TexasCHLforum.com

Of all of the gun owners I talk to, and they are legion, those who said they would never carry openly outnumbered those who will by a very wide margin. Precious few have told me they won't open-carry, but that they supported the bill on principal. I don't see opposition to open-carry as anti-Second Amendment; that's the all-or-nothing approach that is counterproductive. Just because an "organization" or small number of people claim that the sanctity of the Second Amendment stands or falls on the issue of open-carry doesn't make it so. In my view, claiming that any gun owners who oppose or have concerns about open-carry are anti-gun or taking an anti-Second Amendment stand is as bad as the race-baiters claiming every interaction between a white LEO and a black person is born of racism. Claiming evil intent or motivation where none exists is flat wrong, regardless of the setting. I've seen some argue that supporting open-carry is anti-Second Amendment because of the potential anti-gun backlash. I think that position also goes too far, but we must remember open-carry was offered as an amendment to SB60 in 1995 because those offering it correctly believed it would have doomed the carrying of self-defense handguns by citizens to failure in the 1997 legislative session.

In almost 40 years of traveling all over the country, I cannot recall seeing any non-LEO carrying a handgun openly, unless we were hunting. This includes the so-called "Gold Standard" State of Virginia that I've gone to at least three times a year for fourteen years. Open-carry this session was our legislative Hamburger Hill. We won, but at what cost and what did we truly gain for millions of Texans? As I've said many times before, I want to make a difference, not merely a point.

Chas.

K5GU wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

dk523 wrote:

FormerTSgt wrote:

nitrogen wrote:Coming out of hibernation again. I called both my senator and rep (van taylor and jodie laubenberg) who told me they are both behind open carry.

is there any way I can see who voted for and against the conf committee report in case I need to call back and cal them on male bovine excrement?

There is a list floating around somewhere in this section of the forum. Laudenberg voted yes on concurrence so no worries there. No idea on van Taylor.

Found it:

Here's the list of Republican Representatives that voted against the report. Give them a call and let them know you are not happy. These are RINOs that voted AGAINST Open Carry.

"Hello my name is... I am disappointed with the representative's no vote on HB910 "

Rep. Anderson, Charles (512) 463-0135
Rep. Ashby, Trent (512) 463-0508
Rep. Aycock, Jimmie Don (512) 463-0684
Rep. Bonnen, Dennis (512) 463-0564
Rep. Bonnen, Greg (512) 463-0729
Rep. Burkett, Cindy (512) 463-0464
Rep. Cook, Byron (512) 463-0730
Rep. Dale, Tony (512) 463-0696
Rep. Davis, Sarah (512) 463-0389
Rep. Farney, Marsha (512) 463-0309
Rep. Fletcher, Allen (512) 463-0661
Rep. Frank, James (512) 463-0534
Rep. Galindo, Rick (512) 463-0269
Rep. Geren, Charlie (512) 463-0610
Rep. Goldman, Craig (512) 463-0608
Rep. Gonzales, Larry (512) 463-0670
Rep. Harless, Patricia (512) 463-0496
Rep. King, Susan Lewis (512) 463-0718
Rep. King, Phil (512) 463-0738
Rep. Koop, Linda (512) 463-0454
Rep. Larson, Lyle (512) 463-0646
Rep. Meyer, Morgan (512) 463-0367
Rep. Miller, Doug (512) 463-0325
Rep. Miller, Rick (512) 463-0710
Rep. Morrison, Geanie W.(512) 463-0456
Rep. Murphy, Jim (512) 463-0514
Rep. Price, Four (512) 463-0470
Rep. Riddle, Debbie (512) 463-0572
Rep. Sheets, Kenneth (512) 463-0244
Rep. Sheffield, J. D. (512) 463-0628
Rep. Smith, Wayne (512) 463-0733
Rep. Smithee, John T. (512) 463-0702
Rep. Stephenson, Phil (512) 463-0604
Rep. Thompson, Ed (512) 463-0707
Rep. VanDeaver, Gary (512) 463-0692
Rep. Villalba, Jason (512) 463-0576
Rep. Zerwas, John (512) 463-0657

NO!!!! Do not follow this advice! We need to get HB910 passed and this won't help. Call your Representative and tell him/her to vote for the Conference Committee Report on HB910. Don't get into name-calling and insults.

Chas.

What vote are you referring to? That list looks to be from the voting on the motion-to-concur.
HB 910 is on the House calendar for later today. I may be wrong, but I don't know of any other voting that has been done today in the House on HB 910.

The House voted not to concur with the Senate changes to HB910. The next vote will be an up or down vote to approve or reject the Conference Committee Report.

Chas.

dk523 wrote:

FormerTSgt wrote:

nitrogen wrote:Coming out of hibernation again. I called both my senator and rep (van taylor and jodie laubenberg) who told me they are both behind open carry.

is there any way I can see who voted for and against the conf committee report in case I need to call back and cal them on male bovine excrement?

There is a list floating around somewhere in this section of the forum. Laudenberg voted yes on concurrence so no worries there. No idea on van Taylor.

Found it:

Here's the list of Republican Representatives that voted against the report. Give them a call and let them know you are not happy. These are RINOs that voted AGAINST Open Carry.

"Hello my name is... I am disappointed with the representative's no vote on HB910 "

Rep. Anderson, Charles (512) 463-0135
Rep. Ashby, Trent (512) 463-0508
Rep. Aycock, Jimmie Don (512) 463-0684
Rep. Bonnen, Dennis (512) 463-0564
Rep. Bonnen, Greg (512) 463-0729
Rep. Burkett, Cindy (512) 463-0464
Rep. Cook, Byron (512) 463-0730
Rep. Dale, Tony (512) 463-0696
Rep. Davis, Sarah (512) 463-0389
Rep. Farney, Marsha (512) 463-0309
Rep. Fletcher, Allen (512) 463-0661
Rep. Frank, James (512) 463-0534
Rep. Galindo, Rick (512) 463-0269
Rep. Geren, Charlie (512) 463-0610
Rep. Goldman, Craig (512) 463-0608
Rep. Gonzales, Larry (512) 463-0670
Rep. Harless, Patricia (512) 463-0496
Rep. King, Susan Lewis (512) 463-0718
Rep. King, Phil (512) 463-0738
Rep. Koop, Linda (512) 463-0454
Rep. Larson, Lyle (512) 463-0646
Rep. Meyer, Morgan (512) 463-0367
Rep. Miller, Doug (512) 463-0325
Rep. Miller, Rick (512) 463-0710
Rep. Morrison, Geanie W.(512) 463-0456
Rep. Murphy, Jim (512) 463-0514
Rep. Price, Four (512) 463-0470
Rep. Riddle, Debbie (512) 463-0572
Rep. Sheets, Kenneth (512) 463-0244
Rep. Sheffield, J. D. (512) 463-0628
Rep. Smith, Wayne (512) 463-0733
Rep. Smithee, John T. (512) 463-0702
Rep. Stephenson, Phil (512) 463-0604
Rep. Thompson, Ed (512) 463-0707
Rep. VanDeaver, Gary (512) 463-0692
Rep. Villalba, Jason (512) 463-0576
Rep. Zerwas, John (512) 463-0657

NO!!!! Do not follow this advice! We need to get HB910 passed and this won't help. Call your Representative and tell him/her to vote for the Conference Committee Report on HB910. Don't get into name-calling and insults.

Chas.

Xikar wrote:I'm a little surprised that nobody here seems to know what is going on.

Does the House have to vote again, or is it just a "motion to concur"... and what is the difference? What does a house do in a "motion to concur"?

I'm not sure what you are asking. The process is as I described above. Yes, the full House must vote to concur or not. If a conference committee is necessary and if there's enough time to get a conference report, then both the full House and full Senate must vote on the conference report. Either body can filibuster, but the Senate is the most likely to do so. Sen. Ellis and Sen. West have promised to do so, if HB910 winds up back late enough for a filibuster to be successful.

If you are asking what work is being done, that I cannot disclose for reasons I've stated.

Chas.

If the House concurs then it goes to the Governor. If the House doesn't then it goes to conference committee if there is enough time. If there is time and a conference report comes out, then each chamber has an up or down vote. if its close enough to the end of the session, then Democrats will filibuster and the bill dies.

Chas.

K.Mooneyham wrote:If this doesn't pass into law, Bloomberg, et al., are going to laugh so loud that you'll be able to hear them on the other side of the planet. And they are going to buy media time crowing and saying how they won, etc., and how much influence they have even in a Republican dominated state. I'm so irritated right now!

This is absolutely true! If it dies, it will be because of Huffines, not MDA, but they'll certainly take credit.

Chas.

safety1 wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:Seems to me that if the Governor supported OC a month ago after the House passed 910, there's no reason for him to not support the version that passed the Senate last night.

It only differs by a clerical error.

I agree, it has been said that this amendment would have little affect and was all grandstanding.
The Gov. supported it coming out of the House with a VERY similar amendment.
Why the uproar now and now rumors the Gov will veto it??
I'm not point fingers at anyone....I'm confused as many of us are.
I understand the bill was suppose to come out of the senate "clean"
But those that striped the amendment in commitee knew the votes were there to get it back.
I understand there is workings and agrrements behind closed doors we dont know about.
With that said, it now feels like the "good guys" would like to see the bill die.
Again, Im not pointing fingers at ANYONE, I'm making and observation that I'm sure many are feeling the same
Ready for the tongue lashing that I'm sure is coming.

You make gross assumptions and look for conspiracies.

You assume that Gov. Abbott supported HB910 with the Dutton Amendment that came unexpectedly. You ignore the massive law enforcement response to the Amendment and the respect that LEOs have with elected officials. Law enforcement opposed open-carry and the Legislature passed it anyway, but adding the Dutton Amendment is viewed as a slap in the face. Real world impact or not, it is viewed as distrust of law enforcement and that doesn't go over well conservatives who are the strongest supporters of gun rights. You also assume that the Dutton Amendment and the support of Sen. West and Ellis were solely to protect citizens and not part of a broader plan.

Chas.

joe817 wrote:

ralewis wrote:

joe817 wrote:

Rick Harris wrote:Breitbart Texas;

Keith Elkins, Communications Director for the Lt. Governor told Breitbart Texas the Senate will work with the House tomorrow to try and resolve the different versions and get concurrence. Governor Abbott has consistently said he would sign whatever open carry bill came to his desk. However, a Friday evening tweet by the Governor made some wonder if he was signaling a possible veto of the bill if it contained the Dutton/Huffines amendment.

Great ! More drama !

I don't tweet, but I'd sure like to see what he said & not just a reference to it by a 3rd party.

https://twitter.com/GovAbbott" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Don't see anything from the Gov last night saying that.

Many thanks R.A.! So for right now, we cannot verify if Abbott actually made that reference.....making it a rumor, and rumor only unless someone else can substantiate what the Governor allegedly said. So I'm discounting it.

I have a Twitter account that I never use and I know nothing about how Twitter works. Here's a link to a Twitter page listing Tweets under the hashtag #txleg. https://twitter.com/hashtag/txlege?src=hash" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; The alleged Abbott tweet is there and if you click on the "view photo" link, so is the image. Since I don't know how Twitter works, I can't say if all tweets under a hashtag show up in two places or only one. Remember Sen. Ellis' and West's support of the Huffines Amendment?

Chas.

mojo84 wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

mojo84 wrote:Is that beneficial or not, Charles?

Is what beneficial?

Chas.

Dutton amendment beneficial expediting 910.

I new I should have quoted.

At the end of the day, it will not impact how LEO's do their job. The 5th Circuit has not adopted the black decision, but it may in the future. Whether it does or not, all an officer needs is something in addition to the open-carry of a firearm in order to interview the subject and ask for ID and CHL. So the impact of the Dutton amendment will be minimal.

Chas.

I was just trying to find out of it would help 910 get out of the senate and to Abbott quicker like some are implying. I don't think it has much practical benefit once passed.

There's a reason it was stripped out in committee and Huffines is rendering that plan moot. Additionally, we now have Sen. Whitmire and Sen. Huffman indicating that LEOs can stop and interview solely because they are wearing a handgun openly. Thanks Sen. Huffines.

Chas.

mojo84 wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

mojo84 wrote:Is that beneficial or not, Charles?

Is what beneficial?

Chas.

Dutton amendment beneficial expediting 910.

I new I should have quoted.

At the end of the day, it will not impact how LEO's do their job. The 5th Circuit has not adopted the black decision, but it may in the future. Whether it does or not, all an officer needs is something in addition to the open-carry of a firearm in order to interview the subject and ask for ID and CHL. So the impact of the Dutton amendment will be minimal.

Chas.

mojo84 wrote:Is that beneficial or not, Charles?

Is what beneficial?

Chas.

SewTexas wrote:is Huffines, basically re-introducing the Dutton amendment?

Yes.

Chas.

Please contact Lt. Governor Dan Patrick and urge immediate movement on HB 910. The longer the Senate waits to act on this important measure, the more time the Senate Democrats will have to conjure up amendments to prolong debate. Time is ticking and excuses for lack of time on important issues affecting your Second Amendment rights are building.

You can Contact the Lieutenant Governors Office in the following ways:

By Phone:
• The Texas Lieutenant Governor Comment Line: (512) 463-5342
• The Texas Lieutenant Governor Office Line: (512) 463-0001
By Email:
LTGConstituent.Affairs@ltgov.state.tx.us