TexasCHLforum.com

TinaMiB wrote:I am excited that HB910 made it. It is a good bill that all of us will benefit from at times (for me, it is primarily when I go to the range to instruct). I am still hoping that we get SB11 passed. My day job is at a very big local University that will restrict us from conceal carry if they can. I really do not want to continue doing what I have to do when I am going and coming from work. Many people state they don't see why campus carry is that important but when you are a person that carries at all times except when you are at work, you would understand the frustration of working at an institution that you pay taxes to that doesn't allow you to carry.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Finally!! I get some time away from a computer, the phone and bills. I'm going to lay on the soft with my dog, my HT (hams know what I mean), the remote control and watch TV. I need some mindless time off.

Chas.

pdxmale wrote:here is the effected change they came up with.....
original:
SECTION 29. Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, is amended by adding Section 411.2049 to read as follows:
Sec. 411.2049. CERTAIN INVESTIGATORY STOPS AND INQUIRIES PROHIBITED. A peace officer may not make an investigatory stop or other temporary detention to inquire as to whether a person possesses a handgun license solely because the person is carrying a partially or wholly visible handgun carried in a shoulder or belt holster.


NEW:

SECTION __. Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, is amended by adding Section 411.2049 to read as follows:
Sec. 411.2049. CERTAIN INVESTIGATORY STOPS AND INQUIRIES PROHIBITED. A peace officer may not make an investigatory stop or other temporary detention to inquire as to a person's possession of a handgun license solely because the person is carrying in a shoulder or belt holster a partially or wholly visible handgun. [FA9]

baldeagle wrote:

Overthehill wrote:Just one question. If Federal law already prohibits stopping just to inquire for a liscense and both amendments simply restate federal law then why, except to kill open carry, did some in the law enforcement community raise such a stink and why did the representatives roll over and vote not to concur. If law enforcement is truly prohibited from committing an act why was reinforcement of that prohibition an issue of such import? Or is the federal prohibition not factual? Simply seeking greater knowledge.

You answered your own question. "to kill open carry"