TexasCHLforum.com

K5GU wrote:FYI...HB554 Springer - Relating to a defense to prosecution for the offense of possessing or carrying a weapon in or into the secured area of an airport, was discussed in today's Homeland Security & Public Safety meeting.

nightmare69 wrote:If campus carry passes, what will this mean for students with CHLs who live in dorms on campus? I hope they will be able to store their firearm in their room vs only in their vehicle as it is now.

ScooterSissy wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:... How is Patrick supposed to bring a bill to the floor of the Senate if it does not clear a committee? Hint: He cannot!
...

Maybe the mistake of many of us was not questioning him further when he ran. Instead of accepting that he would fight for OC as Lt Gov, maybe we should have been asking him exactly how he was going to do that.

It's the representatives job to write, sponsor, promote and get bills passed. What do you want Patrick to do specifically?

That's why I said that maybe "we" (figuratively speaking) should have asked what specifically he planned on doing when he made OC part of his campaign. Apparently, he's now saying he can't do much, which is disappointing whether it's true or not, since he did make it part of his campaign.

Up to this point, I think he's done what he can and fulfilled his campaign promise. What more do you expect, specifically?

I guess I'm missing what he did to support it. Can you elaborate?

Reduced what it takes to get a bill to a floor vote, made his chair appointments, indicated his support for open carry and reduced the number of democratic committee chairs. What more can he as Lt. Gov. do at this point.

He can't draft legislation and put it to a floor vote by himself. There is a process that has to be followed. Seems like some believe he has some authority to issue executive actions or such that will make OC a law. Do you guys expect him to pull an Obama?

viewtopic.php?f=133&t=75973" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I suspect we're going to have to disagree, but here are my counters:

If "the votes aren't there", then reducing the number of of votes needed to bring it to a floor vote (with that number "apparently" still being too high) did nothing to advocate.
If the chair appointments he made aren't doing it, then did he make the right chair appointments?
Indicating "support" for a position that a politician believes won't be voted on is an old trick. It's been done for years now.

I suspect that there is plenty of "back room pressure" that can be applied by the most powerful position in Texas politics. Maybe he's doing that, and it ain't working. I don't know.

But, I don't buy the argument that "there's nothing he can do" when it's placed alongside of "he promised to do something". If the former is true, then he should have never done the latter.

ScooterSissy wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:... How is Patrick supposed to bring a bill to the floor of the Senate if it does not clear a committee? Hint: He cannot!
...

Maybe the mistake of many of us was not questioning him further when he ran. Instead of accepting that he would fight for OC as Lt Gov, maybe we should have been asking him exactly how he was going to do that.

It's the representatives job to write, sponsor, promote and get bills passed. What do you want Patrick to do specifically?

That's why I said that maybe "we" (figuratively speaking) should have asked what specifically he planned on doing when he made OC part of his campaign. Apparently, he's now saying he can't do much, which is disappointing whether it's true or not, since he did make it part of his campaign.

Up to this point, I think he's done what he can and fulfilled his campaign promise. What more do you expect, specifically?

I guess I'm missing what he did to support it. Can you elaborate?

ScooterSissy wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:... How is Patrick supposed to bring a bill to the floor of the Senate if it does not clear a committee? Hint: He cannot!
...

Maybe the mistake of many of us was not questioning him further when he ran. Instead of accepting that he would fight for OC as Lt Gov, maybe we should have been asking him exactly how he was going to do that.

It's the representatives job to write, sponsor, promote and get bills passed. What do you want Patrick to do specifically?

That's why I said that maybe "we" (figuratively speaking) should have asked what specifically he planned on doing when he made OC part of his campaign. Apparently, he's now saying he can't do much, which is disappointing whether it's true or not, since he did make it part of his campaign.

ScooterSissy wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:... How is Patrick supposed to bring a bill to the floor of the Senate if it does not clear a committee? Hint: He cannot!
...

Maybe the mistake of many of us was not questioning him further when he ran. Instead of accepting that he would fight for OC as Lt Gov, maybe we should have been asking him exactly how he was going to do that.

XinTX wrote:I'm not "attacking" Patrick. Just calling him to task for the disconnect between his campaign rhetoric and his actions. Patrick has been in the TX Senate and had some good inside knowledge of the math involved in getting things done. It's not like some political neophyte was coming in. And he campaigned on "fighting for OC". No one forced him to put that on his list, he chose to do so. The TX GOP also did so. Now there are only four people in this process I can directly affect with my vote in this process. Abbott has already publicly stated that if an OC bill reaches his desk he will sign it. My Representative and Senator said they will support it. Patrick said he not only would support it, but "fight for" it. But now he appears to be backing away from that.

If, during my interview, I made commitments to meet certain goals and objectives, then after being on the job a short time tell my employer "no, can't get it done", I shouldn't expect a glowing performance review.

Look, I'm no hard core OC supporter. If OC were law today I can think of only a couple very specific instances where I would do so. But I am a big believer in personal liberty. I do believe people should have the choice to do so. And we're now in a long period where the Republicans have control of the legislative and executive branches in TX. But history shows, nothing is permanent. Does anyone think that if the Dems held the seats the GOP now holds that they wouldn't get gun control bills through in one session? If we can't expect big wins while holding as many of the levers of power we now hold, we should brace for some significant losses once we're back to minority status. A lot of what prohibits OC stems from laws put in place during Reconstruction. If we can't undo a bad law in over 100 years, I just don't know what to think.

XinTX wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

XinTX wrote:I'm not going to point too much of a finger at Watkins and his band of merry cohorts. And it's not like anyone had no reason to think Patrick wouldn't support 2A legislation and OC.

[ Image ]

How is Dan Patrick supposed to bring an open-carry bill to the Senate floor for a vote if the bill never gets voted out of committee favorably?

Chas.

I suspect the heartburn derives from announcing less than 2 weeks into the session that open carry is on life support. From the outside, it might appear that not much effort was made to bring about something that was a rather prominent campaign promise.

Not trying to put words in anyone's mouth... not mine either.

If it's not voted out of committee, the GOP (who made this a prominent campaign issue) has no one to blame but themselves. They have near historic majorities in both houses of the legislature. They don't have to overcome the old "blocker bill" or 2/3 rule any longer. And being the majority, they controlled who was on the committees. But a week in we have the Lt Governor who campaigned on the promise to "fight" for such legislation come out publicly and wave the John Boehner Memorial surrender flag.