Gov. Abbott on constitutional carry

[Ruark]

I like the approach of making it a crime only if the individual is asked to leave and refuses. If we go that route, we can eliminate the 30.06 & 30.07 signage altogether along with the offense of "trespass by a license holder." This is the model used successfully by many other states. I agree that we are unlikely to achieve that all at once, but we can chip away at it like we did this session.

I'm thinking that won't fly because if you're carrying concealed, they won't know you're armed, and thus wouldn't ask you to leave. The preference (their preference) would thus be for the concealed carrier to know that he's committing an offense by walking past the sign.

[canvasbck]

Unlicensed OC and licensed CC is a good next step. Criminals just don't open carry or use holsters.

Reducing prohibited places for CHL is the most important next step. Unlicensed OC is a pipe dream.

I don't agree. People that get a threat to their life need a way to legally carry without waiting 30 to 60 days to obtain a license. I wish everybody was proactive with self defense training and a CHL before they ever had a threat to their life but that's just not the case.

But after the 30 - 60 days are up and one has a CHL, they can carry a self-defense handgun, but not in off-limits areas so they are defenseless in those areas. That's why I feel that removing all off-limits areas is the most important step we can take for Texas gun owners.

If you mean we should push for unlicensed carry rather than eliminating off-limits areas, then I disagree. As long as OCT and Grisham are polluting the political atmosphere, it's not going to pass. Plus, even if it does, then the off-limits areas will not only still exist, it will be virtually impossible to even reduce their number, much less repeal them in total.

I do think we should repeal some of the current CHL eligibility requirements such as those dealing with deferred adjudications, non-violent offenses, child support and taxes. A person's life and the lives of their families should not be put at risk for such issues. This issue is also one that should be addressed after removing off-limits areas. It's not only a matter of priority, but also a matter of timing. Pushing for legislation out of sequence could result in a current victory that precludes future victories. Bills that would remove off-limits areas have been filed in the last two legislative sessions and they went nowhere. This is the case even though those bills would impact only CHL's with our outstanding track record. Imagine trying to remove off-limits areas after unlicensed-carry were to pass. It would never happen. The proper bill at the proper time is critical to continuing success.

Chas.

This is the roadmap for the 2017 session. End of story.

Passing unlicensed carry before removing off limits locations would remove the most compelling argument for removing prohibited locations currently available........CHL holders have a much better record than joe blow citizen and their crime stats are even better than the record amongst LEO's. If we as a society are comfortable with off duty LEO carrying in certain locations, why are we not comfortable with a group with an even BETTER criminal record?

[TXBO]

Unlicensed OC and licensed CC is a good next step. Criminals just don't open carry or use holsters.

Reducing prohibited places for CHL is the most important next step. Unlicensed OC is a pipe dream.

I don't agree. People that get a threat to their life need a way to legally carry without waiting 30 to 60 days to obtain a license. I wish everybody was proactive with self defense training and a CHL before they ever had a threat to their life but that's just not the case.

But after the 30 - 60 days are up and one has a CHL, they can carry a self-defense handgun, but not in off-limits areas so they are defenseless in those areas. That's why I feel that removing all off-limits areas is the most important step we can take for Texas gun owners.

If you mean we should push for unlicensed carry rather than eliminating off-limits areas, then I disagree. As long as OCT and Grisham are polluting the political atmosphere, it's not going to pass. Plus, even if it does, then the off-limits areas will not only still exist, it will be virtually impossible to even reduce their number, much less repeal them in total.

I do think we should repeal some of the current CHL eligibility requirements such as those dealing with deferred adjudications, non-violent offenses, child support and taxes. A person's life and the lives of their families should not be put at risk for such issues. This issue is also one that should be addressed after removing off-limits areas. It's not only a matter of priority, but also a matter of timing. Pushing for legislation out of sequence could result in a current victory that precludes future victories. Bills that would remove off-limits areas have been filed in the last two legislative sessions and they went nowhere. This is the case even though those bills would impact only CHL's with our outstanding track record. Imagine trying to remove off-limits areas after unlicensed-carry were to pass. It would never happen. The proper bill at the proper time is critical to continuing success.

Chas.

This is the roadmap for the 2017 session. End of story.

Passing unlicensed carry before removing off limits locations would remove the most compelling argument for removing prohibited locations currently available........CHL holders have a much better record than joe blow citizen and their crime stats are even better than the record amongst LEO's. If we as a society are comfortable with off duty LEO carrying in certain locations, why are we not comfortable with a group with an even BETTER criminal record?

Not at all. There can still be different rules for CHL holders.

[Jim Beaux]

***SNIP***

Agree, to an extent. I agree that once a person has successfully completed a DA, and was never officially convicted, then it should not DQ someone for 10 years. Maybe 1-2 after it is completely dismissed, but not 10. I see why they did the child support thing, but I agree it needs to go away... it has nothing to do with defending yourself outside the home.

Can't carry within 1,000 feet of a place of execution on the day of an execution...? What the crap is that...

Places we can't carry should be correctional facilities, courtrooms, and on commercial flights. Basically, if they don't have a metal detector right now, it should not be illegal to carry there... because if it does not have a metal detector, a criminal can carry there, so why not the good guys?

Good point Sully. I never looked at the issue from this vantage.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Unlicensed OC and licensed CC is a good next step. Criminals just don't open carry or use holsters.

Reducing prohibited places for CHL is the most important next step. Unlicensed OC is a pipe dream.

I don't agree. People that get a threat to their life need a way to legally carry without waiting 30 to 60 days to obtain a license. I wish everybody was proactive with self defense training and a CHL before they ever had a threat to their life but that's just not the case.

But after the 30 - 60 days are up and one has a CHL, they can carry a self-defense handgun, but not in off-limits areas so they are defenseless in those areas. That's why I feel that removing all off-limits areas is the most important step we can take for Texas gun owners.

If you mean we should push for unlicensed carry rather than eliminating off-limits areas, then I disagree. As long as OCT and Grisham are polluting the political atmosphere, it's not going to pass. Plus, even if it does, then the off-limits areas will not only still exist, it will be virtually impossible to even reduce their number, much less repeal them in total.

I do think we should repeal some of the current CHL eligibility requirements such as those dealing with deferred adjudications, non-violent offenses, child support and taxes. A person's life and the lives of their families should not be put at risk for such issues. This issue is also one that should be addressed after removing off-limits areas. It's not only a matter of priority, but also a matter of timing. Pushing for legislation out of sequence could result in a current victory that precludes future victories. Bills that would remove off-limits areas have been filed in the last two legislative sessions and they went nowhere. This is the case even though those bills would impact only CHL's with our outstanding track record. Imagine trying to remove off-limits areas after unlicensed-carry were to pass. It would never happen. The proper bill at the proper time is critical to continuing success.

Chas.

This is the roadmap for the 2017 session. End of story.

Passing unlicensed carry before removing off limits locations would remove the most compelling argument for removing prohibited locations currently available........CHL holders have a much better record than joe blow citizen and their crime stats are even better than the record amongst LEO's. If we as a society are comfortable with off duty LEO carrying in certain locations, why are we not comfortable with a group with an even BETTER criminal record?

Not at all. There can still be different rules for CHL holders.

What "can" happen and what will happen are two vastly different things. Unlicensed carry is purely an academic discussion as long as OCT/Grisham and others are poisoning the issue.

Would you support off-limits areas that apply to people carrying without a license but not a person with a license?

Chas.

[MeMelYup]

I must agree with the persons that think the removal of all off limit areas should be our next big push. We should be able to carry anywhere a police officer can.

After that we can see about open carry got everyone that is qualified to own a firearm, with restrictions to places they cannot carry. Then the stores can put up a 30.08 sign, a ten inch red circle with a slash thru it covering a handgun.

[TXBO]

What "can" happen and what will happen are two vastly different things. Unlicensed carry is purely an academic discussion as long as OCT/Grisham and others are poisoning the issue.

Would you support off-limits areas that apply to people carrying without a license but not a person with a license?

Chas.

I certainly understand the challenges you face. I admire the patience and diplomacy it takes to do the work you do.

Yes, I would support anything that advances 2nd Amendment rights of law abiding citizens. What we have proven in the last 20 years throughout this country is that gun free zones absolutely do not work and that crime goes down as law abiding citizens carry. Anything that puts more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens and in more places, I would support.

[TXBO]

I do think we should repeal some of the current CHL eligibility requirements such as those dealing with deferred adjudications, non-violent offenses, child support and taxes. A person's life and the lives of their families should not be put at risk for such issues.
Chas.

I tend to agree with you on this. I think those prone to violence need to be locked up however those people that don't pay their taxes, support their kids or follow the law are further down on my priority list. I'd be happier with anything that streamlined the qualification process and made it more affordable.