TexasCHLforum.com

Damn sneaky politicians, I've had this site and live house/senate feed running at my desk at work for weeks and they pass it while I'm home with the family sure nothing is gonna happen tonight.

Congrats Texas!!!!!!!
Thank you Chas!!!!!!!!
Thank you Senators and Reps!!!!

Scott Farkus wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:There's lots of head shaking to go around, but, IMO the single biggest facepalm goes to Senator Huffines for failing to Amend HB 910 to be EXACTLY, word-for-word, punctuation-for-punctuation, the same as the version received from the House. Major fail.

Hopefully it can still be salvaged.

I've read in other places that even if Huffines had added back the amendment word for word, the bill would have still had to go back to the House for concurrence because it had been altered in committee (i.e. when Huffman took it out before sending it to the floor) and therefore at that point was no longer an "identical" bill regardless of what happened from then on.

I don't know if that's true or not but if it is, it would make Huffine's error in language - if in fact that was an error - a moot point I guess.

^This

Have we heard from one of our local experts that the bill would have gone straight to Abbott with identical wording or is that just a rumor? I thought it had to return to the house for concurrence the moment the senate committee removed the Dutton amendment, which I understand they had to do to secure the votes. I watched and heard Huffines say the wording was identical to Duttons, and I watched senator Estes try to convince Huffines to withdraw it so I'm convinced he knew the firestorm was coming.

Report is posted and the amendment has been stripped.

Senate has just appointed conferees to the 910 committee

And SB 11 has been sent to committee too

Jasonw560 wrote:Sen. Whitmire, in his dressing down of Sen. Huffines, mentioned that Philedelphia had different laws regarding open carry than the rest of PA. What he (naturally) forgot to mention is the higher crime rate: http://www.neighborhoodscout.com/pa/philadelphia/crime/

It's things like this that our side needs to be more versed on, and call out the other side for getting out ALL the facts.

The lack of intelligent & factual response was certainly one of the most frustrating parts of watching the debates. The folks opposed to the bill made some of the most ridiculous and outright false assertions and the best response most of our reps could muster was, "no, that's not what this bill says". NOBODY truly believed these amendments made open carriers unapproachable, but the dems won't stop saying it.

When do we learn more? The house conferees have been appointed, are we waiting on senate conferees or just a free room to meet in?

Sent my rep a thank you for voting in favor.

v7a wrote:

Robert91RS wrote:I feel let down by our reps, and I don't even know what to think of these political LEOs who think the 4th amendment should be as conditional and selective as the 2nd has been made.

If the Bill of Rights were proposed today, it wouldn't pass. Democrats and Republicans would vote against.

So embarrassing

sig-sog wrote:Are y'all as mad as I am over this? I mean, the supposed 2A loving majority controlled house and senate couldn't get this done. I will refrain from saying more for a bit so as not to get booted by Charles. My time, money, and voting will be applied differently from here on out though. Am I wrong for feeling this way?

Really is frustrating. I feel let down by our reps, and I don't even know what to think of these political LEOs who think the 4th amendment should be as conditional and selective as the 2nd has been made. To be honest, I didn't even plan to open carry. I just liked the idea of a shirt that mostly concealed on a warm day at the lake and the improvement in 2A rights in Texas. Weather Huffines poisoned the bill or not, this amendment and misinformed LEOs should not have stopped the bill.

Well this has been.....educational......

Glockster wrote:Yes, this needs to stay in because there is clearly misunderstanding by some police. Yes. Yes. Yes.

I feel the same way. If these protesting officers think this amendment is the only thing standing in the way of unlawfully detaining citizens then perhaps this redundancy is needed.

v7a wrote:It's blatantly dishonest to claim that police cannot ask. Police can ask whatever they want. They can try to engage in conversation with a potential suspect. Just because Open Carriers aren't obligated to display the license doesn't mean police cannot engage in different ways (including small talk).

EXACTLY!!

If an officer chose to politely strike up a conversation the majority of License holders would not refuse to answer any reasonable questions.

CoffeeNut wrote:"They've broken no laws and have the right to carry but we should kill this bill because cops won't know what to do"

Blows the mind....

txglock21 wrote:

Robert91RS wrote:

Back to the house according to this

:Edit: others are reporting this info may be false. Answer, we still don't know

Go back and look at the time of that tweet. For what it's worth, the state website say's the next stage is "Governor Action".

I saw the time and am reading the other discussion, that's why I edited. Still concerned the state website has it over simplified under the assumption the bill won't be amended but what do I know

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Back to the house according to this

:Edit: others are reporting this info may be false. Answer, we still don't know

Ruark wrote:What about Whitmire? As he walked away, he seemed to imply that he's going to come back and do whatever it takes to kill the bill.

I thought his vendetta was against the amendment. Is he out to kill the bill too?