TexasCHLforum.com

CJD wrote:

casp625 wrote:

CJD wrote:

AJSully421 wrote:

v7a wrote:The bill author already said he will not oppose the partial-opt-out amendment. I have a feeling that's because a deal has been struck whereby Democrats will not filibuster the bill. Or maybe that's just my imagination running wild... In any case, I think passing SB11 as amended is better than not passing SB11 at all (go read the language of the partial-opt-out amendment, it's not as bad as you may think at first).

I agree, the only system that will have enough votes to ban guns in any meaningful way will be the UT system. The rest will have campus carry, with maybe a few restrictions in only a few locations on campus.

Never forget: Concealed means concealed.

Don't underestimate boards of regents. I bet we will see large opt outs at ALL Texas public universities.

Yes but they wouldn't be able to opt out the entire campus, only certain areas with "justification"

I know, and I'm sure that will be abused, and can't be remedied until 2017. I agree, though, that it's better than nothing. To me, decriminalization is more important than preemption on "rules and regulations."

Bladed wrote:

CJD wrote:

casp625 wrote:

CJD wrote:

AJSully421 wrote:

v7a wrote:The bill author already said he will not oppose the partial-opt-out amendment. I have a feeling that's because a deal has been struck whereby Democrats will not filibuster the bill. Or maybe that's just my imagination running wild... In any case, I think passing SB11 as amended is better than not passing SB11 at all (go read the language of the partial-opt-out amendment, it's not as bad as you may think at first).

I agree, the only system that will have enough votes to ban guns in any meaningful way will be the UT system. The rest will have campus carry, with maybe a few restrictions in only a few locations on campus.

Never forget: Concealed means concealed.

Don't underestimate boards of regents. I bet we will see large opt outs at ALL Texas public universities.

Yes but they wouldn't be able to opt out the entire campus, only certain areas with "justification"

I know, and I'm sure that will be abused, and can't be remedied until 2017. I agree, though, that it's better than nothing. To me, decriminalization is more important than preemption on "rules and regulations."

I'm not sure what you mean about decriminalization versus preemption of "rules and regulations." Under the Zerwas amendment, colleges would still be allowed to criminalize concealed carry in regent-approved zones, and they'd still be prohibited from regulating concealed carry everywhere else.

CJD wrote:

Bladed wrote:

CJD wrote:

casp625 wrote:

CJD wrote:

AJSully421 wrote:

v7a wrote:The bill author already said he will not oppose the partial-opt-out amendment. I have a feeling that's because a deal has been struck whereby Democrats will not filibuster the bill. Or maybe that's just my imagination running wild... In any case, I think passing SB11 as amended is better than not passing SB11 at all (go read the language of the partial-opt-out amendment, it's not as bad as you may think at first).

I agree, the only system that will have enough votes to ban guns in any meaningful way will be the UT system. The rest will have campus carry, with maybe a few restrictions in only a few locations on campus.

Never forget: Concealed means concealed.

Don't underestimate boards of regents. I bet we will see large opt outs at ALL Texas public universities.

Yes but they wouldn't be able to opt out the entire campus, only certain areas with "justification"

I know, and I'm sure that will be abused, and can't be remedied until 2017. I agree, though, that it's better than nothing. To me, decriminalization is more important than preemption on "rules and regulations."

I'm not sure what you mean about decriminalization versus preemption of "rules and regulations." Under the Zerwas amendment, colleges would still be allowed to criminalize concealed carry in regent-approved zones, and they'd still be prohibited from regulating concealed carry everywhere else.

You are right. I saw a post where Charles said it was decriminalized, but I must have misunderstood what he meant. So would a violation be an offense under 30.06 or 46.03? Big difference.

Bladed wrote:

CJD wrote:

Bladed wrote:

CJD wrote:

casp625 wrote:

CJD wrote:

AJSully421 wrote:

v7a wrote:The bill author already said he will not oppose the partial-opt-out amendment. I have a feeling that's because a deal has been struck whereby Democrats will not filibuster the bill. Or maybe that's just my imagination running wild... In any case, I think passing SB11 as amended is better than not passing SB11 at all (go read the language of the partial-opt-out amendment, it's not as bad as you may think at first).

I agree, the only system that will have enough votes to ban guns in any meaningful way will be the UT system. The rest will have campus carry, with maybe a few restrictions in only a few locations on campus.

Never forget: Concealed means concealed.

Don't underestimate boards of regents. I bet we will see large opt outs at ALL Texas public universities.

Yes but they wouldn't be able to opt out the entire campus, only certain areas with "justification"

I know, and I'm sure that will be abused, and can't be remedied until 2017. I agree, though, that it's better than nothing. To me, decriminalization is more important than preemption on "rules and regulations."

I'm not sure what you mean about decriminalization versus preemption of "rules and regulations." Under the Zerwas amendment, colleges would still be allowed to criminalize concealed carry in regent-approved zones, and they'd still be prohibited from regulating concealed carry everywhere else.

You are right. I saw a post where Charles said it was decriminalized, but I must have misunderstood what he meant. So would a violation be an offense under 30.06 or 46.03? Big difference.

Neither--it would be a violation of 46.035(a-3), a Class A misdemeanor.

CJD wrote:

Bladed wrote:

CJD wrote:

casp625 wrote:

CJD wrote:

AJSully421 wrote:

v7a wrote:The bill author already said he will not oppose the partial-opt-out amendment. I have a feeling that's because a deal has been struck whereby Democrats will not filibuster the bill. Or maybe that's just my imagination running wild... In any case, I think passing SB11 as amended is better than not passing SB11 at all (go read the language of the partial-opt-out amendment, it's not as bad as you may think at first).

I agree, the only system that will have enough votes to ban guns in any meaningful way will be the UT system. The rest will have campus carry, with maybe a few restrictions in only a few locations on campus.

Never forget: Concealed means concealed.

Don't underestimate boards of regents. I bet we will see large opt outs at ALL Texas public universities.

Yes but they wouldn't be able to opt out the entire campus, only certain areas with "justification"

I know, and I'm sure that will be abused, and can't be remedied until 2017. I agree, though, that it's better than nothing. To me, decriminalization is more important than preemption on "rules and regulations."

I'm not sure what you mean about decriminalization versus preemption of "rules and regulations." Under the Zerwas amendment, colleges would still be allowed to criminalize concealed carry in regent-approved zones, and they'd still be prohibited from regulating concealed carry everywhere else.

You are right. I saw a post where Charles said it was decriminalized, but I must have misunderstood what he meant. So would a violation be an offense under 30.06 or 46.03? Big difference.

Scott Farkus wrote:I suspect CC is the price we had to pay to get OC through without a fight. Sad that we aren't left with enough time or political capital to realistically do anything about CC, but at least we got the OC elephant out of the room. Hopefully this clears the decks next session so the grownups can get back to work.

AJSully421 wrote:

Scott Farkus wrote:I suspect CC is the price we had to pay to get OC through without a fight. Sad that we aren't left with enough time or political capital to realistically do anything about CC, but at least we got the OC elephant out of the room. Hopefully this clears the decks next session so the grownups can get back to work.

Agreed. Hopefuly we can get a HB308 type bill in 17 that wipes the whole slate, campus, polling places, probably not bars based on what Charles has said in the past, but I could deal with bars being the only places prohibited, maybe reduced to a class B or something.

Sen. Brian Birdwell, author of the campus carry bill, said he was fine with a tweak to allow public schools the ability to declare parts of campus off-limits to guns, but not the entire campus. But touting private property rights, he said he opposed getting rid of a total opt-out choice for private schools.

To avoid a Democratic filibuster, campus carry supporters hoped to file paperwork Friday that would allow debate on Saturday. A Birdwell aide said he thought that positive negotiations would allow backers to avoid any procedural hiccups.

Asked what Democrats might do then to stop campus carry, Sen. Royce West, D-Dallas, rephrased a reporter’s question.

“What else can Texans do?” he said. “Pray.”

Scott Farkus wrote:I suspect CC is the price we had to pay to get OC through without a fight. Sad that we aren't left with enough time or political capital to realistically do anything about CC, but at least we got the OC elephant out of the room. Hopefully this clears the decks next session so the grownups can get back to work.

Bladed wrote:The conference committee has filed their report on SB 11:

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLook ... &Bill=SB11" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

H Conf. Comm. Report distributed 05/30/2015 12:22 AM