TexasCHLforum.com

Hinojosa's nurse really should do a better job of keeping him sitting in his wheelchair, much like Biden. How someone that addled gets elected, wow.

txyaloo wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 6:09 pm

bbhack wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 6:00 pm Who is this senator lying about 3 1/2 percent of Texans are gum owners?

3.5% of Texans are LTC holders. I don't think he was talking about total gun owners

Even that statement is incorrect. Per DPS at the end of 2020 there were 1,626,242 Active LTC holders. Per the 2020 Census there were 29,183,290 people in Texas. That equates to 5.5% of the population with an LTC.

You don't need to own a gun to have a LTC, and there are a very large number of ineligible persons (under age, felons, etc.) that cannot get an LTC so nothing can be inferred about gun ownership rates based on the number of LTCs.

Glad Sen. Whitmire isn't grandstanding and yelling, at least. Always boggles my mind how far apart we are in our perceptions of the effects of these bills.

Papa_Tiger wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 6:20 pm

txyaloo wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 6:09 pm

bbhack wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 6:00 pm Who is this senator lying about 3 1/2 percent of Texans are gum owners?

3.5% of Texans are LTC holders. I don't think he was talking about total gun owners

Even that statement is incorrect. Per DPS at the end of 2020 there were 1,626,242 Active LTC holders. Per the 2020 Census there were 29,183,290 people in Texas. That equates to 5.5% of the population with an LTC.

You don't need to own a gun to have a LTC, and there are a very large number of ineligible persons (under age, felons, etc.) that cannot get an LTC so nothing can be inferred about gun ownership rates based on the number of LTCs.

You're right. Traditionally the numbers given by DPS showed ~3.5% of the population has had an LTC. Looks like that's gone up a decent amount over the last 2-3 years.

Seems to me that the opposition's arguments can be summed up as the same old 'blood in the treets, for the children, cats & dogs living together" argument that was used when CCL was passed, when campus carry was passed and when open carry was passed. It will have the same results again too I feel.

PASSED!

Edit - of course, this means a conference committee, which is all sorts of stupid. But we're on our way!

Now to reconciliation with house..then to Gov.

I can't wait to see the engrossed text to really know what was in the amendments that were passed.

It's passed so this is old info at this point but I saw this quote from Patrick that shows a little on what must have been going on behind the scenes and the willingness to get this on the floor.

"Patrick told Dana Loesch, a radio host and former spokeswoman for the National Rifle Association, that he needs the support of all 18 Senate Republicans to allow a vote on the bill.

When the legislation came over from the House last week, "I had maybe six in favor, about six against and six unsure," Patrick said. "We're now up to 12 votes, maybe 13. I'm still a few short, but I'm going to bring it to the floor. It's rare I do this. Usually when you don't have the votes, you don't bring a bill up that's going to lose, but this is an important issue.

"I'm optimistic and working to be sure we get those votes to be able to pass it out," he said."

https://www.statesman.com/story/news/20 ... 881199001/

Papa_Tiger wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 6:39 pm I can't wait to see the engrossed text to really know what was in the amendments that were passed.

One of the amendments that Schwetner put forth and was approved in the Senate version was a provision that deleted the House amendment that 46.03 only applies if you're personally given notice about a prohibited location... honestly, more than anything, that's what I want out of the bill to go into law. A big segment of my day to day life is impinged by the notion that "no no no, this place is special, you don't get to legally carry here, not for you!". All pigs are equal but some pigs are more equal than others.

denwego wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 6:48 pm

Papa_Tiger wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 6:39 pm I can't wait to see the engrossed text to really know what was in the amendments that were passed.

One of the amendments that Schwetner put forth and was approved in the Senate version was a provision that deleted the House amendment that 46.03 only applies if you're personally given notice about a prohibited location... honestly, more than anything, that's what I want out of the bill to go into law. A big segment of my day to day life is impinged by the notion that "no no no, this place is special, you don't get to legally carry here, not for you!". All pigs are equal but some pigs are more equal than others.

That was replaced with 30.05 signage to specifically restrict unlicensed carry. Again though, the devil is in the details, thus wanting to see the engrossed version to se the actual legal language.

Fascinating stuff. If it passes:

- Probably 99.99999% of the convenience stores in Texas have a standard sign on their windows saying "the unlicensed possession of a firearm on these premises..." and stating that it's a felony with up to 10 years in prison, $10,000 fine, etc. I'm sure everybody here has seen it. So if this passes, all of those will have to be removed.... or at least they will be ignored.

- Various legal protection companies like USCCA, [pre-paid legal], CCWSafe, etc. have packages and pricing for people with CHLs. They'll have to rework their business models.

- Presumably, this will negate the entire universe of 3006 and 3007 signage, many of which are engraved into glass. I wonder what the signage requirements will be if this passes.

just got a tweet that it passed the senate???? any confirmations? i could not get in to texas site

Ruark wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 8:47 pm Fascinating stuff. If it passes:

- Probably 99.99999% of the convenience stores in Texas have a standard sign on their windows saying "the unlicensed possession of a firearm on these premises..." and stating that it's a felony with up to 10 years in prison, $10,000 fine, etc. I'm sure everybody here has seen it. So if this passes, all of those will have to be removed.... or at least they will be ignored.

- Various legal protection companies like USCCA, [pre-paid legal], CCWSafe, etc. have packages and pricing for people with CHLs. They'll have to rework their business models.

- Presumably, this will negate the entire universe of 3006 and 3007 signage, many of which are engraved into glass. I wonder what the signage requirements will be if this passes.

A couple of points. We still don't know the final version of the bill - the House still has to concur with the Senate's amendments and we don't know the full content of those yet. If they don't concur and it goes to conference committee, we will still have no idea of what the bill has until the conference committee report is published and both the House and Senate concur. A lot of road to travel yet, but it looks pretty positive that Texas will be the largest state to have unlicensed carry.

The TABC Blue signs go away in any version of this bill, so yes those signs would have no real force of law any more, not that they had much anyway since there was very little enforcement of them.

In no version of HB 1927, House or Senate, were the 30.06/7 signs touched. They still have legal ramifications for license holders. Depending on the language of Amendment 13 by Schwertner, there will be a similar 30.05 sign required to prohibit all unlicensed carry. That means 1 sign to have force of law for unlicensed carry and 2 signs to have force of law for licensed carry.

*Edited for clarity and adding detail on the steps left to travel*

thanks

my phone was blowing up
seemed to easy