SB11 & HB910 This week....

[jmra]

Does HB910 as approved last night allow cities with a population greater than 750K to enact ordinances preventing OC? Rumors are flying everywhere.

No. This confusion comes from the voting on the house floor before the house passed it on to the senate. An amendment (# 8 I think) was proposed to allow cities with a population of more than 1,000,000 to opt out. Before the amendment was tabled a vote was taken to lower the 1,000,000 requirement in the amendment to 750,000 which passed changing the wording of the amendment (this was labeled amendment 9). A vote was then taken to table amendment 8 which made the passage of amendment 9 of no consequence.
So in short, amendment 9 (which passed) was an amendment to amendment 8 (which failed). So, no opt out.

[RoyGBiv]

Does HB910 as approved last night allow cities with a population greater than 750K to enact ordinances preventing OC? Rumors are flying everywhere.

No

Welcome!

[sig-sog]

Thanks for the explanation jmra.

[jmra]

Thanks for the explanation jmra.

You're welcome. Glad you found us.

[TXBO]

" It might not be all the way there, but because of Senator Huffines, it's a lot closer that it was before his amendment."

Really? Seriously? If Huffine did not have his amendment the Bill would have passed hours before it did so saying that it is closer because of his amendment is being intellectually dishonest and misleading then again so was Huffine saying that he had support from an organization that opposed his Amendment.

His amendment had a very good chance of killing the Bill, fortunately it did not happen. He stated numerous times that his Amendment was the exact same as the House version, we now know it is not so back to the House it goes and hopefully gets a vote.....

Being a Monday morning quarterback is fine if it goes your way, had it blown up the Bill everybody would be looking to hang him, it comes down to risk versus reward and IMO it was not worth the risk..............

"Intellectually dishonest"?
Compare HB910 as passed by the House with HB910 as passed by the Senate with and without the Huffines amendment. It's a travesty that Huffines put so much effort into passing this amendment and didn't get it identical but his amendment certainly makes the Senate version much closer to the House version.

[NotRPB]

cross-posting from viewtopic.php?f=133&t=77720&p=984743#p984743" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I heard it might be a 3 word difference

I thought I recalled the 3 words "Shoulder or belt" (holster) being removed at House (Dutton) , which seem present in Huffines .. I might be wrong

might impact "licensed open carry in a visible car holster attached to transmission hump/steering column" ?
I don't know ...

[K5GU]

cross-posting from viewtopic.php?f=133&t=77720&p=984743#p984743" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I heard it might be a 3 word difference

I thought I recalled the 3 words "Shoulder or belt" (holster) being removed at House (Dutton) , which seem present in Huffines .. I might be wrong

might impact "licensed open carry in a visible car holster attached to transmission hump/steering column" ?
I don't know ...

FYI, the "Dutton Amendment" on April 20th: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/ ... 910H33.HTM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[NotRPB]

cross-posting from viewtopic.php?f=133&t=77720&p=984743#p984743" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I heard it might be a 3 word difference

I thought I recalled the 3 words "Shoulder or belt" (holster) being removed at House (Dutton) , which seem present in Huffines .. I might be wrong

might impact "licensed open carry in a visible car holster attached to transmission hump/steering column" ?
I don't know ...

FYI, the "Dutton Amendment" on April 20th: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/ ... 910H33.HTM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks, my confusion stemmed from hearing during debate removing "shoulder or belt" and using
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/ ... 910H23.HTM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"carries a concealed or visible holstered handgun"
but that was tabled

Thanks for clearing me up :)

[SewTexas]

3 words? wow, last night they were saying maybe a letter, ie, the typo. to me 3 words should have easily been caught, that's not a typo.

[The Wall]

3 words? wow, last night they were saying maybe a letter, ie, the typo. to me 3 words should have easily been caught, that's not a typo.

I think Huffines just wanted his name on it. That way he can take some credit for it when campaigning. Politics anyone!

[Rvrrat14]

I think the Senate just wanted to TAG it so its THEIR bill........Like he said, Politics.

But, with that said, it is one step closer due to all the work of folks here and there!

Let's hope the House steps up and rubber stamps it on to Abbott.

[safety1]

Some are intentionally spreading misinformation. I'd suspect
those doing so are not in support of what has happend.
More or less wanting to rain on the parade

[TVGuy]

Some are intentionally spreading misinformation. I'd suspect
those doing so are not in support of what has happend.
More or less wanting to rain on the parade

What are you referring to?

[stash]

I have been gone since this morning. Would someone kindly tell me where 910 is now? Has it been sent to the house and or is the house working today?

[K5GU]

I have been gone since this morning. Would someone kindly tell me where 910 is now? Has it been sent to the house and or is the house working today?

The Senate voted and it passed. I haven't seen it on a House calendar yet but it will probably show up as soon as the analysis, amendment, budget board report, etc. get printed and published. It needs a motion to concur in the House then on to the Gov.