TexasCHLforum.com

The Texas House voted 101-42 this week to allow licensed open carry of handguns. Every Republican voted for it. Every Democrat voted against it, except seven.
I looked for similarities among those seven: Ryan Guillen of Rio Grande City; Abel Herrero, Robstown; Tracy King, Batesville; Oscar Longoria, Mission; Joe Moody, El Paso; Joe Pickett, El Paso; and Richard Peña Raymond, Laredo.

Five of the seven Democrats — all but the two El Pasoans — represent smaller-town/rural districts. This fits in with the notion that smaller-town/rural Texans are more comfortable around guns than many big-city folks are. A significant majority of Democrats in the House are big-city folks.

...

After the House vote, a reader asked, “Why is Texas so determined to make those of us who do not feel comfortable with people running around carrying weapons unwelcome?”

My answer: Because a large majority of Texas’ lawmakers feel the rights of some people should not be restricted by the discomfort of others.

To me, and maybe to you, open carry is kind of creepy, as are some of the more strident proponents of it (maybe the ones Moody said “probably can’t get a license”). But there’s going to be a long list if we start banning things I think are creepy. Bye-bye to vapor cigarettes, many tattoos and most body piercings.

To me, the creepiest thing about the House bill is that part that bars a cop from asking to see an open carrier’s license. Seems weird. The Senate should unweird that.

Read what the Senate did as you choose: They either fumbled a major piece of legislation that’s on the governor’s hot list and slowed it down, or they offered a bit of retaliation for the House’s disregard of the Senate’s open carry bill.

Maybe you saw some of the heated reaction from state Rep. Dennis Bonnen, R-Angleton, directed at Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and the Senate?

“Had they chosen to do what historically happens and pass the House bill over with their changes, we could be quickly moving to a conference committee and getting this bill on the governor’s desk much sooner rather than later,” Bonnen said.

He might have said the same about the House and handguns.

timtheteacher wrote:I would have no problem showing my card. Not a big deal to me..

v7a wrote:STAR-TELEGRAM:

Alice Tripp of the Texas State Rifle Association said that she likes the “intent” of the amendment but that the wording needs a look.

Alice Tripp of the Texas State Rifle Association said that she likes the “intent” of the amendment but that the wording needs a look.

thechl wrote:Isn't the implication of Acevedo's rant that he fully intends for his officers to stop and check any/all open carriers to ensure they have a CHL? Sounds like harassment to me.

So while I didn't feel the need for Dutton's amendment when it was proposed, Acevedo has convinced me of its worth!

mojo84 wrote:

v7a wrote:

mojo84 wrote:I see it as benefiting everyone that chooses to open carry and not just minorities. It's a good thing.

Yes, it benefits everyone. But Dutton's concern was specifically racial profiling (so the title of the newspaper article in question was in fact correct).

I'm lost. Why did you post the link to this article then?

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/ ... bate.html/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

v7a wrote:Open carry bill passed with amendment to discourage racial profiling

The Wall wrote:That title makes it sound like that was the only reason for the amendment. I'm not sure that's the case. It's just one of many good reasons to have it in the bill.

mojo84 wrote:I see it as benefiting everyone that chooses to open carry and not just minorities. It's a good thing.

The Wall wrote:That title makes it sound like that was the only reason for the amendment.

Some have suggested that the amendment could, in effect, allow for the unlicensed open carry of handguns. That’s because someone open carrying without a license – illegally – wouldn’t need to fear police questioning if they were otherwise doing no wrong.

Dutton said on Tuesday that his intent had nothing to do with unlicensed open carry – but instead with safeguarding against racial profiling.

“If you see black guys with open carry, I didn’t want them stopped because they happened to be black guys exercising their right to open carry,” said Dutton, who voted against the overall open carry bill. “That was my concern.”

Yesterday's amendment to Texas' Open Carry Legislation is beyond belief and Aiken to open season for gang members, drug cartels, outlaw motor cycle gangs and any other criminal or extremist to defy the law with impunity, just brilliannt! If criminals, drug cartels, and extremists had a seat at the policy writing table they couldn't have come up with s better Amendment.

By prohibiting law enforcement from stopping or detaining to check for CHL, Texas is authorizing within our state lines any and all criminals to carry a firearm. My heart goes out to domestic violence victims and the victims of violent crimes in our State. Through this amendment we are facilitating the victimization of the people we are sworn to serve, protect and lead.

Here is a scenario, next time groups face off in our Capital City at the Capitol, Klan with their hoods on, Panthers with their faces covered, ISIS sympathizers with their faces covered and just about any other extremist group, armed with firearms authorized by Open-Carry, law enforcement will have absolutely no authority to ensure the people who are armed as they wish..........why bother common sense has officially died and writing any further would be fruitless.

Houston Democrat Harold Dutton offered the amendment, which prohibits peace officers from stopping or detaining someone "solely because the person is carrying a partially or wholly visible handgun carried in a shoulder or belt holster." Dutton is a criminal defense lawyer.

Charley Wilkinson, who heads the Combined Law Enforcement Associations of Texas, or CLEAT, the state's largest peace officer organization, said he will urge lawmakers to remove the amendment before final passage.

"We don't want officers to abuse their authority and power which is why we have a lot of recourse and remedy if the officer does a wrong thing," said Wilkinson. "I would hope that cooler heads would prevail here, and we would keep these fundamental tools for the officers to protect the public."

Houston Police Officers' Union President Ray Hunt, however, said he did not have a lot of "heartburn" over the change.

"It's kind of a common sense issue," said Hunt, who added police still would be allowed to stop someone with a gun if there was some other reasonable suspicion they were going to commit a crime. "I mean, we don't stop some people who are driving cars to see if they have a license."