Campus Carry revived, attached to open carry

[Bladed]

Looks like because of campus carry attached to OC, we won't get OC. At this point I just wish they'd have left OC alone and maybe it would have went through. If campus carry and unrestricted carry were supported it they could have made it on their own.

I personally think that campus carry and unrestricted carry didn't have a chance for whatever reason since the beginning that's why the focus was on OC because it had a chance of passing, not because less effort was given to other things. No reason we should not have been able to get it all, but I digress.

So IMHO whoever attached campus carry to OC to end run the system just did as much damage to OC as OCT, all or nothing means we will likely end up with nothing. So if we want to lament over not having campus carry or unrestricted carry we can rejoice because looks like we won't have open carry either (and it was likely killed by campus carry, yeah!-sarcasm).

Nobody has attached campus carry to open carry. The current holdup of open carry has nothing to do with campus carry.


A deal between Texas House and Senate members has revived legislation that would allow concealed handguns to be carried into university classrooms, dorms and buildings.
After passing quickly through the Senate, legislation allowing “campus carry” has been bottled up for the past month in the House, raising questions about its viability with only three full weeks remaining in the legislative session.
Apparently out of options in the House, state Rep. Allen Fletcher, R-Cypress, turned to the Senate, where he said he worked out a deal to have campus carry legislation grafted onto another gun bill as an amendment. The move would allow the new combination bill to return to the House, where approval by the Republican majority is expected.
“If I can get the Senate to send it back over this way, we’ll wrap it up and call it a session,” Fletcher said Wednesday. “It’ll save a lot of time and effort and debate.”
The first step of the plan took place Wednesday evening when Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick referred House Bill 910, allowing those with a concealed handgun license to openly carry a holstered firearm, to the Senate State Affairs Committee, where it must receive a public hearing and a vote before heading to the full Senate.
Fletcher’s campus carry legislation, House Bill 937, has been sitting without action for the past four weeks in the House Calendars Committee, which decides which legislation goes to the floor for a vote. Campus carry language will be added to HB 910 before it leaves the Senate, Fletcher said

http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news/de ... 263.735724" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Are you sure? Then what does the hold up have to do with? First we hear, relax all is well, then we hear never mind. TSRA keeps sending emails about urgent action needed. If they got the votes, should be no problem making them happen.

Here are my suggestions:

Step 1: Learn the legislative process--there have been no hearings or floor votes on open carry since HB 910 passed out of the House, so there has been no opportunity to attach campus carry to open carry.

Step 2: Learn that correlation does not equal causation--the fact that the holdup on open carry became apparent at about the same time the media reported that legislators were considering attaching campus carry doesn't mean that the holdup is related to the amendment talks.

[mojo84]

Apparently, there is much we aren't being told. I suspect it comes down to egos and Straus playing king.

I know he has plenty of power but at least in theory, he should not be able to block HB910 from moving in the Senate. Some on here have questioned why political capital is needed if Republicans hold majorities. Maybe this is why, I guess he could hold other bills hostage if this one moves in the Senate.

I also said "egos". It's not just Straus. I think we have some middle age children running the show.

Yes, I saw that one and I didn't have any comment on that.

We shouldn't pin it 100% on Straus if he isn't 100% the cause.

[mojo84]

Looks like because of campus carry attached to OC, we won't get OC. At this point I just wish they'd have left OC alone and maybe it would have went through. If campus carry and unrestricted carry were supported it they could have made it on their own.

I personally think that campus carry and unrestricted carry didn't have a chance for whatever reason since the beginning that's why the focus was on OC because it had a chance of passing, not because less effort was given to other things. No reason we should not have been able to get it all, but I digress.

So IMHO whoever attached campus carry to OC to end run the system just did as much damage to OC as OCT, all or nothing means we will likely end up with nothing. So if we want to lament over not having campus carry or unrestricted carry we can rejoice because looks like we won't have open carry either (and it was likely killed by campus carry, yeah!-sarcasm).

Nobody has attached campus carry to open carry. The current holdup of open carry has nothing to do with campus carry.


A deal between Texas House and Senate members has revived legislation that would allow concealed handguns to be carried into university classrooms, dorms and buildings.
After passing quickly through the Senate, legislation allowing “campus carry” has been bottled up for the past month in the House, raising questions about its viability with only three full weeks remaining in the legislative session.
Apparently out of options in the House, state Rep. Allen Fletcher, R-Cypress, turned to the Senate, where he said he worked out a deal to have campus carry legislation grafted onto another gun bill as an amendment. The move would allow the new combination bill to return to the House, where approval by the Republican majority is expected.
“If I can get the Senate to send it back over this way, we’ll wrap it up and call it a session,” Fletcher said Wednesday. “It’ll save a lot of time and effort and debate.”
The first step of the plan took place Wednesday evening when Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick referred House Bill 910, allowing those with a concealed handgun license to openly carry a holstered firearm, to the Senate State Affairs Committee, where it must receive a public hearing and a vote before heading to the full Senate.
Fletcher’s campus carry legislation, House Bill 937, has been sitting without action for the past four weeks in the House Calendars Committee, which decides which legislation goes to the floor for a vote. Campus carry language will be added to HB 910 before it leaves the Senate, Fletcher said

http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news/de ... 263.735724" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Are you sure? Then what does the hold up have to do with? First we hear, relax all is well, then we hear never mind. TSRA keeps sending emails about urgent action needed. If they got the votes, should be no problem making them happen.

Here are my suggestions:

Step 1: Learn the legislative process--there have been no hearings or floor votes on open carry since HB 910 passed out of the House, so there has been no opportunity to attach campus carry to open carry.

Step 2: Learn that correlation does not equal causation--the fact that the holdup on open carry became apparent at about the same time the media reported that legislators were considering attaching campus carry doesn't mean that the holdup is related to the amendment talks.

Condescension is unnecessary. Most of us that have jobs and run companies do the best we can to keep up. It can be quite the challenge with all the secret back room dealings and misreporting that gets put out for us little people to try to understand.

By the way, even Alice Tripp is frustrated. I think we are in good company.

[Bladed]

Looks like because of campus carry attached to OC, we won't get OC. At this point I just wish they'd have left OC alone and maybe it would have went through. If campus carry and unrestricted carry were supported it they could have made it on their own.

I personally think that campus carry and unrestricted carry didn't have a chance for whatever reason since the beginning that's why the focus was on OC because it had a chance of passing, not because less effort was given to other things. No reason we should not have been able to get it all, but I digress.

So IMHO whoever attached campus carry to OC to end run the system just did as much damage to OC as OCT, all or nothing means we will likely end up with nothing. So if we want to lament over not having campus carry or unrestricted carry we can rejoice because looks like we won't have open carry either (and it was likely killed by campus carry, yeah!-sarcasm).

Nobody has attached campus carry to open carry. The current holdup of open carry has nothing to do with campus carry.


A deal between Texas House and Senate members has revived legislation that would allow concealed handguns to be carried into university classrooms, dorms and buildings.
After passing quickly through the Senate, legislation allowing “campus carry” has been bottled up for the past month in the House, raising questions about its viability with only three full weeks remaining in the legislative session.
Apparently out of options in the House, state Rep. Allen Fletcher, R-Cypress, turned to the Senate, where he said he worked out a deal to have campus carry legislation grafted onto another gun bill as an amendment. The move would allow the new combination bill to return to the House, where approval by the Republican majority is expected.
“If I can get the Senate to send it back over this way, we’ll wrap it up and call it a session,” Fletcher said Wednesday. “It’ll save a lot of time and effort and debate.”
The first step of the plan took place Wednesday evening when Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick referred House Bill 910, allowing those with a concealed handgun license to openly carry a holstered firearm, to the Senate State Affairs Committee, where it must receive a public hearing and a vote before heading to the full Senate.
Fletcher’s campus carry legislation, House Bill 937, has been sitting without action for the past four weeks in the House Calendars Committee, which decides which legislation goes to the floor for a vote. Campus carry language will be added to HB 910 before it leaves the Senate, Fletcher said

http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news/de ... 263.735724" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Are you sure? Then what does the hold up have to do with? First we hear, relax all is well, then we hear never mind. TSRA keeps sending emails about urgent action needed. If they got the votes, should be no problem making them happen.

Here are my suggestions:

Step 1: Learn the legislative process--there have been no hearings or floor votes on open carry since HB 910 passed out of the House, so there has been no opportunity to attach campus carry to open carry.

Step 2: Learn that correlation does not equal causation--the fact that the holdup on open carry became apparent at about the same time the media reported that legislators were considering attaching campus carry doesn't mean that the holdup is related to the amendment talks.

Condescension is unnecessary. Most of us that have jobs and run companies do the best we can to keep up. It can be quite the challenge with all the secret back room dealings and misreporting that gets put out for us little people to try to understand.

By the way, even Alice Tripp is frustrated. I think we are in good company.

My condescension isn't about him not knowing the process and backroom negotiations; it's about him proclaiming his assumptions as fact and assigning blame to innocent people despite not knowing the process and backroom negotiations.

There is nothing wrong with attending a basketball game despite not knowing the rules, but if you start proclaiming to everyone around you that the home team is losing because their point guard wastes all of his time bouncing the ball on the ground instead of picking it up and running toward the goal, you deserve whatever scorn an derision you attract.

[C-dub]

Personally, I'm more disappointed in the process than I am in the individual bills. The legislature seems to be a joke right now.

I flip flop on the merits of OC, but I'm in total agreement that campus carry should be available. I also think 30.06 needs to be reexamined to determine some form of requirements for posting. Being uncomfortable with guns shouldn't give a location the ability to deny a right.

I'm a little lost on the last one. If you're talking about a government facility, I agree; but they aren't permitted to do so now by law, some cities/counties just do it in spite of the law. If you're talking about private businesses, I have to disagree. They should be permitted to disallow guns for any reason they choose. I'm a big believer in 2A rights, but I'm also a believer in property rights. I'll let them know my displeasure by using my wallet.

OK, let's take this to an extreme for argument's sake, shall we? If a movie theater/restaurant/convention center posted a sign out front that said "No Whites allowed," do you think that would fly? How about "No Christians?"

If you honestly believe 2A grants everyone the power to carry, then how is it different than racial/religious/orientation discrimination?

Please do keep in mind that I'm very much middle of the road on this, but I'm curious to see where the line is for folks.

You may not like my answers (they've made me unpopular in a number of conversations)

First, the legal reasons - Race and Religion are protected classes. Carrying a firearm is not (nor is deciding not to wear shoes, or a shirt, see more on that in a moment).
That said, legal reasoning aside - I think providing protected classes in situations like this is a mistake, unless those being discriminated against can show that there are no other publicly available similar facilities available. That's right, I believe that a business owner should be able to put up a "no whites" or "no Christians", I say let them; and then let their customers decide what they want to do with that information. I can almost bet you that a business will open up across the street (or near by) that will allow those groups being discriminated against. The more open business will prosper.

However, the comparison isn't totally valid, since as I said, race and religion are protected classes. Gun carrying is not (nor do I think it should be). A more accurate comparison would be "no shirt, no shoes, no service" signs. It is my right to decide to not wear shoes or a shirt. It's also a right for a business to refuse to let me in if they don't like that. Both are as things should be (in my opinion).

Don't worry too much Scooter. I agree with you on letting the market figure it out. However, I can also say that I and many people I know wouldn't go into a business that said only this group or that group. I don't want anything to do with folks with that kind of attitude.

[jerry_r60]

Apparently, there is much we aren't being told. I suspect it comes down to egos and Straus playing king.

I know he has plenty of power but at least in theory, he should not be able to block HB910 from moving in the Senate. Some on here have questioned why political capital is needed if Republicans hold majorities. Maybe this is why, I guess he could hold other bills hostage if this one moves in the Senate.

I also said "egos". It's not just Straus. I think we have some middle age children running the show.

Yes, I saw that one and I didn't have any comment on that.

We shouldn't pin it 100% on Straus if he isn't 100% the cause.

Agree, and I'm certainly not. I was only addressing that the Calendar committee is not currently in position to be the hold up on HR910 now.

I also had no comment on legislators' egos.

[Charles L. Cotton]

That story is a week old and says the Senate is doing business. Where is the action in the House? We are told on this forum things are happening, but it's secret and can't be divulged until it's too late to do anything about it. This forum has ears, the other side is seeing what's posted, etc. Fine. 19 days left. There are 600 days 7 hours until Jan 2, 2017, the next session of the Texas Legislature.

If you don't like or believe what you read on the Forum, then don't read it. I post what I can when I can as accurately as I can. If you can't understand that in politics, things can and do change in an instant, especially when you have two powerful men acting like children, they you need to stay away from politics and legislation.

Chas.

[ScooterSissy]

Personally, I'm more disappointed in the process than I am in the individual bills. The legislature seems to be a joke right now.

I flip flop on the merits of OC, but I'm in total agreement that campus carry should be available. I also think 30.06 needs to be reexamined to determine some form of requirements for posting. Being uncomfortable with guns shouldn't give a location the ability to deny a right.

I'm a little lost on the last one. If you're talking about a government facility, I agree; but they aren't permitted to do so now by law, some cities/counties just do it in spite of the law. If you're talking about private businesses, I have to disagree. They should be permitted to disallow guns for any reason they choose. I'm a big believer in 2A rights, but I'm also a believer in property rights. I'll let them know my displeasure by using my wallet.

OK, let's take this to an extreme for argument's sake, shall we? If a movie theater/restaurant/convention center posted a sign out front that said "No Whites allowed," do you think that would fly? How about "No Christians?"

If you honestly believe 2A grants everyone the power to carry, then how is it different than racial/religious/orientation discrimination?

Please do keep in mind that I'm very much middle of the road on this, but I'm curious to see where the line is for folks.

You may not like my answers (they've made me unpopular in a number of conversations)

First, the legal reasons - Race and Religion are protected classes. Carrying a firearm is not (nor is deciding not to wear shoes, or a shirt, see more on that in a moment).
That said, legal reasoning aside - I think providing protected classes in situations like this is a mistake, unless those being discriminated against can show that there are no other publicly available similar facilities available. That's right, I believe that a business owner should be able to put up a "no whites" or "no Christians", I say let them; and then let their customers decide what they want to do with that information. I can almost bet you that a business will open up across the street (or near by) that will allow those groups being discriminated against. The more open business will prosper.

However, the comparison isn't totally valid, since as I said, race and religion are protected classes. Gun carrying is not (nor do I think it should be). A more accurate comparison would be "no shirt, no shoes, no service" signs. It is my right to decide to not wear shoes or a shirt. It's also a right for a business to refuse to let me in if they don't like that. Both are as things should be (in my opinion).

Don't worry too much Scooter. I agree with you on letting the market figure it out. However, I can also say that I and many people I know wouldn't go into a business that said only this group or that group. I don't want anything to do with folks with that kind of attitude.

Nor would I. And I consider myself a pretty open minded reasonable person; so I think a lot of folks would do the same thing.
Personally, I wouldn't touch a BBQ place or Cajun restaurant that catered solely to people that look and talk like me...

[RedTop]

That story is a week old and says the Senate is doing business. Where is the action in the House? We are told on this forum things are happening, but it's secret and can't be divulged until it's too late to do anything about it. This forum has ears, the other side is seeing what's posted, etc. Fine. 19 days left. There are 600 days 7 hours until Jan 2, 2017, the next session of the Texas Legislature.

If you don't like or believe what you read on the Forum, then don't read it. I post what I can when I can as accurately as I can. If you can't understand that in politics, things can and do change in an instant, especially when you have two powerful men acting like children, they you need to stay away from politics and legislation.

Chas.

Hehehe.....2? I'd say more like 172.....but that's just me...and not referring to OC , I'm referring in general...Seems like they ALL act like kids.

[LSUTiger]

Looks like because of campus carry attached to OC, we won't get OC. At this point I just wish they'd have left OC alone and maybe it would have went through. If campus carry and unrestricted carry were supported it they could have made it on their own.

I personally think that campus carry and unrestricted carry didn't have a chance for whatever reason since the beginning that's why the focus was on OC because it had a chance of passing, not because less effort was given to other things. No reason we should not have been able to get it all, but I digress.

So IMHO whoever attached campus carry to OC to end run the system just did as much damage to OC as OCT, all or nothing means we will likely end up with nothing. So if we want to lament over not having campus carry or unrestricted carry we can rejoice because looks like we won't have open carry either (and it was likely killed by campus carry, yeah!-sarcasm).

Nobody has attached campus carry to open carry. The current holdup of open carry has nothing to do with campus carry.


A deal between Texas House and Senate members has revived legislation that would allow concealed handguns to be carried into university classrooms, dorms and buildings.
After passing quickly through the Senate, legislation allowing “campus carry” has been bottled up for the past month in the House, raising questions about its viability with only three full weeks remaining in the legislative session.
Apparently out of options in the House, state Rep. Allen Fletcher, R-Cypress, turned to the Senate, where he said he worked out a deal to have campus carry legislation grafted onto another gun bill as an amendment. The move would allow the new combination bill to return to the House, where approval by the Republican majority is expected.
“If I can get the Senate to send it back over this way, we’ll wrap it up and call it a session,” Fletcher said Wednesday. “It’ll save a lot of time and effort and debate.”
The first step of the plan took place Wednesday evening when Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick referred House Bill 910, allowing those with a concealed handgun license to openly carry a holstered firearm, to the Senate State Affairs Committee, where it must receive a public hearing and a vote before heading to the full Senate.
Fletcher’s campus carry legislation, House Bill 937, has been sitting without action for the past four weeks in the House Calendars Committee, which decides which legislation goes to the floor for a vote. Campus carry language will be added to HB 910 before it leaves the Senate, Fletcher said

http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news/de ... 263.735724" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Are you sure? Then what does the hold up have to do with? First we hear, relax all is well, then we hear never mind. TSRA keeps sending emails about urgent action needed. If they got the votes, should be no problem making them happen.

Here are my suggestions:

Step 1: Learn the legislative process--there have been no hearings or floor votes on open carry since HB 910 passed out of the House, so there has been no opportunity to attach campus carry to open carry.

Step 2: Learn that correlation does not equal causation--the fact that the holdup on open carry became apparent at about the same time the media reported that legislators were considering attaching campus carry doesn't mean that the holdup is related to the amendment talks.

Condescension is unnecessary. Most of us that have jobs and run companies do the best we can to keep up. It can be quite the challenge with all the secret back room dealings and misreporting that gets put out for us little people to try to understand.

By the way, even Alice Tripp is frustrated. I think we are in good company.

My condescension isn't about him not knowing the process and backroom negotiations; it's about him proclaiming his assumptions as fact and assigning blame to innocent people despite not knowing the process and backroom negotiations.

There is nothing wrong with attending a basketball game despite not knowing the rules, but if you start proclaiming to everyone around you that the home team is losing because their point guard wastes all of his time bouncing the ball on the ground instead of picking it up and running toward the goal, you deserve whatever scorn an derision you attract.

Ladies and gentlemen of the forum, I'm just a caveman. I fell on some ice and later got thawed out by some of your scientists. Your world frightens and confuses me! Sometimes the legislative process makes me want to pull my hair out, scream.. and run off into the hills, or wherever.. I don't know! My primitive mind can't grasp these concepts.

But there is one thing I do know - First we are told have patience, the political process takes time, don't worry all is fine. Then, taking the title of this thread and the article mentioned (b]Campus carry language will be added to HB 910 before it leaves the Senate,[/b] Fletcher said) at face value there are changes in strategy apparently on how to get things passed. Then there is no movement on anything. Then we are told that things can change in an instant. Then we are continually requested to help with calls to action. From what recall reading in this thread and elsewhere on the forum some others share the opinion that by trying to attach campus carry to OC is a good way to kill OC.

Granted, I'm not and insider, I don't have all the facts, I don't know anything for sure, I just have my opinion. Thank you Mr. Mojo84 for your support.

So Mr. Bladed if you or anyone else would care to share their vast knowledge the process and your unique insider knowledge of the backroom negotiations with the rest of the unlearned, uneducated like myself so we might understand, have more patience and better direct our efforts to help the cause, it would be appreciated.

I eagerly await your accurate, detailed and thorough report of current happenings and plan to get things passed.

Thank you.

I don't mind so much being called a dummy if the one calling me a dummy then proceeds to explains why. But when the name caller calls doesn't know anything more than I do or doesn't offer the explanation why, then I it's a little hard to take. Not that I'm gonna lose any sleep over it, but it makes it hard to keep my big mouth shut and not reply.

[Jumping Frog]

Well I just got off the phone with my representative's office expressing my desire to see HB 937 pass out of the calendars committee. I was told that yesterday was the deadline for the calendars committee, and HB 937 is now dead for this legislative session. So the only viable alternatives left for campus carry are the companion bI'll SB 11 or amending the open carry bill as discussed above.

[Charles L. Cotton]

It's bad enough that the legislature is acting like a bunch of children; I'm not going to tolerate it here on the Forum. People who feel compelled to make false allegations and/or make personal attacks and insults toward other Members are going to find themselves on vacation for 30 days, well after this legislative session is over. If you think this is a bluff, then just do it again and find out.

I'll say it again, if you don't like or trust the information provided at the Forum, then leave!!

Chas.

[ELB]

Well I just got off the phone with my representative's office expressing my desire to see HB 937 pass out of the calendars committee. I was told that yesterday was the deadline for the calendars committee, and HB 937 is now dead for this legislative session. So the only viable alternatives left for campus carry are the companion bI'll SB 11 or amending the open carry bill as discussed above.

indeed. That plan to attach campus carry to open carry AND GET IT TO THE GOVERNOR'S DESK had better bear fruit...

[joe817]

Well I just got off the phone with my representative's office expressing my desire to see HB 937 pass out of the calendars committee. I was told that yesterday was the deadline for the calendars committee, and HB 937 is now dead for this legislative session. So the only viable alternatives left for campus carry are the companion bI'll SB 11 or amending the open carry bill as discussed above.

Yup. Yesterday was the deadline for House to distribute last House Daily Calendar with house bills and joint resolutions.

Today(Wednesday), is the deadline for House to distribute last House Local and Consent Calendar with Consent House Bills.

http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/dates/dates% ... terest.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And the Calendars Committee hasn't published the minutes from yesterday's(May 12th) meeting, so we don't even know what bills are on that last calendar. Same goes for Local & Consent Calendars(for the 12th OR the 13th, which is today)

[safety1]

Well I just got off the phone with my representative's office expressing my desire to see HB 937 pass out of the calendars committee. I was told that yesterday was the deadline for the calendars committee, and HB 937 is now dead for this legislative session. So the only viable alternatives left for campus carry are the companion bI'll SB 11 or amending the open carry bill as discussed above.

Yup. Yesterday was the deadline for House to distribute last House Daily Calendar with house bills and joint resolutions.

Today(Wednesday), is the deadline for House to distribute last House Local and Consent Calendar with Consent House Bills.

http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/dates/dates% ... terest.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And the Calendars Committee hasn't published the minutes from yesterday's(May 12th) meeting, so we don't even know what bills are on that last calendar. Same goes for Local & Consent Calendars(for the 12th OR the 13th, which is today)

Time is running out, what if any viable options remain? For OC & CC