ACTION NEEDED: Hearing on Anti-gun HB356

[tacticool]

However, Alaska (at least), offers a Concealed permit for those that want one for Reciprocity purposes. So Alaskans, as I read it, would still need an Alaska permit to validate a Utah license.

Same for an Alaskan getting the $26 Pennsylvania license.
http://www.co.centre.pa.us/sheriff/license_to_carry.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Griz44]

so Griz44. Sounds like you also believe Utah residents with a Utah CHL should not be recognised in Texas?

I did not say that. That's not even on the same planet to what I said. If they have a license in their home state, why would it make any difference at all if they had a license from every state they could get one in?
We were discussing Texas residents, and Texas licenses. I occasionally take out of state customers hunting. Some of them have CHL licenses from their home state, and carry legally in Texas. There's no problem with that. They don't use a Texas license to skirt the requirements of their home states minimum standard. I don't give a flip about what any person who is a Utah resident does, has or wants. That's Utah's business, not ours.

[cbr600]

deleted

[Sniper John]

so Griz44. Sounds like you also believe Utah residents with a Utah CHL should not be recognised in Texas?

I did not say that. That's not even on the same planet to what I said. If they have a license in their home state, why would it make any difference at all if they had a license from every state they could get one in?
We were discussing Texas residents, and Texas licenses. I occasionally take out of state customers hunting. Some of them have CHL licenses from their home state, and carry legally in Texas. There's no problem with that. They don't use a Texas license to skirt the requirements of their home states minimum standard. I don't give a flip about what any person who is a Utah resident does, has or wants. That's Utah's business, not ours.

It was a question. And you answered it. Thank you. So you have no problem with the fact Utah is a 4 hour class and no shooting. So you also have no problem with a Utah resident carrying in Texas under the same permit/class. Correct?

[sjfcontrol]

Grizz

So if you were to look at two identical people, both have Utah licenses, the same training, the same skills, the same knowledge, except one lives in Oklahoma, and the other lives in Texas. Neither has Texas licenses. I'd be OK for the Okie to carry here, but not the Texan. That means the Texan has less rights than the Okie, just because he lives here. Punish the Texan for living in Texas. Sounds fair to me!

[morigan]

The campus carry bill (HB 750) only allows concealed carry by someone with a CHL issued by the State of Texas. The Texas Capitol only allows us to bypass the metal detectors if we have a CHL issued by the State of Texas. Are those rules anti-gun? If not, how can we call this bill anti-gun?

[hirundo82]

I'd consider the restriction for campus carry to be mildly anti-gun, but it appears to be a necessary concession to get campus carry passed this session and likely will be easy to remove once the hubbub over out-of-state licenses dies down.

I don't know how out-of-state licenses are being handled at the capitol now that there are metal detectors; state law doesn't allow them to exclude people who are carrying on a non-Texas permit.

[morigan]

They ran my Texas CHL through a card reader attached to a laptop to verify it's valid.

ETA: Supporting link http://texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=409335#p409335" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[hirundo82]

Yes, I'm aware that they swipe Texas CHLs to confirm they are valid and that is not possible with licenses from other states. However, DPS does not have the authority to exclude someone from the Capitol because they are legally carrying on another state's license.

[Charles L. Cotton]

The campus carry bill (HB 750) only allows concealed carry by someone with a CHL issued by the State of Texas. The Texas Capitol only allows us to bypass the metal detectors if we have a CHL issued by the State of Texas. Are those rules anti-gun? If not, how can we call this bill anti-gun?

This thread isn't about campus-carry or the Texas Capitol. It's about HB356.

Let's get back on topic.

Chas.

[SWAMPRNR]

Any idea were this bill stands now?

[hirundo82]

It was heard in committee on Tuesday 3/22, but the committee hasn't voted yet on the bills they heard that day.

[Ameer]

Any idea were this bill stands now?

"Left pending in committee"

[Burn]

The CHL law has many requirements in place that limit eligibility for a Texas CHL. The Texas Legislature put those requirements in place intentionally. They were no accident. I don't think I would be going out on a limb if I said the reason the Texas Legislature created those elibibility requirements is they didn't want to allow Texans to carry guns unless they are eligible, i.e. they satisfy all the requirements for a Texas CHL.

HB 356 was introduced this session to ensure Texas residents are properly trained and can pass the criminal background check, before they're allowed to carry guns in churches, shopping malls, parks where children are playing, and other public places. It's a common sense law that closes an unintended loophole, and it deserves support from gun owners and concerned citizens alike.

[sjfcontrol]

The CHL law has many requirements in place that limit eligibility for a Texas CHL. The Texas Legislature put those requirements in place intentionally. They were no accident. I don't think I would be going out on a limb if I said the reason the Texas Legislature created those elibibility requirements is they didn't want to allow Texans to carry guns unless they are eligible, i.e. they satisfy all the requirements for a Texas CHL.

HB 356 was introduced this session to ensure Texas residents are properly trained and can pass the criminal background check, before they're allowed to carry guns in churches, shopping malls, parks where children are playing, and other public places. It's a common sense law that closes an unintended loophole, and it deserves support from gun owners and concerned citizens alike.

Using that logic, Texas should eliminate reciprocity with Utah altogether, and the other states as well.

There is NO reason to think a Texan carrying in Texas on a Utah license (or Florida license) is more dangerous, or less knowledgable of the laws, than a Utah-ite (or Floridian) carrying in Texas on a Utah (or Florida) license. And everybody in the above scenario has passed a background check.