I have a hard time believing that the NRA had a hand in making these proposed changes to 30.06. I'm not saying that they didn't, but considering what Mr. Cotton (who is on the NRA BoD) has said about the subject, it just seems unlikely. Almost seems like the Rep (or his staffers) are using the NRA as a scapegoat ("It's not OUR fault, the NRA made us do it") for these changes.tico wrote:Just got off the phone with Bryan Smith and Noah Gilliam from Rep. Lavender's office thanking them for filing HB700, but also wanting to clarify the problems with modifying 30.06.
They say that the NRA asked them to make those changes to get the bill passed but they're aware of the problems and will be amending it. I asked for them to either create a separate sign (30.07?) that would apply to only prohibit open carry, or just allow the old gun busters sign to work for now. Having a separate sign for open carry would be an additional annoyance for anti-gun business owners to post up two signs, but also would allow for supporters for concealed carry only to still allow that method of carry without having to ban all forms of carry with a single sign.
When I asked for why they added "or unconcealed" all throughout the penal code instead of just striking 46.035a they said that had come from NRA as well after their experience during the last legislative session, but just needed to get *something* filed early in the process even though they intended to amend it as they went along.
As for the holster requirements, that was done to get support from law enforcement organizations, though none have publicly stated support for this bill as of now.
Please give them a call (512-463-0692) and your local representative too.
Mr. Cotton, do you know if the NRA had any input into this?
