Agree, and to some extent, I give them credit for coming over and reading what's here, educating themselves on what "the other side" says. That may not be their motive but to wade through and find the quotes, they must see other stuff too. If I'm against someone else in politics, war, debate I'd want to know how they think, what information they use etc so I can counter. We should assume that takes place here.Dave2 wrote:It's a public site... saying we have spies here is kinda like accusing the Russians of spying on us because they read the New York Times.Beiruty wrote:We either have spies, moles, or both on this site.TVGuy wrote:Yeah, this is why I voiced my concern about that survey.jerry_r60 wrote:Testimony given in support of the bill just quoted the survey we had on this site, saying people would intentionally walk past a non-compliant sign.
Search found 10 matches
Return to “Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06”
- Thu Apr 09, 2015 5:42 pm
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
- Replies: 86
- Views: 16624
Re: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
- Tue Apr 07, 2015 4:05 pm
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
- Replies: 86
- Views: 16624
Re: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
It was frustrating to hear someone testifying against the bill to so easily give an opening to advance the bill. Specially when it was from someone representing a 2A organization.TexasCajun wrote:That's what I was thinking. There's no way that Rep Nevarez would be willing to take the teeth out of 30.06 without some ulterior motive. Since the Kory Watkins stunt painted him as the Mom's poster-boy he's itching to find a way to stick it to Texas gun owners.Charles L. Cotton wrote:That's a trap. Step 1) repeal the size and specific wording requirements for 30.06 signs as well as the penalties; step 2) CHLs ignore the signs; step 3) add criminal penalties to TPC §30.06 in 2017 because the law has no teeth and CHLs ignore property owners wishes. Also, why should TPC 30.05 have criminal penalties, but not TPC §30.06steveincowtown wrote:jerry_r60 wrote:Testimony is over. The bill author closed with an opening for an amendment to take away the criminal penalty, that's what it sounded like to me. If this bill passed, I'd prefer that amendment than not, but It would be better to not have the bill and work to remove the criminal penalty from the existing 30.06.
Really? If there is no criminal penalty they can make the gun busters sign any sign that says "pull" or "push" and it is just fine by me.
Come on folks, this isn't hard to figure out.
Chas.
- Tue Apr 07, 2015 3:49 pm
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
- Replies: 86
- Views: 16624
Re: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
ELB wrote:I would be wary of a late-breaking change that alleges to remove the criminal penalty in exchange for weakening the sign requirement. Specifically, I would be wary that other sections of the law could used to criminally penalize going past a sign, which is what I think some previous posters were bringing up or asking questions about.
If TSRA/Charles examines the changes and gives a , then OK, but short of that, I'd say this bill needs to stop.
It would be fun to see an bill that started out trying to make things difficult for CHL'ers turned into a positive 2A step forward, tho.
- Tue Apr 07, 2015 3:14 pm
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
- Replies: 86
- Views: 16624
Re: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
The discussion that was going on in the testimony wasn't just removing the criminal penalty from the existing 30.06, it was a modified version with substantial change to the sign requirements. The bill may not pass however there was testimony and then a couple comments between the committee memebers suggesting the idea that the bill would be more palatable with an amendment removing the penalty.Bladed wrote:Removing the criminal penalty associated with PC Section 30.06 wouldn't necessarily change PC Section 30.05, which currently states:steveincowtown wrote:Hold on. I changed my mind already. Even though 30.06 wouldn't apply, wouldn't it just revert back to 30.05? And ....jerry_r60 wrote:Just because I won't be punished, if the code says I should not be carrying past the sign because the business owner doesnt' want me in there, I would not. I'd be happy that I wouldn't be in trouble if I missed a sign.steveincowtown wrote:jerry_r60 wrote:Testimony is over. The bill author closed with an opening for an amendment to take away the criminal penalty, that's what it sounded like to me. If this bill passed, I'd prefer that amendment than not, but It would be better to not have the bill and work to remove the criminal penalty from the existing 30.06.
Really? If there is no criminal penalty they can make the gun busters sign any sign that says "pull" or "push" and it is just fine by me.2) "Notice" means:
(A) oral or written communication by the owner or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner;
With that said, I seriously doubt that the Texas Legislature is going to remove all criminal penalties associated with PC Section 30.06.(f) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that:
(1) the basis on which entry on the property or land or in the building was forbidden is that entry with a handgun was forbidden; and
(2) the person was carrying a concealed handgun and a license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, to carry a concealed handgun.
- Tue Apr 07, 2015 2:50 pm
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
- Replies: 86
- Views: 16624
Re: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
Just because I won't be punished, if the code says I should not be carrying past the sign because the business owner doesnt' want me in there, I would not. I'd be happy that I wouldn't be in trouble if I missed a sign.steveincowtown wrote:jerry_r60 wrote:Testimony is over. The bill author closed with an opening for an amendment to take away the criminal penalty, that's what it sounded like to me. If this bill passed, I'd prefer that amendment than not, but It would be better to not have the bill and work to remove the criminal penalty from the existing 30.06.
Really? If there is no criminal penalty they can make the gun busters sign any sign that says "pull" or "push" and it is just fine by me.
- Tue Apr 07, 2015 2:39 pm
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
- Replies: 86
- Views: 16624
Re: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
Testimony is over. The bill author closed with an opening for an amendment to take away the criminal penalty, that's what it sounded like to me. If this bill passed, I'd prefer that amendment than not, but It would be better to not have the bill and work to remove the criminal penalty from the existing 30.06.
- Tue Apr 07, 2015 2:32 pm
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
- Replies: 86
- Views: 16624
Re: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
The testimony is going on now live.rivertripper wrote:For those who miss Tuesday's action on HB 2405 here is the link to archived broadcasts
for Texas House Committees:
http://www.house.state.tx.us/video-audi ... dcasts/84/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Select the April 7th, 10:30 a.m., Homeland Security and Public Safety Committee hearing
- Tue Apr 07, 2015 2:11 pm
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
- Replies: 86
- Views: 16624
Re: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
Testimony given in support of the bill just quoted the survey we had on this site, saying people would intentionally walk past a non-compliant sign.
- Tue Apr 07, 2015 2:05 pm
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
- Replies: 86
- Views: 16624
Re: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
I got very uncomfortable with the Open Carry Texas representative testifying. He was saying they would change there vote from Against to For if the criminal penalty was removed. I'd love to not have the criminal penalty on the current 30.06 but that's not the only reason for opposing HB 2405. There has been some testimony that argued against the bill because of the danger of accidentally walking past a smaller sign and being arrested. That's a good argument but it's not the only one. I got very uncomfortable with saying support would shift to the bill if the penalty was removed from this bill.
- Tue Apr 07, 2015 11:19 am
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
- Replies: 86
- Views: 16624
Re: Call-To-Action: HB2405 Gutting TPC §30.06
All calls made other than to Navarez.