-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Open carry passage potential in Texas
- Thread starter Redhorse
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
The sign is just fine as it is. Whittling down the penalty for crossing it would be nice, but not anywhere near the top of the priority list. Narrowing the list of places it can be posted to actual private property only would be good too.
I have to agree. To say nothing of the requirement that the sign be just so, and if it is not, it is invalid, I don't ever want to lose the most apropos gun law citation I've ever seen. The very idea of a "gun prohibited" sign being named after a rifle caliber is just too perfect.
Blessings,
Bill
HB 910, which is the House Companion to the Senate's SB 17 licensed open carry bill, has been assigned to the Homeland Security and Public Safety Committee with four authors and 63 coauthors. The committee has nine members: the chair of the committee is one of the bills authors and three of its members are coauthors.
Two minor amendments: a "retention" component as part of the existing, required training; and delayed implementation until January 1, 2016. It should sail through the house, from what I hear.
Also: campus carry is supposed to be taken up today in the senate.
Also: campus carry is supposed to be taken up today in the senate.
Hold your horses pardners...
OC has not completely out of the Senate yet -- it still needs a final vote. It should pass the senate and go to the house, but it is not quite official yet.
The vote yesterday was straight party line vote. I will leave figuring out which party voted for and which against as an exercise for the reader.
I haven't had time to figure out the exact language of the amendments passed, but from discussion in the TexasCHLforum.com, the following three amendments were added:
1. Retention will be covered in the CHL class. My understanding is that this is classroom only, not actual tussle and tumble training.
2. Implementation date is delayed four months to 1 Jan 16. New laws normally take effect on 1 Sep, but DPS asked for a delay in order to update the CHL Instructor training and train those instructors up for renewal (which I think is all of them).
3. No OC on university/college campus.
The House will bear close watching, is not at all a smooth sail. It seems likely that licensed OC will pass out of committee, but to get to the floor for a vote it has to be scheduled by the Calendars Committee, which is directly controlled by Speaker Straus. Speaker Straus buried campus carry last legislature by having it never leave the Calendars committee. He depends on some Democrats for his position, and he is cozy with the Univ of Texas, who opposes campus carry and in all likelihood open carry as well.
ETA: About 20 amendments were offered, some requiring retention holsters, adding 10hours of "OC" training to the CHL class (that's longer than the current CHL class), requiring annual background checks, requiring some form of visible ID that you have a license if you OC (known on the CHL forum as the "tiara amendment"), and other obnoxiousness. Only the three listed above passed.
OC has not completely out of the Senate yet -- it still needs a final vote. It should pass the senate and go to the house, but it is not quite official yet.
The vote yesterday was straight party line vote. I will leave figuring out which party voted for and which against as an exercise for the reader.
I haven't had time to figure out the exact language of the amendments passed, but from discussion in the TexasCHLforum.com, the following three amendments were added:
1. Retention will be covered in the CHL class. My understanding is that this is classroom only, not actual tussle and tumble training.
2. Implementation date is delayed four months to 1 Jan 16. New laws normally take effect on 1 Sep, but DPS asked for a delay in order to update the CHL Instructor training and train those instructors up for renewal (which I think is all of them).
3. No OC on university/college campus.
The House will bear close watching, is not at all a smooth sail. It seems likely that licensed OC will pass out of committee, but to get to the floor for a vote it has to be scheduled by the Calendars Committee, which is directly controlled by Speaker Straus. Speaker Straus buried campus carry last legislature by having it never leave the Calendars committee. He depends on some Democrats for his position, and he is cozy with the Univ of Texas, who opposes campus carry and in all likelihood open carry as well.
ETA: About 20 amendments were offered, some requiring retention holsters, adding 10hours of "OC" training to the CHL class (that's longer than the current CHL class), requiring annual background checks, requiring some form of visible ID that you have a license if you OC (known on the CHL forum as the "tiara amendment"), and other obnoxiousness. Only the three listed above passed.
Last edited:
Thanks for the clarification. Guess I'm kinda confused about this. The bill was represented as passed by the Senate here. What does "passed to engrossment" mean?
Last edited:
Wowser, earlier reports were that the Senate would not go to the "third reading" and final vote on it until Friday, but they just brought it up again and passed it 20 to 10. So NOW it is officially headed to the House. The House is already holding a committee hearing on the house companion bill (HB910 I think).
Pudly, the "engrossed" version is the final version with all the approved amendments incorporated. The TTAG article, published yesterday, was incorrect at the time - the senate had basically approved the version of the bill that would be put up for the third (final) reading*, but had not done the final vote yet. It was an almost foregone conclusion that they would do so, but never wise to take things for granted in politics.
*Texas constitution requires a bill to be "read" three times before it can be finally passed. First is when it is filed, second is in committee, and third is on the floor before a final vote is taken.
Pudly, the "engrossed" version is the final version with all the approved amendments incorporated. The TTAG article, published yesterday, was incorrect at the time - the senate had basically approved the version of the bill that would be put up for the third (final) reading*, but had not done the final vote yet. It was an almost foregone conclusion that they would do so, but never wise to take things for granted in politics.
*Texas constitution requires a bill to be "read" three times before it can be finally passed. First is when it is filed, second is in committee, and third is on the floor before a final vote is taken.
Now to do away with those silly 30.06, 51% and whatever other anti-gun laws on the books too
Unfortunately, that bill (HB308) seems to be stuck. Sigh.
I was afraid OC was going to suck up all the attention and political capital, and bills with real substance were going to get slow-rolled. And it seems to be happening.
Making open carry legal in Texas is, frankly, a trivial advancement - good for bragging rights I guess, but it doesn't expand the legal domain of where one can exercise 2A rights, it just adds a mode of carry. HB308 would do away with nearly all the restrictions on where you can carry with a license, and then when no blood runs in the streets yet again, we can work on dropping the whole licensing business. But no, unlicensed OC advocates have to show up to the hearing on licensed carry in the House to shout at other witnesses and the panel, trip over their tongues, and spew profanities, thus validating the anti's witnesses caricatures of gun owners. Thanks guys.
Am I correct in understanding there is concern that there will be more 'gun free zones' created as a result of the OC law? Seems to be some of the sentiment at the TexasGunTalk forum (also a member there).
Was just reading about the shooting(s) in a San Antonio nightclub... wish the Texas lawmakers understood that criminals don't read silly signs and stickers. I'm sure the nightclub had a 51% law posting as well.
Anyhow, it's exciting to see progress be made in a State that the rest of America already thinks is the wild-west with no restrictions. So it's a good step in the right direction and hopefully over the course of time it becomes a much more reasonable state to carry in.
Are you living in Texas now? I've always wondered what Texans do when carrying. Say you want to go to a store but it has a posted sign, that carries the weight of the law... do you unholster in your car? Remove your holster all together and put it back on when you get back in? Ignore the sign and commit a crime just by carrying? That's the great thing about Indiana... a no guns ign means nothing to me other than the store owner or chain's personal preference and I'm at ease knowing I'm not breaking a law if I choose to ignore their request. (But of course, have to leave if asked without hesitation)
I'm traveling down that way in May as I've purchased some acreage and am going to be wearing a concealed carry vest, both for comfort when hiking (Big Bend National Park) and also so I can easily disarm when going into a store or some place that may have the 51% sign posted or something.
The idea of people having to unholster in their car seems dangerous. And the idea of people ignoring the signs do too. Just curious what people do or if they just go out of there way to ignore places that don't allow it.
Based on the history of the introduction of concealed carry in Texas, and the antics of OCT/OCTC and the like, and the fact that OC is a bit more obvious than CC, there is some concern that more places, especially corporate types, will seek to ban carry altogether. The OC bills under serious consideration will require a sign almost identical to the 30.06 sign (it will be the "30.07") sign, which will prevent people from just slapping up any silly old gun buster sign, so there's that.
I think handgun carry is already pretty reasonable -- we can do all kinds of things CA and NJ won't allow -- and OC will be welcome, but as I said, it is not a huge step, and the effort devoted to it taking up energy devoted to other things.
I live in Texas now. I CC all the time. I run into very few, and I mean almost no places that legally restrict concealed carry. The only legitimate signs I see are on corporate chains and hospitals (which are generally corporate entities too).
51% signs seem to be less prevalent too. At one time it seems businesses could restrict or designate a room or area as the place where alcohol for on-premises consumption (i.e. the bar in a hotel) and that would have a 51% sign. Now the license applies to the whole entity at a given street address, so food sales are part of the equation and thus all the hotels I have been in for example, there is no (longer) a 51% restriction at the bar itself. So you can legally carry at the bar where Teddy recruited the Rough Riders. Generally you will only see a 51% sign at a place whose primary business is selling alcohol by the drink, i.e. it is strictly a bar, not a TGIF or something similar.
As to what people do when they do run into a 30.06 sign that meets the legal requirements? Well, with a modicum of care it is possible to stash your piece in the car without ventilating your car or your leg. And of course concealed is concealed, altho I certainly would not advise or admit to any specific act on the internet. In the last year for which the DPS published data (2013) there were exactly seven (7) convictions for Unlawful Carry by a License Holder, and I think that includes more than just crossing the sign. So this does not seem to be a problem either way.
While May is officially still spring, it still gets pretty warm, so you may find a vest not all that comfy except well after dark. I just carry under an untucked T-shirt or polo, and am fortunate in this is perfectly acceptable attire in my work and social scenes. I doubt you will find many 51% locations that will require you to disarm. Recall this only applies to places that serve alcohol to drink on the premises, NOT package stores, gas stations, grocery stores that sell beer, etc. Those places will have a sign that says 10 year felony for unlicensed possession of a firearm, but that does not apply to license holders.
Enjoy your trip and welcome to Texas!
I think handgun carry is already pretty reasonable -- we can do all kinds of things CA and NJ won't allow -- and OC will be welcome, but as I said, it is not a huge step, and the effort devoted to it taking up energy devoted to other things.
I live in Texas now. I CC all the time. I run into very few, and I mean almost no places that legally restrict concealed carry. The only legitimate signs I see are on corporate chains and hospitals (which are generally corporate entities too).
51% signs seem to be less prevalent too. At one time it seems businesses could restrict or designate a room or area as the place where alcohol for on-premises consumption (i.e. the bar in a hotel) and that would have a 51% sign. Now the license applies to the whole entity at a given street address, so food sales are part of the equation and thus all the hotels I have been in for example, there is no (longer) a 51% restriction at the bar itself. So you can legally carry at the bar where Teddy recruited the Rough Riders. Generally you will only see a 51% sign at a place whose primary business is selling alcohol by the drink, i.e. it is strictly a bar, not a TGIF or something similar.
As to what people do when they do run into a 30.06 sign that meets the legal requirements? Well, with a modicum of care it is possible to stash your piece in the car without ventilating your car or your leg. And of course concealed is concealed, altho I certainly would not advise or admit to any specific act on the internet. In the last year for which the DPS published data (2013) there were exactly seven (7) convictions for Unlawful Carry by a License Holder, and I think that includes more than just crossing the sign. So this does not seem to be a problem either way.
While May is officially still spring, it still gets pretty warm, so you may find a vest not all that comfy except well after dark. I just carry under an untucked T-shirt or polo, and am fortunate in this is perfectly acceptable attire in my work and social scenes. I doubt you will find many 51% locations that will require you to disarm. Recall this only applies to places that serve alcohol to drink on the premises, NOT package stores, gas stations, grocery stores that sell beer, etc. Those places will have a sign that says 10 year felony for unlicensed possession of a firearm, but that does not apply to license holders.
Enjoy your trip and welcome to Texas!
The House companion bill for licensed OC was heard in the Texas House's Homeland Security and Public Safety committee yesterday. The committee custom or rule is to hold a hearing in one meeting and vote in a later meeting, so it was not passed out of committee. I expect it will pass at some point in the future, and then the hurdle will be the Calendars Committee.
As a side note, Campus Carry has been tracking along with Open Carry in the Texas Senate - they were both originally considered in the same hearing by the same committee, and have had the same panty-bunchers wailing about both of them. Just this morning it successfully passed out of the Senate to the House as well.
Kirk Freeman
Grandmaster
That is certainly good news as to campus carry. We cannot allow little islands of gun free zones to be established where the antis can pretend the real world does not exist.
At the moment it has an amendment that will forbid open carry on campus. So I guess as long as they can't see guns, then they can still pretend and dream I guess. Would you take away their dreams?! Why do you hate dreamers?!
HB910, which is the Texas House bill authorizing licensed open carry, has been voted out of the Homeland Security and Public Safety Committee. Not a huge surprise, since the bill's author is the chairman of that committee. The vote was 7 to 2, with the two being Democrats. One Democrat and all Republican members of the committee voted for it.
House panel approves open-carry bill | www.statesman.com
It is now up to the Calendars Committee to schedule 910 for a floor vote. HB910 has about 80 authors/coauthors, which is a majority of the House, so if it reaches the floor for a vote, it should pass.
HB910 is the companion bill to SB17, which was passed by the full Senate back on 3/17. I believe the bills are identical,[STRIKE] so not sure if a House/Senate committee will be required to reconcile the two bills. I doubt if they are much different if they are not identical, and maybe the Senate one can be substituted for the floor vote and thus avoid the reconciliation meeting altogether? Dunno about those details.[/STRIKE]
ETA: I learn more about my Legislature every day. The same bill (not just companion bill) has to be heard in committee and passed by both houses, thus at this point SB17 still needs to be assigned to committee and voted out, then it can take the place of HB910. The committee went ahead with HB910 so as to get the witness testimony out of the way and get it on the House calendar for a vote. When SB17 is sent to the committee, it will be quickly acted on without taking more testimony or public hearings, and then be substituted on the calendar in place of HB910.
In any case, there is no GOOD reason why licensed OC should not end up on Governor Abbott's desk, and he has already stated more than once he will sign an OC bill if it gets to him.
The only hitch at this point is whether the Calendars Committee will park the bill and not allow it to come to a floor vote. The Speaker of the House of course controls this, and many view him with suspicion -- he has supported many 2A bills, but he has squashed Campus Carry in the past (and maybe some others), so there is some trepidation there (at least by me).
Many think the mini-revolt against him at the beginning of the session, while not successful in dislodging him, may have put him on notice from the more conservative end of the Republican spectrum, so that there is pressure on him to prove his bonafides. I still suspect he is going to try to squash Campus Carry again, so he may save his kibosh for that and try to build up some credit by letting OC go through.
We shall see.
House panel approves open-carry bill | www.statesman.com
It is now up to the Calendars Committee to schedule 910 for a floor vote. HB910 has about 80 authors/coauthors, which is a majority of the House, so if it reaches the floor for a vote, it should pass.
HB910 is the companion bill to SB17, which was passed by the full Senate back on 3/17. I believe the bills are identical,[STRIKE] so not sure if a House/Senate committee will be required to reconcile the two bills. I doubt if they are much different if they are not identical, and maybe the Senate one can be substituted for the floor vote and thus avoid the reconciliation meeting altogether? Dunno about those details.[/STRIKE]
ETA: I learn more about my Legislature every day. The same bill (not just companion bill) has to be heard in committee and passed by both houses, thus at this point SB17 still needs to be assigned to committee and voted out, then it can take the place of HB910. The committee went ahead with HB910 so as to get the witness testimony out of the way and get it on the House calendar for a vote. When SB17 is sent to the committee, it will be quickly acted on without taking more testimony or public hearings, and then be substituted on the calendar in place of HB910.
In any case, there is no GOOD reason why licensed OC should not end up on Governor Abbott's desk, and he has already stated more than once he will sign an OC bill if it gets to him.
The only hitch at this point is whether the Calendars Committee will park the bill and not allow it to come to a floor vote. The Speaker of the House of course controls this, and many view him with suspicion -- he has supported many 2A bills, but he has squashed Campus Carry in the past (and maybe some others), so there is some trepidation there (at least by me).
Many think the mini-revolt against him at the beginning of the session, while not successful in dislodging him, may have put him on notice from the more conservative end of the Republican spectrum, so that there is pressure on him to prove his bonafides. I still suspect he is going to try to squash Campus Carry again, so he may save his kibosh for that and try to build up some credit by letting OC go through.
We shall see.
Last edited:
Site Supporter
Staff online
-
d.kaufmanStill Here
Members online
- den57
- Bosshoss
- jwamplerusa
- Bollorollo
- KMaC
- fatman1957
- henry0reilly
- 10mmfan
- sunnyrambler
- jsharmon7
- Hoosierdood
- slims2002
- Mice54
- tjh88
- OneBadV8
- x34822
- 223 Gunner
- Kirk Freeman
- jabean
- Born2vette
- Shadow01
- BrentTheBoat
- d.kaufman
- Deldorado
- J D
- dfcrane
- NINJA
- BeDome
- bboalltherm17
- Angrysauce
- Gabriel
- Bennettjh
- Quiet Observer
- Sdiersing
- Maverick
- Bobby
- Mike Grasso
- dougha5
- Denny347
- Timjoebillybob
- cmann250
- WillH
- DarkLight
- TLHelmer
- Mr.Softball
- INPatriot
- CheapPreBan
- Jmtbug21
- bobzilla
- HoosierHunter07
