TexasCHLforum.com

Yee haaaaaw. It finally passed. Thanks to all that had input in this cause and thanks to the legislatures that pushed it through the house and Senate. Without their dedication and will power,we wouldn't have the option to choose between oc or not. Also the changing of the 30.06 penalty is awesome. Keep up the good work.

mulfjohn wrote:
Yee haaaaaw. It finally passed. Thanks to all that had input in this cause and thanks to the legislatures that pushed it through the house and Senate. Without their dedication and will power,we wouldn't have the option to choose between oc or not. Also the changing of the 30.06 penalty is awesome. Keep up the good work.

I'm more excited about the change in the penalty and the fact that on Jan 1 all existing 30.06 signs have incorrect wording than I am about open carry itself.

Finally Texas catches up with all the other reasonable states. Kudos to all in both houses who held firm with a few demerits for she who deleted the amendment, he who added it back with changed wording and those who played politics to keep law enforcement unions happy.

All done now and even with the demerits all were there at the final push and I thank them all.

jmra wrote:

mulfjohn wrote:
Yee haaaaaw. It finally passed. Thanks to all that had input in this cause and thanks to the legislatures that pushed it through the house and Senate. Without their dedication and will power,we wouldn't have the option to choose between oc or not. Also the changing of the 30.06 penalty is awesome. Keep up the good work.

I'm more excited about the change in the penalty and the fact that on Jan 1 all existing 30.06 signs have incorrect wording than I am about open carry itself.

How do all 30:06 signs have improper wording? Was there a change to the wording?

louisf1 wrote:

jmra wrote:

mulfjohn wrote:
Yee haaaaaw. It finally passed. Thanks to all that had input in this cause and thanks to the legislatures that pushed it through the house and Senate. Without their dedication and will power,we wouldn't have the option to choose between oc or not. Also the changing of the 30.06 penalty is awesome. Keep up the good work.

I'm more excited about the change in the penalty and the fact that on Jan 1 all existing 30.06 signs have incorrect wording than I am about open carry itself.

How do all 30:06 signs have improper wording? Was there a change to the wording?

Yep.

This is the 30.06 language change:

AJSully421 wrote:

louisf1 wrote:

jmra wrote:

mulfjohn wrote:
Yee haaaaaw. It finally passed. Thanks to all that had input in this cause and thanks to the legislatures that pushed it through the house and Senate. Without their dedication and will power,we wouldn't have the option to choose between oc or not. Also the changing of the 30.06 penalty is awesome. Keep up the good work.

I'm more excited about the change in the penalty and the fact that on Jan 1 all existing 30.06 signs have incorrect wording than I am about open carry itself.

How do all 30:06 signs have improper wording? Was there a change to the wording?

Yep.

I may be wrong but it looks like they snuck in some other areas making churches and religious facilities off limits. Also looks like amusement parks are off limits without regard to the population of the city it's located in. See page 34 and 35 of the conference report. Tell me I'm wrong.

K5GU wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

louisf1 wrote:

DanD wrote:A truly amazing past 30 minutes. Truly amazing.

What is truly amazing is that walking past a 30:06 sign unintentionally is now going to be a class C misdemeanor.

This is more valuable than open-carry, in my view. 850,000+ CHL benefit from this protection from accidentally entering posted property.

Chas.

Yes! Speaking of that, do you have any stats on how many accidental 30.06 violations by CHL holders there have been to date, and approximately how much it cost to mitigate those violations?

I don't know of any, but if there are convictions, they are very few in number. There's no separate category for §30.06 violations in the DPS crime stats, but the total number of convictions for unlawful carrying by a licensee is 16 in 2013.

Chas.

louisf1 wrote:

AJSully421 wrote:

louisf1 wrote:

jmra wrote:

mulfjohn wrote:
Yee haaaaaw. It finally passed. Thanks to all that had input in this cause and thanks to the legislatures that pushed it through the house and Senate. Without their dedication and will power,we wouldn't have the option to choose between oc or not. Also the changing of the 30.06 penalty is awesome. Keep up the good work.

I'm more excited about the change in the penalty and the fact that on Jan 1 all existing 30.06 signs have incorrect wording than I am about open carry itself.

How do all 30:06 signs have improper wording? Was there a change to the wording?

Yep.

I may be wrong but it looks like they snuck in some other areas making churches and religious facilities off limits. Also looks like amusement parks are off limits without regard to the population of the city it's located in. See page 34 and 35 of the conference report. Tell me I'm wrong.

Nothing changed with amusement parks and churches. The only new language is underlined.

Chas.

Okay I was a bit disturbed there for a few minutes. I see the part that require 30:06 / 30:07 notification now.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

louisf1 wrote:

AJSully421 wrote:

louisf1 wrote:

jmra wrote:

mulfjohn wrote:
Yee haaaaaw. It finally passed. Thanks to all that had input in this cause and thanks to the legislatures that pushed it through the house and Senate. Without their dedication and will power,we wouldn't have the option to choose between oc or not. Also the changing of the 30.06 penalty is awesome. Keep up the good work.

I'm more excited about the change in the penalty and the fact that on Jan 1 all existing 30.06 signs have incorrect wording than I am about open carry itself.

How do all 30:06 signs have improper wording? Was there a change to the wording?

Yep.

I may be wrong but it looks like they snuck in some other areas making churches and religious facilities off limits. Also looks like amusement parks are off limits without regard to the population of the city it's located in. See page 34 and 35 of the conference report. Tell me I'm wrong.

Nothing changed with amusement parks and churches. The only new language is underlined.

Chas.

I would have never thought something like that would have been possible anyway, but I'm certainly glad to see it "confirmed".

In my opinion, trading church carry for OC would be akin to trading a Kimber for a Hi-Point.

Thank you, Mr. Cotton.


jd

Deeply grateful for ALL who helped this process.

Did I miss a link to the actual law?

I'd like to read it and, somehow, become aware of any changes/highlights so I can be fully informed.

(also have a local news interview tomorrow)

Thanks again!

Overthehill wrote:Finally Texas catches up with all the other reasonable states. Kudos to all in both houses who held firm with a few demerits for she who deleted the amendment, he who added it back with changed wording and those who played politics to keep law enforcement unions happy.

All done now and even with the demerits all were there at the final push and I thank them all.

The Bill would not have gotten out of committee if the Dutton amendment had not been stripped out.

Chas.

link to the final bill as passed?

doc540 wrote:link to the final bill as passed?

It's in the conference report.