TexasCHLforum.com

PBratton wrote:

LSUTiger wrote:I'm with the "take what we can get" crowd.

I've been in the crowd since I got married 37 years ago...

someone's couch must be comfy. Or their SO doesn't read the forum.

oljames3 wrote:
Thirty-four years in Field Artillery gives me a firm understanding of the concept of "close enough". 910 without Dutton/Huffines is close enough. At this point, all else is a bridge too far.

You win quote of the night.

ScooterSissy wrote:

jmra wrote: If you support the passage of OC then the amendment becomes a problem for YOU because as we have learned it will not pass with the amendment.
I think that we forget that it took many sessions to get where we are with CHL and it may take many sessions to get where we want to be. But one thing has held true throughout, the all or nothing approach has never worked in our favor.

In my opinion, if we have a majority of Republicans in both sides of the Texas legislature, and they won't pass a bill that contains an amendment articulating and codifying a known 4th amendment issue; then we have some of the wrong R's in office.

While I understand your sentiment, it's been pretty well established that the problem was not the actual amendment, but that LEOs (mainly the political higher-ups) saw it as poke in the eye AND with CJ, et al... running their pie holes about it being de-facto unlicensed carry, it was an albatross. And yes, that was supposed to be lucky until some jackhole killed it. Well... CJ and Stickland killed it and Huffines hung it around our necks. I too liked the amendment at first. You can check the posts I made. I didn't fully realize how little logic plays a role when butts get hurt.

It's not that Rs don't like the 4th amendment, it's that they don't like being perceived as cop-haters. Like it or not, that was the message that was being repeated over and over and the ONLY one they heard. You can curse the darkness (Huffines) or light a candle (Huffman). Pity Huffines blew it out.

baseballguy2001 wrote:Anybody that says that language is un-needed is either terribly mis-informed, or a government lobbyist.

Or trying to get SOMETHING passed so we can move forward instead of losing OC indefinitely.

jerry_r60 wrote:We learned the other night that it's not over until it's over. We have a threat of a filibuster now and that may very well happen but who knows what other deals might get struck between now and the end. Doesn't look good but just saying......

Sorry. But I think the Fat Lady and Don Merideth have taken the stage. Given what others in the know have said and other threads that have started, I think everyone with skin in the game is ready for the show to be over and concentrate on '17. ...Possibly without OC if "those elements" that supposedly support it can't be contained.

Sucks but... I hope I'm wrong. At this point, not coming up for a vote at all may be better than a Money-Drive filibuster or a down-in-flames vote.

Don't see any text.

But, does it really matter? We can't stop a filibuster?

pdxmale wrote:84(R) HB 910
Relating to the authority of a person who is licensed to carry a handgun to openly carry a holstered handgun; creating criminal offenses.
5/28/2015 S Conference committee report filed
View all actions

already???? Oh Dear.

Is that kinda like the only responsible thing to do is report anyone you disagree with who has a gun so he can "check them out"? I mean, it does, "...keep him up at night."

If I hear the word, "FEEL," one more time...

OH MY! That's a stack of cards!

safety1 wrote:

arthurcw wrote:So, "Don't go to Austin and OC." Basically.

If you have a valid CHL and are doing nothing wrong....What does it matter?

Because my guess is that Acevedo will instruct APD to "Check 'em all." I don't want to be stopped every few hours and be asked, "Papieren bitte?" I'd rather just go about my business with my family and not take the chance on getting a D-bag who thinks I'm compensating for something.

While 99% of the cops won't give a flip and will be doing it because they have to and 99% of gun owners will just hand over their ID with all the giddiness of a 40-something being carded for beer, I don't want some overzealous t*rd-in-the-punchbowl (on either side) getting into a Klingon P*cker Swinging contest shouting about "Mah Authoratah!" or "Mah Rights!" WIll it happen? I have no clue. But seeing what passes for restraint among OCT and MDA(and their supporting Police Chiefs), I have my concerns. I'll just elect to conceal in some places until this runs its course. Pick your battles.

I would prefer the amendment to lessen the chance of an LEO v. OCT mistake that leads to bad press.

So, "Don't go to Austin and OC." Basically.