2013 Legislative Section is now open
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
-
Topic author - Site Admin
- Posts in topic: 5
- Posts: 17787
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
- Location: Friendswood, TX
- Contact:
2013 Legislative Section is now open
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.
Chas.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 5110
- Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 12:00 pm
- Location: North Texas
Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open
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!
Certified Curmudgeon - But, my German Shepherd loves me!
NRA-Life, USN '65-'69 & '73-'79: RM1
1911's RULE!
-
- Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 131
- Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 12:28 pm
- Location: Almost to the goat lovers!
Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open
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?
Any chance of CHL holder being allowed to open carry?
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 5110
- Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 12:00 pm
- Location: North Texas
Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open
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).
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!
Certified Curmudgeon - But, my German Shepherd loves me!
NRA-Life, USN '65-'69 & '73-'79: RM1
1911's RULE!
Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open
Anti-RKBA prejudice takes many forms.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).
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 569
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 5:49 pm
- Location: Atascocita, TX
Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open
No Campus Carry pre-filed?
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
-
Topic author - Site Admin
- Posts in topic: 5
- Posts: 17787
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
- Location: Friendswood, TX
- Contact:
Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open
Constructive discussions, not tin foil hat stuff. I'm not kidding. There's too much work to do to be distracted by this stuff.bizarrenormality wrote:Anti-RKBA prejudice takes many forms.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).
Chas.
-
Topic author - Site Admin
- Posts in topic: 5
- Posts: 17787
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
- Location: Friendswood, TX
- Contact:
Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open
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.77346 wrote:No Campus Carry pre-filed?
Chas.
-
- Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 131
- Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 12:28 pm
- Location: Almost to the goat lovers!
Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open
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.77346 wrote:No Campus Carry pre-filed?
Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open
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.)
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 483
- Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 1:25 am
- Location: McKinney
Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open
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.
Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open
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.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.
Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open
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?Heartland Patriot wrote: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.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.
Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open
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.bizarrenormality wrote: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?Heartland Patriot wrote: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.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.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 4
- Posts: 579
- Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 8:15 pm
Re: 2013 Legislative Section is now open
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.