TexasCHLforum.com

FormerTSgt wrote:

gljjt wrote:

sugar land dave wrote:

gljjt wrote:

PBR wrote:Well looks like -- Appointed (05/27/2015) Phillips (Chair) | Burns | Geren | King, Phil | Nevárez (2 voted for it 3 against it)

Will be overseeing the committee for the House, when and where can you see who from the Senate will be there and when this committee will get started on this?

Phil King voted nay, but he supports OC. I am sure he will do everything he can to get OC moving in conference. In spite of his vote today, he is in the "us" camp. I think we should hold public anger until all is said and done. This thing is so close, let's don't throw a wrench in the gears. Contacting our reps in anger and threatening to vote for someone else next election probably would cause more harm than good. IMHO.

That's what the OCT guys did and we know how that turned out.....

I know Phil personally so my opinion of him isn't pure conjecture. Also, we should look at the long term track record of some of the reps being trashed. Throwing them out could be short sighted. There is a lot more that goes on behind the scenes and its not all negative. Equating historically strong RKBA reps to OCT isn't helpful. This isn't over.

With all due respect, & I mean that, if you know Phil personally maybe you could ask him why he felt it necessary to risk open carry not passing at all just to make this point about the amendment. Don't get me wrong, I am in agreement that the amendment is foolish but if that's what it took to get open carry passed then I would have bet the bullet and voted for it. I guess my question is is it really that unimportant to him? Just trying to get a handle on why he would put the status of open carry as a whole at such risk with so little time left.

sugar land dave wrote:

gljjt wrote:

sugar land dave wrote:

gljjt wrote:

PBR wrote:Well looks like -- Appointed (05/27/2015) Phillips (Chair) | Burns | Geren | King, Phil | Nevárez (2 voted for it 3 against it)

Will be overseeing the committee for the House, when and where can you see who from the Senate will be there and when this committee will get started on this?

Phil King voted nay, but he supports OC. I am sure he will do everything he can to get OC moving in conference. In spite of his vote today, he is in the "us" camp. I think we should hold public anger until all is said and done. This thing is so close, let's don't throw a wrench in the gears. Contacting our reps in anger and threatening to vote for someone else next election probably would cause more harm than good. IMHO.

That's what the OCT guys did and we know how that turned out.....

I know Phil personally so my opinion of him isn't pure conjecture. Also, we should look at the long term track record of some of the reps being trashed. Throwing them out could be short sighted. There is a lot more that goes on behind the scenes and its not all negative. Equating historically strong RKBA reps to OCT isn't helpful. This isn't over.

The above bolded statement is what I was referring to.

sugar land dave wrote:

gljjt wrote:

PBR wrote:Well looks like -- Appointed (05/27/2015) Phillips (Chair) | Burns | Geren | King, Phil | Nevárez (2 voted for it 3 against it)

Will be overseeing the committee for the House, when and where can you see who from the Senate will be there and when this committee will get started on this?

Phil King voted nay, but he supports OC. I am sure he will do everything he can to get OC moving in conference. In spite of his vote today, he is in the "us" camp. I think we should hold public anger until all is said and done. This thing is so close, let's don't throw a wrench in the gears. Contacting our reps in anger and threatening to vote for someone else next election probably would cause more harm than good. IMHO.

That's what the OCT guys did and we know how that turned out.....

PBR wrote:Well looks like -- Appointed (05/27/2015) Phillips (Chair) | Burns | Geren | King, Phil | Nevárez (2 voted for it 3 against it)

Will be overseeing the committee for the House, when and where can you see who from the Senate will be there and when this committee will get started on this?

sugar land dave wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Tracker wrote:what nobody is talking about but what I'm seeing is that if HB910 dies then so does the $200 Class C misdemeanor for accidental 30.06 violations.

That will be a bigger loss than open-carry.

Chas.

That is what I meant by my earlier post about OCT people not taking an easy 90 % win. If I had my choice, I would have taken that penalty reduction even over open carry, but we could have had them both.