CALL TO ACTION: SB905

[Keith B]

Well said. I think we should vote for/against legislators based on what they do for/against us. If they do something for my neighbor, then my neighbor should vote for them. However, that doesn't earn them my vote.

I think the baby step comment is valid. If baby steps are the best I can get with a Republican majority (60-70%) in the Texas legislature, then I think I should vote to get back to the Rep-Dem mix that got us the big step of the CHL law in 1995.

Well, it took a lot of years to get CHL in 1995. There were almost 16 years of working on the legislators to get it. So, it was no different than what we are seeing today with other bills; that it takes time for them to be move through and get the legislators to warm up to your proposals.

[M2K]

+10000000000

Amendment or no, I can't support SB905. In fact, I am ashamed that Dan Patrick, the conservative Republican senator who represents my district, was one of the authors of this totally unnecessary bill.

The claim, voiced by Sen. Patrick, is that legislators, judges, statewide elected officials and others, like non-commissioned employees of the Department of Public Safety are high-profile targets for assassins. For some reason, the Governor, city mayors, elected municipal and county officials and non-sworn employees of the state's police and county sheriff departments are not. Let's look at the facts: since 1815, exactly 19 people who would qualify under SB905 have been assassinated in the United States. One was in Texas (John Woods, a federal judge, killed by a hitman for a Mexican drug lord in 1979). Ten of those killings occurred in the last 100 years. Likewise, ten happened in the period from 1871, when the Texas Legislature stripped the citizens of Texas of the right to legally carry a handgun at all, until 1995, when George W. Bush signed a limited restoration of those rights under strict state control. That's ten in the entire country; I'll bet a lot more than ten Texan citizens were murdered in that period who would have been alive had they or another citizen been able to legally carry a handgun. Heck, we lost more than ten at Luby's in 1991!

To put the numbers in another perspective, whooping cough, scarlet fever and malaria are rare in the United States. Yet more Americans died of those diseases in 2007 alone than all federal and state legislators and judges assassinated in the last century.

Here's another kicker: Not one of these assassinations took place in a location that would be authorized by SB905. Most happened either in the victim's home or at the victim's place of work. The attack on Gabrielle Giffords, in which federal judge John Roll was killed) took place in a supermarket parking lot in the middle of the morning. Under Texas law, not even a CHL would have been required for armed intervention: Texans can carry a concealed handgun in their personal vehicle without a permit.

You can talk about "baby steps" all you want; babies fall down, too, and SB905 is a prime example of this. Unless a potential amendment extends the same expansion of permitted carry to all CHL holders, SB905 needs to end its days in the House, without passage. This is sheer, naked elitism and self-serving on the part of our elected officials; the so-called justification does not hold water, even under the most cursory examination.

SB905 is scheduled for public hearings on May 17. If you are in Austin, a visit to the State Capitol might be worthwhile. In the meantime, you should contact your Texas State Representative (http://www.house.state.tx.us/resources/ ... s/#who_rep) and left them know you oppose SB905 as passed by the Senate. Tell them the language needs to be extended to cover all Texans with Concealed Handgun Licenses or the measure needs to be defeated.

[stevie_d_64]

Easier to pass.
They can say, "Here are folks who have passed a 10-15 year probationary period without shooting up the shopping mall. We are now going to allow them to carry in bars."
That's a much easier sale than, "Here is a 21 year old about to enter a bar for the first time. We're going to allow him to do so while packing a concealed handgun."
And it does get a foot in the door. Assuming these CHLs on their third renewal don't go shoot up the bars, in the near future we should be able to persuade them to reduce or eliminate the "probationary period."

That is actually a fair statement, I agree, it is exactly the same kind of logic my Dad and I discussed this morning...But a 21 year old who has passed and obtained the license will have been through the same class and discussion that we have had, or thought about to ourselves about the combination of drugs, alcohol and firearms...WE all know that it is a bad combination, and that there will not be anything stopping you or I, or that 21 year old from patronizing that place...But good judgement...

Besides, what elitist politician is going to go into a bar, armed, for any reason??? I don't know too many that would feel the need to do so, to socialize, drink, cut loose, whatever you want to call it, and be a little loose on the control of his/her weapon...I believe the consumption of alcohol and the carrying of firearms is something the Texas CHL community as a whole frowns upon, and that alone gives almost enough pause to keep that from being too much of a problem...I'm sure some would say I would be wrong, and they are probably right, but we have seen no statistics on this...So I only speculate based upon years of discussion, here, and other venues, both live and on the internet on this issue...

I believe the Texas CHL delivers a dose of maturity, that turns most of us into tea-totallers, and old fuddy-duddies...I'm kinda ok with that premise...And if you still desire to go out and drink yourself into oblivion, thats ok as well, I think most of us would hang the hogleg up on the wall, just to keep it from becoming an issue before heading out on that adventure...

Just my opinion...

[stevie_d_64]

The thing is - everyone is applying rational thought to something that is frequently completely irrational - politics and politicians!

emotion wants to slam any bill that doesn't do something for me personally - fight down that feeling and look at the endgame.

I actually am looking at the possibility of this bill coming to law...And I am still opposed on several fronts...One of them you just illuded to...

I am actually qualified as the bill is written now to take advantage of the provisions...My longevity as a Texas CHL licensee is ripe of history and ardent support for all of the "tweeks", "baby steps" we have helped support and lobby intensly for, for YEARS...We have also been stalwart in the defense of the provisions when our overall right to keep and bear arms is attacked...That goes for those of us who have been in this game for quite some time, and those who are new to the process...I believe people who are new to the "plastic" have just as much a play, and a role, in this as some of us "more seasoned" citizens...(I know, for some silly reason I am going to catch flak for that comment...But I believe most will know why I said it... )

Emotion should have NO play in this at all...If anything, this is a gut feeling I have, that this bill will create and emotional void we DO NOT NEED in our CHL community in the state of Texas...I am no better than you, or anyone else when it comes to your right to keep and bear arms, and I see this as an un-necessary "baby-step" to "eventually" getting everyone who has a Texas CHL up to this "level" (for lack of a better term)...This is a political play of monsterous liberal and moderate faction within certain political affiliations, and being deep into the political party I am affiliated with, it flies in the face of conservative values, and I am not impressed...That's as harsh as I can be...

I will never hedge my bets on the future based upon political intent...

Like you said, it is irrational...And I really like that analysis...

[Right2Carry]

I contacted my State Senator Wendy Davis and let her know that I wanted SB 905 amended to include all CHL holders.
I appreciate all the hard work Charles and others have done for CHL holders in the Great State of Texas.

Good luck getting Wendy Davis on board.

I didn't elect her but she is my State Senator so I made my feelings known.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Do you consider campus carry and employee parking lots baby steps?

Yes they are baby steps, especially the watered down versions that seem most likely to pass.

I don't want a car salesman to sell me a lemon. If he does, I won't do business with him again. If he tells me I should "make lemonade" you can bet I'll tell all my friends.

Then you will never be satisfied. Do you consider everything accomplished since 1995 to be merely baby steps? What do you consider to be something other than baby steps?

Chas.

[sugar land dave]

... It infringes on our rights of self actualization and we cannot permit this sad state of affairs to exist. These facts are all the more egregious considering the fact that we cannot all carry all the time and everywhere.

Bonus points for you for the correct usage of the words "actualization" and "egregious." You have my "Bravo!"

PS: you should read my above post on page 4 about kissing a pig with lipstick.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I am all for advancement but advancement should be for everyone, . . ."

Then nothing that has been accomplished since 1995 meets your criteria. No gun-related bill will every be for everyone; it's a political impossibility. You are preaching Utopia, not political reality. Had your philosophy been followed by NRA and TSRA, no one would be carrying a defensive handgun anywhere, nor would a single one of the pro-gun bills we've passed in the last 16 years have ever seen the Governor's desk for signature.

Philosophy and theory sound great, but they don't get legislation passed.

If Texas wants to be in the forefront, it better get a move on. We claim pride in our western heritage yet Texas is one of just two states (and Oklahoma may leave it as the only state) that doesn't permit unlicensed open carry in some form. Even California allows it in some circumstances.

Somehow I knew you were heading to open-carry.

We have one of the most onerous licensing processes in the U.S.: it's actually quicker to be cleared to be a police officer in Texas than it is to get a CHL.

I was a COP for 15 years and this is dead wrong!

The parking lot issue should have been a slam-dunk long ago. Campus carry should not have to be passed through parliamentary procedures -- it should have sailed through standing proud.

Parking lots should have been a "slam-dunk" by what standard; your opinion? You are showing a great deal of political naiveté. Campus carry didn't get out of the Senate on a parliamentary trick; it was prevented from getting to the Senate floor because of absurd Senate rules that allows minority tyranny via the 2/3 rule.

In 1871, the Texas Legislature passed the most restrictive handgun law in the United States -- even in New York, you could get a permit to legally carry. It was a Jim Crow law, designed to keep guns out of the hands of newly-freed slaves, but it remained on the books until CHL legislation became law in 1995. After 124 years of denial, is there some particular reason we should continue to put up with the foot-dragging in Austin? And is there any reason we should put up with legislation that confers extra privileges on a few, who voluntarily sought and spent gobs of money winning, the offices they hold? They knew the risks when they ran; they haven't changed. If they can't share those privileges with those who put them in office, they don't deserve them.

Okay, get back to reality. This isn't 1871 or New York and this ranting doesn't help pass legislation in 2011. Serious discussion is welcome, but simply blasting everything about Texas from 1871 forward isn't.

Chas.

[sugar land dave]

This bill seems rather imperious to me. It's whole notion seems just "wrong-headed" as my father would have said. I could compare the current situation to an Emperor's court throwing a party for themselves while their people suffer. When faced with the public outcry for the Legion to remind the Palace that they exist to serve the people, the Elite invite a few Centurions to the party and suggest that in a few years they'll let the rest of the Centurions attend a similar party.

I know that's the way Texas politics work. I know that sometimes they are in effect telling me I must kiss a pig. I shouldn't have to like it just because they put some lipstick on it.

I love this country. I work in support of it each day, as do most on this board. Some times I just ponder if those at the top occasionally become as wonderful yet uncaring as Marie Antoinette.

Let me also say that I personally never had any interest in this bill. From the start I assumed those in Austin would take care of themselves. To them I would say, "Just do what you normally do, and..... forget the lipstick."

I am not a lawyer or politician, just one of the people who believe that the country is the people, not the ground they stand on. May God bless the American people, those in Texas, and especially Charles and the Moderators for allowing me the freedom and the place to comment.

For the evening crowd......

[Charles L. Cotton]

Our newly joined members who have focused on this thread and bill need to look at my earlier post. I'm not saying SB905 is a good bill; I'm asking people to support the Kleinschmidt amendment to SB905. As many have said, there is a reason for this but I can't say at this time.

Chas.

[M2K]

Our newly joined members who have focused on this thread and bill need to look at my earlier post. I'm not saying SB905 is a good bill; I'm asking people to support the Kleinschmidt amendment to SB905. As many have said, there is a reason for this but I can't say at this time.

Chas.

I've read your earlier posts and most everything on this board for the last few years. It is one of the better boards on the internet consisting of a very intelligent membership. I’m usually not a “joiner” but I joined this board because I just couldn't stand the implied arrogance and elitism of this bill and the Kleinschmidt amendment.

Why should I accept your hidden reason at face value?

Mike

[74novaman]

Our newly joined members who have focused on this thread and bill need to look at my earlier post. I'm not saying SB905 is a good bill; I'm asking people to support the Kleinschmidt amendment to SB905. As many have said, there is a reason for this but I can't say at this time.

Chas.

I've read your earlier posts and most everything on this board for the last few years. It is one of the better boards on the internet consisting of a very intelligent membership. I’m usually not a “joiner” but I joined this board because I just couldn't stand the implied arrogance and elitism of this bill and the Kleinschmidt amendment.

Why should I accept your hidden reason at face value?

Mike

Then don't accept it. Don't call in support. But you've stated you lurked here for several years. Do you think antis don't watch to see what were up to? Why show our hand? Charles has proven time and time again to have the interests of all Texas chls as his guiding principles. You have 3 posts. For all we know you're John woods. Respectfully, he has nothing to prove to you.

ETA: Welcome to the forum. I hope you will post more.

I may not like the fact that Charles can't just tell us all the plans to get things done, but since this is an open forum that anyone can read, letting the antis read our cards would only make all of our lives harder. For now, I'm willing to trust that backing this amendment will help CHLs in Texas in some way. If you don't feel that it will, by all means, feel free to not support it, or even phone in opposition to the measure. But don't ask us to reveal our cards to our enemies. That won't help anyone.

[sugar land dave]

...Why should I accept your hidden reason at face value?

Mike

Welcome to the board, Mike. Technically you are right, in that a hidden reason has no face value, as it is unseen, not declared. Now, if Charles were the face value, I believe in his sincerity. However there are those yet unseen, undeclared within the amendment push. What are their motives and what price is to be paid? That is what I seem to hear you saying, and I cannot say that you are entirely wrong.

I know everyday people are tired of the Texas politics, but that didn't stop me from voting today. We should participate as best we can when we can. Don't let divisions on either side distract you from thinking your own thoughts. Letting passion overcome reason is not a good thing. Now passion with reason......

I hope you will continue to voice your opinions now that you have joined. I believe you will enjoy it even more than before.

[M2K]

Our newly joined members who have focused on this thread and bill need to look at my earlier post. I'm not saying SB905 is a good bill; I'm asking people to support the Kleinschmidt amendment to SB905. As many have said, there is a reason for this but I can't say at this time.

Chas.

I've read your earlier posts and most everything on this board for the last few years. It is one of the better boards on the internet consisting of a very intelligent membership. I’m usually not a “joiner” but I joined this board because I just couldn't stand the implied arrogance and elitism of this bill and the Kleinschmidt amendment.

Why should I accept your hidden reason at face value?

Mike

Then don't accept it. Don't call in support. But you've stated you lurked here for several years. Do you think antis don't watch to see what were up to? Why show our hand? Charles has proven time and time again to have the interests of all Texas chls as his guiding principles. You have 2 posts. For all we know you're John woods. Respectfully, he has nothing to prove to you.

I don't who is John Woods?

That's 3 posts now 4 seeing as you're counting.

[sugar land dave]

MK2, 74 novaman is really an ok guy. The board has for the last month seen some pretty heavy trolling by newly joined people. He's just feeling a little defensive of Charles which I hope you can learn to forgive most of us for.

I still bid you welcome!

PS: I don't know John Woods either.