TexasCHLforum.com

The proposal is a back door attempt to convince police to not carry Tasers, IMHO. There are a few people who think cops are killing people with Tasers and that we should not be allowed to do this. Of course, one of the arguments they get back is that they are so safe that anyone could carry one. There is no evidence yet that a Taser has caused a single death, even though around 200 people have died after being tased (most were certified as excited delirium deaths due to drug overdose by the M.E. responsible - some mention that Taser as a possible contributing factor). Anyway, there is also a bill to stop cops from carrying them at all, so this is along those lines.

But there are some interesting things to consider in the bill.

First, it is so poorly written that it has internal references to sections it doesn't include (they copied 46.035 but left out the section on sporting events. Of course, they did not catch the other reference so you need notice for a section that does not exist.

Second, the signage requirement means you have to ban both guns and Tasers and cannot choose to just ban one or the other. There are many ways this could play out for us. People who have no problem with Tasers may be convinced to not ban guns. People who realize how far the law is being carried could rebel and not post, based on their realization of government intrusion, even if they do not care one way or the other about the guns.

Third, and it ties into second, is that this means all of the current 30.06 signs would be invalid on Sep 1. The sign would no longer be a valid sign, even if it is now, if it is not expanded to include Tasers. How many business owners are going to know about this and really go to the trouble of fixing the signs for the new requirements?

Fourth, there is a requirement for a new license to carry a Taser. this is not an endorsement on your CHL or DL, but a whole new license. Of course, you have to show it (again, they just copied the CHL law), so if you had a CHL and a CTL, you would need to carry three documents to show a cop.

Finally, it gives the DPS an impossible requirement for the license. You have to prove your abilities with a Taser (as in qualify) to get a license. A civilian Taser is a one shot one time weapon that costs a couple hundred dollars. How do you qualify with a one time disposable weapon? It means you would have to buy a police version (which is legal if you want to) with rechargeable cartridges to qualify. I don't think this is really what the legislature intended.

To me, this law sounds like a knee jerk reaction from a very liberal anti-violence-of-any-type politician that stands no chance of passing. But we need to make sure we keep an eye on it to insure just that, again IMHO.