TexasCHLforum.com

amtank wrote:

rtschl wrote:I see one major obstacle that can be summed up in two words:

Joe Straus

Surely you don't mean NRA-PVF endorsed Speaker of the House Joe Straus he has an A rating....

What did Speaker Straus do for gun owners in the 2015 Texas Legislative session?

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

amtank wrote:

rtschl wrote:I see one major obstacle that can be summed up in two words:

Joe Straus

Surely you don't mean NRA-PVF endorsed Speaker of the House Joe Straus he has an A rating....

What did Speaker Straus do for gun owners in the 2015 Texas Legislative session?

Chas.

Pardon the interruption, but I do believe we need a "sarcasm" button.. Also the irony that Speaker Straus has/had an "A" rating when in fact he should be rated "D" at best.

Back in my lane...

Charles L. Cotton wrote:
What did Speaker Straus do for gun owners in the 2015 Texas Legislative session?

Chas.

Was only 3/4 the obstructionist he has been in past sessions?

troglodyte wrote:I'd like to add clearing up the volunteer church volunteer security issues.

There is precedence now that schools are openly posting they have armed faculty and staff and will defend their students. Some schools pay stipends for firearms, ammo, and training but the personnel are not licensed security guards. Other schools just allow the employees to carry if they so choose.

I don't see why a volunteer group at churches is any different.

No uniforms, badges, or tiaras, just church members watching over the flock.

Not much of a church-goer anymore, but I agree. Religious buildings are soft targets because some people don't agree with their views. As seen in the Dallas area when people have open carried black rifles in front of a mosque for intimidation factor. Although we know that Christian churches are a target as well as we remember the Charleston tragedy from last year when a hate-filled boy killed several unarmed parishioners.


Not sure if it's already been said in this thread, but also removing the authority of the DFPS to regulate firearms in child-care facilities in regards to the CCL license holders risking their license if they allow LTC-holders in the building with their concealed pistol.

DevilDawg wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

amtank wrote:

rtschl wrote:I see one major obstacle that can be summed up in two words:

Joe Straus

Surely you don't mean NRA-PVF endorsed Speaker of the House Joe Straus he has an A rating....

What did Speaker Straus do for gun owners in the 2015 Texas Legislative session?

Chas.

Pardon the interruption, but I do believe we need a "sarcasm" button.. Also the irony that Speaker Straus has/had an "A" rating when in fact he should be rated "D" at best.

Back in my lane...

Since amtank hasn't answered my question, perhaps you could. What did Speaker Straus do for gun owners in the 2015 Texas Legislative session? I'm no Staus fan, but facts are facts. If your answer, and antank's for that matter, is "I don't know," then say so.

Chas.

I won't speak for amtank, but I took his statement to be one dripping with sarcasm.

Personally I don't believe the Speaker did anything FOR gun owners. In fact I watched, sometimes cussing at the tv, and wondered if he worked for the other team. I think he is no friend to the 2A and wonder how he got and/or maintains an "A" rating.

DevilDawg wrote:I won't speak for amtank, but I took his statement to be one dripping with sarcasm.

Personally I don't believe the Speaker did anything FOR gun owners. In fact I watched, sometimes cussing at the tv, and wondered if he worked for the other team. I think he is no friend to the 2A and wonder how he got and/or maintains an "A" rating.

I am completely against Straus and almost all of my reasons are not related to the 2nd Amendment or guns. However, we have to give credit where credit is due. If he was dead set on open carry or any other gun legislation not getting passed, it wouldn't see the light of day in committee much less floor discussion or a vote. Therefore, he did have a big part in getting some gun legislation passed this session.

mojo84 wrote: I am completely against Straus and almost all of my reasons are not related to the 2nd Amendment or guns. However, we have to give credit where credit is due. If he was dead set on open carry or any other gun legislation not getting passed, it wouldn't see the light of day in committee much less floor discussion or a vote. Therefore, he did have a big part in getting some gun legislation passed this session.

That's far enough, and maybe my mistrust is misplaced. He might have been burning the political capital to offset the left in back room deals. I am not an insider and can only provide my opinion based on what I was able to catch during the session.

Straus did the bare minimum he could do without a wholesale revolt of his mainstream and conservative legislators. We need to recall exactly how Straus got elected. He is there as a direct result of all the Democrats and a handful of Republicans putting him there. It shows in his committee placements, his priorities, and his demeanor, and how he allows his lieutenants to act.

The raw truth is that with Straus and his apparatus of power not in the way wholesale changes, not just a massive increase in Gun Rights, but also real reforms would happen in Texas.

In truth I think the NRA should allow its state affiliates to dive into the minutia of issues and actions and not just score on headlining votes.

Straus beat his primary challengers handily, and most of his allies survived. http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/ ... ries.html/

It's a shame, but from my cheap seat it doesn't appear that the efforts to take him and his allies down have been started soon enough and are not in-depth enough. I suspect there is some dirt beneath the surface with certain legislators dealings with certain universities, but the effort to uncover that got neatly sidelined with some impeachment (I think that's the right term) counter attacks.

There's a reason that incumbents hang on, and short of term limits, if you want to defeat them you have to learn to play on their battlefield initially, something the solid conservatives and Tea Partiers have not been able to do so far.

amtank wrote:In truth I think the NRA should allow its state affiliates to dive into the minutia of issues and actions and not just score on headlining votes.

It's obvious you don't like Straus for reasons other than Second Amendment issues and that's certainly your prerogative. I may well agree with you on those other issues, but because of my position as an NRA Board Member, I don't publicly make position statements on those issues. (Well, not too often anyway.)

The NRA and TSRA rate elected officials based upon what they do for gun owners. To consider other issues would not be appropriate for a Second Amendment organization. Straus did a lot to get three major gun bills passed in 2015. Without his strong efforts, at least two of the three would not have reached the House floor.

As for the NRA and TSRA ratings and endorsement, both put out voter guides. The NRA lobbyist lives in Texas and she's the only NRA state lobbyist that does not live in VA close to NRA HQ. She is very well informed about what is and is not done in Austin, largely because she's in on it.

Chas.

Regarding local governments, clarify areas from which license holders may lawfully be excluded. The City of San Antonio's response, and no doubt that of others, is to designate most of their buildings "private" and allow carry of any sort only in the lobbies. I don't think that's in the spirit of the law, but a clarification would be nice.

In the end, however, the ruling class, even in Texas, is hostile to gun rights and will frustrate whatever the lege does to the best of its ability.

1.) Reintroduction of 308 (2015)

I was a supporter of 910, mainly because it did further advance gun rights in Texas; however it used up a tremendous amount of political capital and 308 never really gained any traction . I personally believe 308 would have done more for Texas gun rights.

My fear is the OCT/CATI and others will be beating the banshee for constitutional carry in 2017, and 308 or similar bill will take the same course as in 2015.

gsansing wrote:1.)My fear is the OCT/CATI and others will be beating the banshee for constitutional carry in 2017, and 308 or similar bill will take the same course as in 2015.

Speaking of beating the banshee, I wonder what Stickland is going to come up with this time around....