TexasCHLforum.com

rtschl

Federal Judge finds US Air Force is 60% responsible for church shooting at Sutherland Springs by failing to enter his information that would have been flagged in a NICS background check.

"Moreover, the evidence shows that — had the Government done its job and properly reported Kelley’s information into the background check system — it is more likely than not that Kelley would have been deterred from carrying out the Church shooting."

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-ba ... oting-at-a

rtschl

State Judge is allowing victims to sue retailer where AR15 was purchased.

I haven't read the actual ruling but I wonder how it is reasoned that a retailer is responsible for the failure of the Air Force to report him to NICS. They sold a legal product that was not defective. Academy should be exempt from this lawsuit.

https://dfw.cbslocal.com/2019/02/04/tex ... -retailer/

rtschl

Charles L. Cotton wrote:
rtschl wrote:
GeekwithaGun wrote: common mistake to not read further:
(i) Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor was not
given effective notice under Section 30.06 or 30.07.
I saw AG Ken Paxton in an interview with Laura Ingraham say that it is confusing the way it is worded and too many people think they cannot carry in a church. I had to do a double take because at first I thought he said it was prohibited. He got a chance to expand and state if notice is given then it is prohibited, but the way the statue is worded needs to be addressed. I'm paraphrasing him, but good that the AG of the state recognizes that it is confusing to people.

Edited: Found interview on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KC36id1t2T8 Paxton's part starts at 5:05 mark and then starts explanation at 6:10 about needing to make it more clear.

TPC §46.035(i) was created in 1997 as part of HB2909. We had to do it that way to achieve the goal. People constantly ask why we didn't just repeal the prohibition on churches, hospitals, etc. The simple answer is we didn't have the votes. The prohibition on carrying in churches, hospitals, etc. was necessary to pass SB60 in 1995 in order to create concealed carry. It was not politically feasible to delete those locations from the off-limits list only two years later. Heck, look how long I've been pushing to repeal all off-limits areas.

There is nothing confusing about §46.03(i); people simply quit reading too soon. Read together, it is absolutely clear that churches,etc. are not off-limits unless they receive notice pursuant to TPC §30.06. If LTCs are not aware of this fact, then their LTC Instructor let them down in a very big way.

Chas.

Charles,

I agree and understand why it was done that way and appreciate your efforts that got us where we are! One day hopefully we will see a repeal of all off-limits areas.

I do not find it confusing, as the phrase "do not apply" is crystal clear. But I do think it trips up to too many people as I have had this discussion many times. This included CHL and Security instructors in the past claiming DPS was telling them that it was still prohibited. I believe that practice was stopped with your help. I still have had to show people including LEOs the full text - which I have subsection "i" highlighted and in bold on my phone.

rtschl

GeekwithaGun wrote: common mistake to not read further:
(i) Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor was not
given effective notice under Section 30.06 or 30.07.

I saw AG Ken Paxton in an interview with Laura Ingraham say that it is confusing the way it is worded and too many people think they cannot carry in a church. I had to do a double take because at first I thought he said it was prohibited. He got a chance to expand and state if notice is given then it is prohibited, but the way the statue is worded needs to be addressed. I'm paraphrasing him, but good that the AG of the state recognizes that it is confusing to people.

Edited: Found interview on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KC36id1t2T8 Paxton's part starts at 5:05 mark and then starts explanation at 6:10 about needing to make it more clear.

TexasCHLforum.com

Search found 4 matches

Re: TX: Sutherland Springs church 26 dead 20 injured in mass shooting

Re: TX: Sutherland Springs church 26 dead 20 injured in mass shooting

Re: TX: Sutherland Springs church 26 dead 20 injured in mass shooting

Re: TX: Sutherland Springs church 26 dead 20 injured in mass shooting