TexasCHLforum.com

chamberc wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 7:18 am

ELB wrote: Thu May 06, 2021 4:20 pm

Papa_Tiger wrote: Thu May 06, 2021 4:11 pm ...

Long and short:
House concurs with Senate changes, on to the governor.
House doesn't concur, conference committee hashes out differences. BOTH chambers must approve conference committee changes for it to go on to the governor, if not bill is dead.

Aw, I couldn't find that in a hurry, thanks for the link. Hopefully the RINOs will still vote for whatever comes out and they can still hide behind the committee.

If it doesn't get out of conference before the session ends, it's also dead. There won't be a special session for this bill.

The House and Senate have until May 30th to get this worked out which is an eternity in the legislative world.
https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/Deadl ... lendar.pdf

Besides, if it weren't for the last minute, nothing would get done.

Flightmare wrote: Thu May 06, 2021 4:21 pm

Papa_Tiger wrote: Thu May 06, 2021 4:11 pm

ELB wrote: Thu May 06, 2021 3:44 pm IIRC that bill does not go back to either chamber to be voted on, it becomes the final bill that goes to the Governor. The RINO senators can quietly tell their supporters "Hey, I tried, but the committee cut out it out."

I don't know that this is the case, but I think it is at least plausible, and to be hoped for.

https://tlc.texas.gov/docs/legref/legis ... rocess.pdf

Page 6 and 7 starting with "Return of a Bill to the Originating Chamber"

Long and short:
House concurs with Senate changes, on to the governor.
House doesn't concur, conference committee hashes out differences. BOTH chambers must approve conference committee changes for it to go on to the governor, if not bill is dead.

That is correct. Question will be on some of these amendments. If they are not found to be germane to the legislation, then the opposition can try to kill the bill on a point of order in the house. The house has different rules than the senate does. While I don't have an issue with a "free" online course offered by DPS, how does that relate to this bill. Schwertner himself was turning amendments away to keep this bill as small and simple as possible. At the very least, I suspect these amendments will cause a delay while the house attempts to resolve some procedural hurdles. Hopefully they can get over them. Many of these amendments should have either been stand alone legislation, or added onto another bill that was more closely related.

I think a reasonable case can be made relating the "free course" to the bill. One of the arguments for the bill that was made on the floor was removing hurdles, including cost, so the "free" part. How does a course relate at all. There was lots of discussion about personal responsibility to learn the law since the everyone would not be taking the mandated LTC course. So this course would presumably make it easier for someone taking personal responsibility and trying to read up on this stuff to learn. It's not much of a stretch to tie the things together.

Some gun owner/shooter (dem) was questioning why Qualification Shooting is gone too.
The guy was pushing me hard to admit that unlicensed carry is not a wise idea.
I countered make the course free, shooting qualification included and very short time to issue the license and I am all for keeping LTC.
On the other hand, I will keep renewing my LTC.

There was lots of discussion about personal responsibility to learn the law since the everyone would not be taking the mandated LTC course.

We don't take general law classes to be free in society, but are expected to know that assault, theft, murder and a whole host of other things are illegal. I don't see the difference?

Beiruty wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 10:29 am Some gun owner/shooter (dem) was questioning why Qualification Shooting is gone too.
The guy was pushing me hard to admit that unlicensed carry is not a wise idea.
I countered make the course free, shooting qualification included and very short time to issue the license and I am all for keeping LTC.
On the other hand, I will keep renewing my LTC.

I agree with you and, I am sure that almost everyone on this forum will be maintaining their LTCs for a few reason including for the reciprocity with other states as well as the waived background checks for gun buys.

Since they've reduced the cost to apply/renew the LTC it's much more available to the public.

I don't see how they can make the training/qualification free except to have state employees as instructors, but I would expect the application fee to increase in order to pay for the state training program. Bad idea in my opinion.

But I could see a state sanctioned online gun safety/basic handgun overview course (similar to "defensive driving") which could be free or nearly free to the public. It's something that's been discussed at length already on the forum, but they could basically "adopt" a course from the NRA. It could satisfy the classroom portion of the LTC training, then you'd only need an instructor to administer the Qualification.

They should continue to lower the barriers to obtaining an LTC, especially with the passing of Constitutional Carry. The state would be wise to emphasize the incentives of obtaining the LTC. Make it easier and even more affordable to get the LTC. Their is value in having the LTC vs. carrying under the legal authority of the Constitutional Carry Legislation. Plus with an LTC you are a member of a community of licensed handgun carriers. And the state gets more people the basic safety and legal overviews that more people need to know as well as the finger prints, background checks etc that they want. It's a win-win

IIRC, when the fee for the license was reduced to $40 for most applicants and renewals, the figure came from trying to be fiscally neutral. Again, IIRC, DPS stated that it cost them somewhere around $30 per license to process paperwork, do the background investigation, and issue the license. An economic reality is someone has to pay something. If the license is issued for free, who pays for processing and background check?

Key element for HB 1927 is to get it passed. Is it everything we want, no, but does it give us most of what we want, I believe so. Contact your congress critters and Senators and tell them to stop with the parliamentary shenanigans and get it passed and to the Governors desk. I believe it is close enough and we can clean up around the edges like we did with CHL in later sessions. I believe if it goes to a conference committee, it will die.

flechero wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 10:55 am

There was lots of discussion about personal responsibility to learn the law since the everyone would not be taking the mandated LTC course.

We don't take general law classes to be free in society, but are expected to know that assault, theft, murder and a whole host of other things are illegal. I don't see the difference?

This is a great point! I am not in favor of adding a training requirement for unlicensed carry in part because that would make it a net negative bill. You would be adding an additional, not insignificant, requirement to exercise a right that is only being slightly expanded. For most folks without an LTC the only time this bill will increase their ability to legally carry is when they go into a store or restaurant. Maybe I don't get out much, but that averages to less than 5% of my total time.

As far as the other arguments towards just lowering the fee for an LTC instead of expanding unlicensed carry, there are also some LTC eligibility differences that would need to be eliminated. Basically, we would need to eliminate all LTC eligibility requirements that are not also requirements to legally own a firearm (not purchase from an FFL, but simply to own). The age for an LTC would have to be lowered to 18 for everyone, for starters.

I'll keep my LTC, however if somebody (Wife, Girlfriend, Sister) Doesn't feel comfortable going through the LTC but wants to CC and ask you to teach them what they need to know, are you going to tell them no?

Oh if wife and girlfriend want you to train them to shoot, I suggest you have two separate classes!

crazy2medic wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 3:32 pm I'll keep my LTC, however if somebody (Wife, Girlfriend, Sister) Doesn't feel comfortable going through the LTC but wants to CC and ask you to teach them what they need to know, are you going to tell them no?

Oh if wife and girlfriend want you to train them to shoot, I suggest you have two separate classes!

Honestly, I make more money teaching basic pistol than I do LTC. Especially if you break it down to an hourly rate. It's a lot less work as well.

AF-Odin wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:36 am ... I believe if it goes to a conference committee, it will die.

If it doesn't go to a conference committee it will die. The House and the Senate voted on different versions, so it has to be reconciled in committee (and then voted on again) or it's dead.

crazy2medic wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 3:32 pm I'll keep my LTC, however if somebody (Wife, Girlfriend, Sister) Doesn't feel comfortable going through the LTC but wants to CC and ask you to teach them what they need to know, are you going to tell them no?

Oh if wife and girlfriend want you to train them to shoot, I suggest you have two separate classes!

madwildcat wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 4:50 pm

crazy2medic wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 3:32 pm I'll keep my LTC, however if somebody (Wife, Girlfriend, Sister) Doesn't feel comfortable going through the LTC but wants to CC and ask you to teach them what they need to know, are you going to tell them no?

Oh if wife and girlfriend want you to train them to shoot, I suggest you have two separate classes!

Fortunately for me wife are girlfriend are the same person.

ELB wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 4:21 pm

AF-Odin wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:36 am ... I believe if it goes to a conference committee, it will die.

If it doesn't go to a conference committee it will die. The House and the Senate voted on different versions, so it has to be reconciled in committee (and then voted on again) or it's dead.

The house will vote to accept or reject the senate changes. If they reject those changes then the bill will go to a conference committee where it may or may not survive. If it survives the conference committee then both houses must vote to accept the conference committee version. should some version of the bill have approval from both houses it will then go to the governor. There are too many "ifs" in what could happen for anyone to predict what the outcome will be, although assuming the bill is never accepted by either house and dies is the statistically safe bet.

Are there holster requirements for guns carried under this bill?

Ruark wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 6:43 pm Are there holster requirements for guns carried under this bill?

I haven’t seen it mentioned, but it’s a good question—particularly since holster carry is specified for licensed open carry.