SB730 - Emloyer parking lot bill being debated now

Relevant bills filed and their status

Moderator: Charles L. Cotton

User avatar

Topic author
Charles L. Cotton
Site Admin
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 17787
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
Location: Friendswood, TX
Contact:

Re: SB730 - Emloyer parking lot bill being debated now

#16

Post by Charles L. Cotton »

will381796 wrote:Was there any discussion of this bill in the Committee meeting today?
It was voted out of committee favorably, as amended. The amendment exempted primary and secondary schools.

Chas.

Kalrog
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1886
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 10:11 am
Location: Leander, TX
Contact:

Re: SB730 - Emloyer parking lot bill being debated now

#17

Post by Kalrog »

Charles L. Cotton wrote:
will381796 wrote:Was there any discussion of this bill in the Committee meeting today?
It was voted out of committee favorably, as amended. The amendment exempted primary and secondary schools.

Chas.
Not perfect, but not bad. Great work all!

will381796
Member
Posts in topic: 9
Posts: 136
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 12:15 pm

Re: SB730 - Emloyer parking lot bill being debated now

#18

Post by will381796 »

I am very happy to hear that institutes of higher education were not exempted from the provision. Next session, if this passes, hopefully we can get that exemption removed so teachers can protect themselves like everyone else.
NRA Life Member
TRSA Life Member

CHL Class:11/22/08
App Submitted : 11/23/08
Received PIN:11/27/08
"Processing Application":12/13/08
Notified of TR100 error by CHL instructor: 12/23/08
Sent updated TR100 to DPS: 12/26/08
"Application Completed": 02/07/09
Plastic in hand:02/13/09
User avatar

Keith B
Moderator
Posts in topic: 9
Posts: 18502
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:29 pm

Re: SB730 - Emloyer parking lot bill being debated now

#19

Post by Keith B »

Hopefully they won't try to back up and prohibit a CHL/non-employee from having it in their car on primary/secondary educational institutions.
Keith
Texas LTC Instructor, Missouri CCW Instructor, NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun Instructor and RSO, NRA Life Member

Psalm 82:3-4
User avatar

nitrogen
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 2322
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 1:15 pm
Location: Sachse, TX
Contact:

Re: SB730 - Emloyer parking lot bill being debated now

#20

Post by nitrogen »

This story just hit digg.com:

http://digg.com/politics/Texas_Law_Woul ... ns_to_Work" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Digg users, go read and digg this story.

Many of the comments seem pro-2a so far.
.השואה... לעולם לא עוד
Holocaust... Never Again.
Some people create their own storms and get upset when it rains.
--anonymous

CWOOD
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 730
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 12:54 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: SB730 - Emloyer parking lot bill being debated now

#21

Post by CWOOD »

Charles L. Cotton wrote:It was voted out of committee favorably, as amended. The amendment exempted primary and secondary schools.

Chas.
Charles, I cannot find where, on the Senate pages, it indicates that SB 730 was voted out of committee. Where is it? Also, in viewing the "text" portion it still shows the original text. Please help me find these things.

I contacted Sen. Hegar's office by phone and email thanking him (and Sen. Patrick) for the intelligent and assertive defense of SB 730 in committee. I also asked him to not allow teachers to be forced to become second class citizens regarding the second amendment.

I feel that if he has indeed deferred to the "education lobby" on this it was because it was needed to get the rest of the bill passed. Sen. Hegar has been so pro 2A that if he feels he needs this backstep to pass the bulk of the bill, I will give him the benefit of the doubt and trust his judgement. I don't like it but can accept that these gains we enjoy have been incrimental in nature. We can address it again later.
SIGN UP! The National Alliance for an Idiot Free America
User avatar

Topic author
Charles L. Cotton
Site Admin
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 17787
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
Location: Friendswood, TX
Contact:

Re: SB730 - Emloyer parking lot bill being debated now

#22

Post by Charles L. Cotton »

CWOOD wrote:
Charles L. Cotton wrote:It was voted out of committee favorably, as amended. The amendment exempted primary and secondary schools.

Chas.
Charles, I cannot find where, on the Senate pages, it indicates that SB 730 was voted out of committee. Where is it? Also, in viewing the "text" portion it still shows the original text. Please help me find these things.

I contacted Sen. Hegar's office by phone and email thanking him (and Sen. Patrick) for the intelligent and assertive defense of SB 730 in committee. I also asked him to not allow teachers to be forced to become second class citizens regarding the second amendment.

I feel that if he has indeed deferred to the "education lobby" on this it was because it was needed to get the rest of the bill passed. Sen. Hegar has been so pro 2A that if he feels he needs this backstep to pass the bulk of the bill, I will give him the benefit of the doubt and trust his judgement. I don't like it but can accept that these gains we enjoy have been incrimental in nature. We can address it again later.
The Legislative website hasn't been updated yet. It seems to be running a little slower this session.

Chas.

CWOOD
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 730
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 12:54 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: SB730 - Emloyer parking lot bill being debated now

#23

Post by CWOOD »

Charles L. Cotton wrote: The Legislative website hasn't been updated yet. It seems to be running a little slower this session.

Chas.
Gosh! It is runnig VERY SLOOOOOOW. I believe last session it was updated within 24 hours. Here it is 3 days later and the Senate website is still showing no change and still has the "As Introduced" text.

Thanks for the reply and thanks for the update.
SIGN UP! The National Alliance for an Idiot Free America

oilman
Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 190
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 4:19 pm
Location: Washington County

Re: SB730 - Emloyer parking lot bill being debated now

#24

Post by oilman »

Charles L. Cotton wrote:
KD5NRH wrote:So, which, if any, committee members are expected to oppose it?
This is just a guess, but Senator Rodney Ellis earned his "F" rating, so I suspect he'll oppose it. He even made a joke about scoring some points with the business lobby by opposing it.

Chas.

You mean my phone call to his office had no effect? :roll:

And they even took my phone number so they could call me back!

Have not heard from him....

O6nop
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 680
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 10:23 pm
Location: Austin

Re: SB730 - Emloyer parking lot bill being debated now

#25

Post by O6nop »

I've read elsewhere on this forum that the parking lot law is not restricted to CHL holders, but the video keeps referencing CHL holders as the ones this law will benefit. Could somebody reassure me for myself and for those opponents of the bill I talk to how this is intended? Thanks
I believe there is safety in numbers..
numbers like: 9, .22, .38, .357, .45, .223, 5.56, 7.62, 6.5, .30-06...

will381796
Member
Posts in topic: 9
Posts: 136
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 12:15 pm

Re: SB730 - Emloyer parking lot bill being debated now

#26

Post by will381796 »

From the wording of the originally submitted law (the amended version is not yet available) :
A public or private employer may not prohibit an employee who holds a license to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, who otherwise lawfully possesses a firearm, or who lawfully possesses ammunition from transporting or storing a firearm or ammunition the employee is authorized by law to possess in a locked, privately owned motor vehicle in a parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area the employer provides for employees
This law only affects CHL holders.
NRA Life Member
TRSA Life Member

CHL Class:11/22/08
App Submitted : 11/23/08
Received PIN:11/27/08
"Processing Application":12/13/08
Notified of TR100 error by CHL instructor: 12/23/08
Sent updated TR100 to DPS: 12/26/08
"Application Completed": 02/07/09
Plastic in hand:02/13/09
User avatar

AEA
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 5110
Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 12:00 pm
Location: North Texas

Re: SB730 - Emloyer parking lot bill being debated now

#27

Post by AEA »

"holds a license to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, who otherwise lawfully possesses a firearm"

I read this to mean anyone that can lawfully possess a firearm (not limited to CHL's).
Anyone that carries under the Motorist Protection Act is covered in this bill as far as I can see.
Alan - ANYTHING I write is MY OPINION only.
Certified Curmudgeon - But, my German Shepherd loves me!
NRA-Life, USN '65-'69 & '73-'79: RM1
1911's RULE!
User avatar

Purplehood
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 4638
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 3:35 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Re: SB730 - Emloyer parking lot bill being debated now

#28

Post by Purplehood »

AEA wrote:"holds a license to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, who otherwise lawfully possesses a firearm"

I read this to mean anyone that can lawfully possess a firearm (not limited to CHL's).
Anyone that carries under the Motorist Protection Act is covered in this bill as far as I can see.
What about the first part of that sentence?
Life NRA
USMC 76-93
USAR 99-07 (Retired)
OEF 06-07
User avatar

Keith B
Moderator
Posts in topic: 9
Posts: 18502
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:29 pm

Re: SB730 - Emloyer parking lot bill being debated now

#29

Post by Keith B »

Purplehood wrote:
AEA wrote:"holds a license to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, who otherwise lawfully possesses a firearm"

I read this to mean anyone that can lawfully possess a firearm (not limited to CHL's).
Anyone that carries under the Motorist Protection Act is covered in this bill as far as I can see.
What about the first part of that sentence?
They comma is the difference. When you read it, pause at the comma and see if it doesn't make a difference in your interpretation.

My understanding is the intent of the bill was to allow CHL'ers and those carrying in their vehicles under the MPA to be allowed to keep their weapon locked in the vehicle on the company lot.
Keith
Texas LTC Instructor, Missouri CCW Instructor, NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun Instructor and RSO, NRA Life Member

Psalm 82:3-4

will381796
Member
Posts in topic: 9
Posts: 136
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 12:15 pm

Re: SB730 - Emloyer parking lot bill being debated now

#30

Post by will381796 »

Reading into the analysis of the bill available on the legislative website, I now agree with that interpretation. You would think that these people that we pay to write our laws could write a law clearly, without ambiguity and without wiggle room.
NRA Life Member
TRSA Life Member

CHL Class:11/22/08
App Submitted : 11/23/08
Received PIN:11/27/08
"Processing Application":12/13/08
Notified of TR100 error by CHL instructor: 12/23/08
Sent updated TR100 to DPS: 12/26/08
"Application Completed": 02/07/09
Plastic in hand:02/13/09
Locked

Return to “2009 Texas Legislative Session”