TexasCHLforum.com

Richard_B wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Richard_B wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

TrueFlog wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

artx wrote:Any updates? There sure seems to be a lot of buzz on open carry....but I know many folks who are 200 times more interested in this process.

Only a small update. I/we gave up on the first Senator and it is now being considered by a Houston area Senator.

Chas.

Has there been any news on this matter? Hopefully the new Senator has been more receptive.

Yes, a 3rd Senator is looking at it and may file soon. If she doesn't do it very soon, it likely won't get the traction necessary to pass. Time isn't up until March 3rd, but that's way too late.

Chas.

History has shown that any bill not prefiled stands a much lesser chance of passage.

That may be the case legislature-wide, but not for our gun bills. I don't know what percentage of our bills are pre-filed, but it's not large. Recent high-profile bills we passed there were not pre-filed include:

SB766 - Range Protection bill - filed 2/17/11
SB378 - "Castle Doctrine" filed 1/31/07
HB1815 - Motorist Protection Act - Filed 2/22/07
SB501 - Prohibiting government use of TPC §30.06 - filed 2/14/03
HB2909 - Established TPC §30.06 (among other things) - filed 3/13/97

Chas.

Charles,

I won't get into a "is too" -- "is not" exchange with you, but it is not a "good thing" when a bill is not prefiled.

Richard_B wrote:I don't doubt the list of bills you cite as successful efforts despite their not having been profiled, but why weren't they profiled?

Richard_B wrote:Failure to have a bill prefiled is not a death knell, but the bottom line is that it is worthwhile to have bills profiled.

Richard_B wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

TrueFlog wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

artx wrote:Any updates? There sure seems to be a lot of buzz on open carry....but I know many folks who are 200 times more interested in this process.

Only a small update. I/we gave up on the first Senator and it is now being considered by a Houston area Senator.

Chas.

Has there been any news on this matter? Hopefully the new Senator has been more receptive.

Yes, a 3rd Senator is looking at it and may file soon. If she doesn't do it very soon, it likely won't get the traction necessary to pass. Time isn't up until March 3rd, but that's way too late.

Chas.

History has shown that any bill not prefiled stands a much lesser chance of passage.

Jumping Frog wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Yes, a 3rd Senator is looking at it and may file soon. If she doesn't do it very soon, it likely won't get the traction necessary to pass. Time isn't up until March 3rd, but that's way too late.

We'll flood her inbox and voicemail with polite and respectful requests if you say the word . . .

TrueFlog wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

artx wrote:Any updates? There sure seems to be a lot of buzz on open carry....but I know many folks who are 200 times more interested in this process.

Only a small update. I/we gave up on the first Senator and it is now being considered by a Houston area Senator.

Chas.

Has there been any news on this matter? Hopefully the new Senator has been more receptive.

artx wrote:Any updates? There sure seems to be a lot of buzz on open carry....but I know many folks who are 200 times more interested in this process.

RHenriksen wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:That's not addressed in the proposed bill. That's an operational issue. In Harris County, people with a Frequent Courthouse Visitor badge simply holds that up and walks around the metal detectors. LEOs show their ID or badges, so I suspect Harris County would do the same for CHL's.

Chas.

Interesting... I'm curious (confused) if you mean Harris County courts would do the same *if* this bill is passed, or already might be doing so?

texasmike wrote:Charles, under this proposal, would state court security mirror security at the capital, i.e., one line for CHL holders and a separate line for everyone else? Would CHL-holding attorneys actually be permitted to carry in state courts?

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I will let people know the results when I get the data necessary to create an updated comparison for LEOs. I spoke with the person who processes Open Record Requests and she seems very helpful and eager to get the information to me timely.

Perhaps I should point out a couple of facts. First, no one should interpret my comments as indicating that the LEO community has a bad track record in terms of criminal convictions. That's not the case. Unless the updated data has changed dramatically, I expect to see that LEOs still have an excellent record, just as it was in 2007. I just point out that Texas CHLs have an even better record.

Secondly, I do not intend to publish the data because I know some intellectually dishonest people (a/k/a anti-gunners) will try to drive a wedge between the LEO community and gun owners by claiming we/I are/am attacking them by publishing data. I will give the overall ratios for LEOs.

Chas.

C-dub wrote:

baldeagle wrote:

C-dub wrote:Even if the bill Charles has drafted does pass a hospital will still be able to prohibit us with a proper 30.06 sign. I don't think anyone is going to try and change that. My doctor's office is in an urgent care center that is not posted. They still have the old signs, but if they post a 30.06 I'll be looking for a new doc. I have yet to see an actual hospital that is not posted here in the Dallas area and fortunately, I haven't needed one.

If that's true, then the bill accomplishes nothing. Hospitals already have this power.

Well, IIRC, Charles has stated that they will not trample upon the private property's owners' rights. So, I must admit I'm not entirely sure what we will be gaining. Maybe it will mostly be schools. IDK

shootthesheet wrote:

oldtexan wrote:Charles,

Are you at liberty to discuss whether the legislation being drafted/considered addresses concealed carry on the premises of educational institutions?

Thanks.

gigag04 wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Not only is this an astounding statistic, it is far better than that achieved by Texas law enforcement.

Chas - as we have found in the other thread, this is definitely the case, but I'm curious if you have access to the actual numbers? The best we could in the thread get was not an apples to apples comparison and I think it was 0.3 for LE and 0.24 for CHLs - if you had better data I'd love to bookmark to share with fellow LE folks.

Also - great article, I'm interested to follow this legislative session.

TexasCajun wrote:Sorry for sounding greedy. I figured we've got a chance to gain more ground next session than we've originally planned. Figured why not ask about the whole shebang. I don't drink, so the bar issue isn't really a big one for me. And I don't hang out in bars on a regular basis. Again, just asking.

RedRaider wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

TexasCajun wrote:I like it. Especially the idea of turning the question around -

The question should not be “why would you need a handgun,” it should be “is there a compelling reason to exclude handguns?”

I do have one question and one point to add.

The question: If there is already a prohibition against being intoxicated while carrying concealed, why continue to exclued concealed carry in 51% establishments?

It won't pass without keeping bars off-limits.

TexasCajun wrote:And my one point: Requiring a CHL holder to disarm before entering a prohibited place actually creates more of a public safety issue. When my gun is holstered & concealed, the chance of a negligent discharge is virtually non-existant. However, when I have to unconceal and unholster my weapon to put it in secure storage, the risk of a negligent discharge goes up significantly due to the very nature of having to handle the weapon. Then re-arming after leaving the prohibited place again increases the ND risk. In these circumstances the ND risk is even higher because the weapon-handling is usually taking place in cramped & seated position within a car. Even re-holstering a micro-compact 9mm pistol IWB puts the CHL'er in an awkward, contorting position.

We really don't want to argue that every time a CHL takes his/her gun out of a holster, we are risking an accidental discharge. We know what the opposition will be saying.

Chas.

How about looking at it a different way. Having to leave your gun in the car causes more of a public safety issue as it is no longer under your control and could potentially be stolen by a criminal? Just food for thought.