TexasCHLforum.com

RPBrown wrote:When can we expect either the House to put SB 17 or the Senate to put HB 910 in a committee?

AJSully421 wrote:

Texascrewser wrote:If I'm reading this right, because of Sticklands comment on the amendment it's going to be the end HB910?
Is there any hope for SB17 or how does that work?
Sorry for the dumb question I'm still learning the legislative process.

If the Dutton amendment is not cool with the Senate, they will pass an amendment that strips that language out of the bill and then pass it in that form. Then it will go to conference between the two bodies to be hashed out and finalized.

99% chances are it will not kill the entire HB910.

TexasCajun wrote:

Papa_Tiger wrote:If it is a murder suspect, they already have probable cause to stop you - you match the description of a person of interest.

The ONLY thing this amendment does is prevent harassment by the police of people open carrying a handgun. If you are stopped and asked to identify, they will need to have probable cause other than the fact that you are carrying a handgun openly. If they state they have probable cause, regardless of how flimsy it seems, record the encounter, comply after notifying them of the law and go about your business. It will be sorted out VERY quickly if you do have a CHL and aren't confrontational. If you feel your rights have been violated, speak with the appropriate department, file an FOIA request for the stop including any 911 calls pertaining to it and build a case that it was unjustified. When you have a solid case, take the officer and the department to court.

Frankly I don't think it will be a big deal. Open carry will require some amount of education of the public as well as training of the 911 dispatchers to ask questions and calm down panicked hoplophobes, but I anticipate it will be worked out relatively quickly. It may take a bit more time in urban areas with populations over 1,000,000 uh, I mean 750,000 no wait, 175,000.

This will most likely be what bears out. I can't imagine even a very over zealous officer going on OC hunts for very long if they end up resulting in nothing. The only wildcard to this theory is that if LEOs end up nabbing a few unlicensed OCs in the process, it will extend the hunting expedition period a bit longer.

jmra wrote:

Ruark wrote:Assuming the amendment stands, what legal remedy do you have if a cop DOES stop you and demands your CHL/ID with no probable cause? I would probably cooperate just to avoid a mess, but afterwards, are there any steps that could be taken?

If I were inclined to OC (I doubt I will), I would carry a recording device along with a copy of the legislation.

Ruark wrote:I can see the logic on both sides. On one hand, it would be difficult for a good cop to look the other way upon seeing a black gangbanger strutting down a Dove Springs sidewalk in baggy pants and a sideways baseball cap with a gun on his hip, compared to a middle age yuppie walking to his BMW at Nordstrom's in his Birkenstocks and Polo shirt, accompanied by his wife pushing a baby carriage.

On the other hand, yeah, that screams profiling. Some cops would be reasonable about it, while others would see it as "open season on open carriers" and harass people mercilessly. Even with this amendment, some may stretch credibility in coming up with reasons to detain: "uh, yeah, we've had some breakins lately...." "there's been some trouble in this area, so we're just checking..." just to have an excuse for an "investigatory detainment."

It'll be really interesting to see how all this pans out.

thechl wrote:Isn't the implication of Acevedo's rant that he fully intends for his officers to stop and check any/all open carriers to ensure they have a CHL? Sounds like harassment to me.

So while I didn't feel the need for Dutton's amendment when it was proposed, Acevedo has convinced me of its worth!

TVGuy wrote:

RHenriksen wrote:So what is this 3rd amendment we're voting on now?

LEO can't stop you just for OC

v7a wrote:[ Image ]

Charles L. Cotton wrote:The amendment is a good one; it's worth the wait. There may be more bad ones, but they won't be adopted.

Chas.