TexasCHLforum.com

ELB wrote:

terryg wrote:Woot!! Thanks for the play by play.

Yes, thanks.

My pleasure. It was wonderful listening to Chairman Whitmire (mostly) with the supporting cast of GOP Senators basically beat up on the opposing arguments.

Does this bill still need 21 votes to consider by the full senate (even though it was passed by the House)?

What about this business of it (and a stronger version of it) being a special session topic?

A media summary. http://blog.chron.com/texaspolitics/201 ... ll-senate/

and here http://www.statesman.com/ap/ap/educatio ... ing/nXqdx/

Reported back to whole Senate. 4 ayes, 2 no's, and the bill is reported back to the full senate with a favorable recommendation.

Quite a few opposition folks for the record (not testifying). I think the final opposition witnesses are (a student counselor) and Texas Gun Nonsense rep is not a credit to his organization. Whitmire is politely wrapping him up.

Edited to summarize more typical non sequitur comments from another UT grad student citing opposition from campus police chiefs and fears of alcohol induced violence.

Sister of two CHL instructors supports the bill.

Perhaps the last witness. Idealistic father/grandfather/combat veteran who opposes the bill over fears of suicide, and who wants to live in a society wehre we don't have to carry guns. OK.

John Woods chastises Texas Legislature for not following Va Tech Review panel.

Schwertner interrupts to ask if/why Woods has a CHL. Woods says he got it for protection, but now realizes it is not a useful thing. A challenge from Whitmire about why folks carry in North Carolina.

Woods asserts that the reason for this bill is to sell more guns by the gun industry.

Edit: The guy that followed Woods is trying to be the Dali Lama.

A string of opposing comments based on I "feel this" or "think that".

Quite a few are alleging majority student opposition -- and yet here they are opposing a bill that gives local control.

Whitmire just said this if HB 972 version doesn't pass, then "more than likely, if we're back in a special session, then the previous version will be presented."

Really?!

The UT biology professor is not faring much better than the Baylor math prof. But in her defense (:<>) the senators are not cutting her any slack.

The proponent witnesses all went first, with a notable performance from one [abbreviated profanity deleted] the UT students (the one bound for law school). He apparently made a strong impressions on Whitmire and Huffman.

The opposition Baylor prof got a lot of critique from Whitmire, Schwertner, Patrick, and one or two others. Wow.

The Senators are shooting back (pardon the pun) the typical "I would not feel safe" argument, and the "stress, anxiety, reduced safety." I think they have put the opposition witnesses back on their heels a bit.

2:15 I am loving Whitmire's cross examination of the first opposing witness.

Editted to add... and the second opposition witness (the Baylor math prof).

baldeagle wrote:Those are all fine and dandy, but my argument would be, the bad guys are carrying on campus now. Does Virginia Tech ring a bell? How about Shepherd University? Failing University of Arizona Nursing College? Appalachian School of Law? The University of Arkansas? San Diego State? And on and on and on and on. Only a fool would think that criminals will obey a sign that says Gun Free Zone. It's proven time and time again that they do not. So, by denying law abiding citizens the right to carry on your premises, what you do is make it easier for the criminals to commit their murders. That's not something I would be proud of. Nor would I want to continue it.

No argument from me, BE. I definitely prefer having the state pre-empt university administrators, and I prefer not to wait another session or two for this to happen. But between HB 972 or nothing, I prefer this step. And I think it weakens their position, beginning with the position they took in Mid-March before the House committee hearings ("We're asking for local control." John Woods) OK, John, HB 972 provides for local control. I prefer state empowered concealed carry, but I'll take local control over statewide restriction.

jmra wrote:

J.R.@A&M wrote:If HB 290 passes, it would be possible for non-staff, non-student CHL folks to legally carry in public university buildings, WITH NO RESTRICTION.

HB 290
Relating to school district selection of assessment instruments in place of state-administered assessment instruments.

My bad. 290 is a Highway that I drive frequently. HB 972.

Over the past couple of sessions, there have been recurring arguments that go something like this:

Pro-Campus Carry: "What are you campus carry opponents so riled up about? We've been carrying for years in the nearby movie theaters and grocery stores and you didn't care then."

Campus Carry Opponent: "No, campus buildings are special/sacred/etc. No guns on campus."

Pro-Campus Carry: "There have been guns on campus for a long time... It is legal for CHLs to carry on the sidewalks and school grounds. The line between the legal/unrestricted area and the campus building is arbitrary."

Campus Carry Opponent: "Campus buildings are special/sacred/etc. No guns on campus."

If HB 290 passes, it would be possible for non-staff, non-student CHL folks to legally carry in public university buildings, WITH NO RESTRICTION. Given that, I would carry at Texas Tech the next time I visit there, just to say that I did, and to establish a precedent to extend the above conversation:

Pro-Campus Carry: "There have been guns on campus for a long time... and now also in campus buildings since the 2013 session, and nothing bad happened. The line between the outside grounds and the campus building WAS arbitrary and meaningless after all."

Bladed wrote:http://www.statesman.com/news/news/camp ... ate/nXkkn/

The opposition ( https://www.facebook.com/txgunsense?fref=ts ) is urging their folks to call Whitmire. Sounds like a good idea to me, too.