We didn't end up where we are overnight. So we have to remember that removing restrictions and increasing availability won't be accomplished overnight either. In 2013, the number of class hours for a CHL was reduced by half. Just that measure by itself increased accessibility AND decreased restrictions. Granted, it wasn't anything earth-shattering or monumental. But it was a step in the right direction.TXBO wrote:mojo84 wrote:TXBO wrote:I believe your philosophy of "supporting bills that provide the most benefit to most people" is an admirable approach. I would personally benefit from being able to carry more places but I would argue that only having 846k+ people in Texas that can legally carry is disappointing. I'd like it to be a priority to see that number multiply.Charles L. Cotton wrote: ... We've passed many great bills and have made great strides in expanding Second Amendment rights, but I believe that HB308 should have been the cornerstone of the 2015 Texas Legislative Session -- but it wasn't. I'm mad and I'm sick that HB308 went nowhere; it is no better off than HB195 or SB342 and I'm not happy. However, I understand why neither the NRA nor TSRA put their political muscle behind HB308. To say it was a controversial bill would be an understatement. The media would have had a field day with "guns everywhere, guns everywhere!" It's right up there with "the British are coming, the British are coming!" The primary reason HB308 was not a priority bill is NRA and TSRA were using huge amounts of political capitol to pass open-carry and to a lesser degree, campus-carry. I still believe we should pass campus-carry because it is the right thing to do even though it differs from our standard procedure of supporting bills that provide the most benefits to most people. At this point in time, HB308 would have worked to the extreme benefit of 846,000+ Texas CHLs and this number will continue to grow. That's how strongly I feel about removing off-limits areas for CHLs, but you haven't heard me lash out at NRA/TSRA for not making MY priority their priority. That's not how you bill strong and effective relationships; you don't abandon friends who share your goals but not your priority list. Contrast this approach with the OCT approach of attacking, condemning and lying about anyone and everyone who does not share both their goals and there tactics.
Chas.
I suspect that is the ultimate goal for many. However, we have to work with the process available and that involves making incremental improvements as we can. Trying for the whole enchilada this go around would have killed the deal all together.
I certainly understand the political hazards. Increasing accessibility does not need to be the "whole enchilada" any more than decreasing restrictions on current CHL. I have not seen one bill this session that I believe has a viable chance of increasing accessibility in the slightest.
This year, we're going to dip our toe into the open carry pool (decreased restriction) for a portion of the population that we expect to be able to carry the banner and provide proof that the dire predictions won't come true. We'll need that data and those facts when it's time to tackle the next obstacle in the same way that we've been able to use the 20yr record of CHLs.
Continued success in the politics of gun rights is going to depend on our ability to see things as they are and address the current reality using long-term goals and perspectives.
Not even a hint? Great. One more thing to worry about. 