TexasCHLforum.com

TexasCajun

jmra wrote:
G.A. Heath wrote:NAGR and OCT are cut from the same cloth. After demanding unlicensed carry or nothing OCT suddenly started claiming credit for getting licensed OC to the point that it's at now and suddenly I am hearing that they are going back to attacking licensed carry again. I am already hearing some weird rumors getting started about licensed OC as well, here are four of the most laughable:

Rumor 1: If licensed OC passes and you have a concealed carry license from your state while your state has unlicensed open carry then you can only concealed carry in Texas if your state has reciprocity with Texas.

Rumor 2: Existing CHLs will not be allowed to open carry, they will have to surrender their license and wait 30/60/90 days before starting the process to get a new license.

Rumor 3: Licensed OC will destroy reciprocity.

Rumor 4: Licensed OC will be the only way anyone can carry in Texas if SB17/HB910 pass.

I am willing to bet most, if not all of these are started by unlicensed carry or nothing supporters trying to kill licensed carry because they feel that will give unlicensed carry a chance.
They are either intentionally starting false rumors or they are too stupid to understand the bills. I think it's a toss up.

Looks like a combination of inability to understand and intentionally spreading false information. 1 and 3 - inability to understand; 2 and 4 - intentionally false.

TexasCajun

BigGuy wrote:Somehow I wound up on another mailing list. TXGR (Texas Gun Rights.) I just got an email where they are ranting about SB17 (See in part below.)

They are painting Dan patrick as an anti gun, and calling SB-17 a step in the wrong direction.

I don't send that much money out. How do I wind up on these whacky mailing lists?

The state Senate, wrangled by Lt. Governor Dan Patrick, passed a limp-wristed Open Carry bill (S.B. 17) full of anti-gun restrictions.

They’re hoping gun rights activists will be appeased and finally leave them alone.

You see, tens of thousands of Texans have contacted their legislators in recent months demanding Constitutional Carry.

And we’re not going to fall for this!

S.B.17 is far from the true pro-gun reform Texas needs, and is arguably a step in the wrong direction as it increases the government’s power to license away our rights.

That’s why it’s vital that you call Dan Patrick TODAY at (512) 463-0001 and demand that he give Constitutional Carry a vote!

Don’t you think gun rights supporters have a right to know who those anti-gun Senators are?

Myopia at its best...

TexasCajun

txglock21 wrote:
mojo84 wrote:It doesn't matter what is passed, there will always be some that would find something to complain about.

There are very few that have the ability to quick draw at the speed necessary to make a significant difference in the outcome of a situation. I think all this quick draw talk stems from childhood memories of watching old westerns with the main street duels.

Now, IF we ever get to the point where there are ten to fifteen+ people in a bank or store carrying their guns in open view, that may serve as a deterrent and cause a bad guy to have a second thought. One person carrying won't have much, if any, impact. I just don't think a regular person is going to have the same deterrent effect as a visible uniformed cop that is carry his weapon.

I like OC for the occasional time that I need or want to remove my cover garment or not have to worry about tucking my shirt over my gun. In other words, convenience and comfort, is why I like it.

Just my opinion.
This question has nothing to do with your post. I quoted it just because it made me think of something I want to ask. My bank has a "gun buster" sign on the door, no 30.06. I have always just walked past it and smiled because of C/C. I'm just wondering if/when open carry passes and they just leave this one silly sign up, would somebody still open carry pass this sign? I know I would still C/C just not to be hassled or told to leave because of it. I'm not an in your face kind of guy. I very rarely go inside anyway, but....
Curious on y'alls thoughts.

Based on reaction from some to the senate's passage of licensed oc with additional provisions, I imagine there will be quite a few who will open carry past the gun buster signs and then point out how those signs cannot be enforced. I hope that the fallout will be limited to the appearance of 30.07 signs, but I won't be surprised if there's an increase in 30.06 in addition to 30.07s.

TexasCajun

And so it begins. A pretty good oc bill is 2/3 of the way to becoming law (passed in the Senate with the governor on board to sign it), ending a restriction that's been in place for 125 years. But rather than see it for the victory that it is, some are going to myopicly bash it because of a few minor concessions. I hope it's not the case, but I suppose this will be the drum beat for the next 2yrs.

TexasCajun

locke_n_load wrote:
ELB wrote:
Kolamer wrote:[...
What is the calendars committee and why would they prove to be troublesome?
I, and many others, believe the Speaker killed it because he is cozy with the Texas academic establishment, particularly UT, and they wanted it squelched.

A similar fate may await OC.
Doubtful, not with all the publicity that OC is getting this time around, IMO. If it doesn't come up for a vote, it will be very known who did it.

That was the jist of a thread earlier this year surrounding a recorded vote for Speaker of the House. Unlike past sessions, there is a recorded vote for or against Strauss this session. OC was fast-tracked through the Senate, so if it stalls in the House all fingers will be pointing at the Speaker and those that renewed his term. I'm cautiously optimistic because the House committee chairs are shaded a bit more toward the conservative than in years past.

TexasCajun

Now on to the House, where the REAL battle begins...

TexasCajun · Re: SB17 OC Bill On Intent Calendar for 3-16-2015. They're on SB 17!

They're on SB 17!

TexasCajun

I imagine they get all of this noncontroversial stuff out of the way early so that they can get down to wrangling out the stuff that needs it.

TexasCajun

http://tlcsenate.granicus.com/MediaPlay ... ent_id=929" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

TexasCajun

Glockster wrote:
CoffeeNut wrote:Does the retention training amendment mean I won't be able to OC until after I renew my CHL?

That amendment was tabled so that won't be a requirement.

No, that amendment will be added to the bill. But it won't apply to existing chl since we have no renewal class. It will affect new chl taking the class and instructors - which is why the law won't take effect until Jan.

TexasCajun

Charles L. Cotton wrote:
gdanaher wrote:I heard nothing in the language that stipulated a period of time for training. Open carry can be covered in 10 minutes.
Correct and nothing changes the current class limitations of a minimum 4 hours. It won't take any time at all to "teach/cover" the issue. Sen. Estes made it clear that the amendment did not require demonstration of weapon retention techniques.

Chas.

Will current CHLs be grandfathered into the additional training requirement or will we need to get updated/refreshed training that includes whatever oc topics would be required?

TexasCajun

After reading the play-by-play from today's session, I feel much better about opting to go to the range instead of watching the proceedings online. Much obliged to those of you who did watch & contributed commentary.

TexasCajun

The House companion bills for open carry and campus carry are scheduled for committee hearing next week, so I'll be cautiously optimistic that things will get moving soon - for now.

Search found 13 matches