HB750 wrote:(2)AA"License holder" means a person to whom a license to carry a concealed handgun has been issued under this subchapter, including a nonresident license issued under Section 411.173(a). The term does not include a person to whom a license to carry a concealed handgun has been issued by another state, regardless of whether a license issued by that state is recognized pursuant to an agreement negotiated by the governor under Section411.173(b).
That says to me that anyone with an out-of-state CHL (for example, a parent from Oklahoma visiting his kid at Texas Tech) would be excluded from the provisions of this bill. In other words, they would still be prohibited from exercising Campus Carry. Am I reading that correctly?
This seems like a terrible idea! First off, it's confusing and sets a dangerous precedent as it creates two sets of rules. Some rules apply to Texas CHL's, and others apply to out-of-state CHL's. Reciprocity would no longer be an across-the-board affair. Out-of-staters would then have to figure out which areaa are covered by reciprocity, and which aren't. Secondly, it needlessly excludes an entire class of responsible, licensed adults. If we trust out-of-state licensees to carry in the mall, movie theater, etc., why is our trust diminished when they enter a university?
I realize there aren't that many out-of-state CHL'ers in Texas, but their numbers are significantly multiplied on our campuses. Consider all the people who would be disenfranchised by this clause: students who still maintain their residence (and license) in their home state, out-of-state parents who are here to visit their kids, families from out of state who've come to visit or preview a university, visiting lecturers and professors, and so on.