday. They want the stat's help with this, but not that? I don't think so. Looks like a whole bunch of states are also having a problem with that logic in addition to the constitutional issue.SlickTX wrote:I like this. It fits nicely with the administrations efforts to get Arizona law enforcement to stop enforcing federal immigration law. How can the Feds defend telling local law enforcement that you must enforce Federal law X, but not Federal law Y?
http://www.PersonalPerimeter.com
DFW area LTC Instructor
NRA Pistol Instructor, Range Safety Officer, Recruiter
DFW area LTC Instructor
NRA Pistol Instructor, Range Safety Officer, Recruiter