Open Carry, TX. style

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't get it though. If the house send it over with amendment 9 in the language, and the senate ultimately voted it to be the exact same thing, why the hell does it have to go back to the house? Just because the senate committee made a change that didn't end up making its way through the senate ultimately? I'm confused,.
 
That's the way I understand it as well. House passed HB910 with House Amendment 3, which is the Dutton/Rinaldi amendment (regarding a peace officer may not stop and ask for CHL solely because an individual is OCing). Went to Senate committee. Senate committee only stripped that specific amendment out. Went to Senate floor. Senate passed HB910 with Senate Amendment 9, which IS the Dutton/Rinaldi amendment. They referred to it as the Dutton amendment several times during the debate.

Since both legislative bodies passed the same bill with the same amendments, it should go straight to the desk of the Governor. Correct?
 
But is the language the exact same as the original Dutton amendment? If not, the conference committee has to square the differences, grammatical though they may be, before sending it on (though I don't think a final vote in either complete chamber would be required at that point).

Still need a schoolhouse rock video... <singing> "I'm just a bill, and I got no-friggin'-clue-what's-goin'-on..."

Thinking ahead to the worst case scenario...what should be the consequences if they fail to do this ONE thing we loyal gunnies asked of them, early and often, in the run up to the election last year? Personally, I elected Abbot for this ONE bill, since he took frequent public stands supporting it, and I'll be royally peeved with him if he doesn't take the lead upon its failure and immediately call a special session to deal with the issue first thing. The Congress' processes are so Byzantine it is obvious even they have no idea what's happening, so a failure is apparently to be expected, but Abbot has the final say on calling the special sessions (the way Texas gets the other 3/4 of its business done).

TCB
 
After this I'll await somebody more learned to weigh in, but what I've read here and elsewhere indicates to me the bill should be going straight to the Governor's desk now.

The reason they stripped Dutton-Rinaldi out in committee and then fought so hard to keep it out today on the floor is to force it back to the House in hopes it would sit there and die due to time running out.
 
I'd consider OC a done deal at this point. It only goes to conference committee if the House bill's author objects to the amendments and the House agrees. I don't see that happening with a bill that is technically identical to the one the House sent over. Even if it somehow ended up in conference committee, Straus and Patrick appoint the members of said committee.

At this point, I would be calling House reps and asking them to support SB11 (Campus carry) and any other gun bills sent over by the Senate (SB version). No amendments except those acceptable to the author.
 
On Facebook in the "Trending" section there is a link to this story (and others like it from news sources all around Texas. )


"Texas Senate OKs open-carry legislation"

http://www.chron.com/news/politics/article/Texas-Senate-OKS-open-carry-legislation-6282299.php


"AUSTIN — Texas is a hair's breadth away from legalizing the licensed open carry of handguns after the state Senate late Friday approved the legislation following hours spent arguing over a controversial amendment that would limit cops' ability to detain gun owners. The Senate approved House Bill 910, which would allow properly licensed gun owners to openly carry their handguns in shoulder or hip holsters. The bill passed by a final vote of 19-12 and now heads back to the House, where that chamber's members will have to agree with the Senate's changes."


Good Luck y'all.
.
 
Another promising public statement:
"While the Senate considered attaching ‘campus carry’ to this bill, Speaker Joe Straus has assured the Texas Senate that the House will approve a ‘campus carry’ bill in time to be approved by the Senate and sent to the Governor to become law before time runs out on the 84th Legislative Session,” concluded Patrick.
Click to expand...
 
The Texas Tribune is reporting that it will have to go back to the House due to small changes to the bill before the govenor gets to sign it.

Geez, what a circus.
 
So please excuse my confusion: the amendment that says a LEO is not allowed to stop one who is open carrying and inquire as to the carrier's CHL is still part of the law? Austin Police Chief Acevedo has previously indicated that he will ignore this part of the law if it includes that amendment. Interesting times we live in.
 
From what I understand, the Senate committee stripped the amendment prohibiting police from stopping open-carriers before the bill was brought to the floor.

While on the Senate floor, the amendment was added back in.
 
This circus proves there is no right to keep and bear arms in Texas. Texans need to fix their state's constitution.
 
The Dutton amendment is still part of the bill and really does nothing but restate commonly understood 4th Amendment law that has been upheld with respect to open carry licenses specifically in several Circuit Court of Appeals.

If Chief Acevedo wants to hand out the money of Austin's taxpayers to licensed open carriers, he is free to do so. I'm pretty sure stating you intend to violate their established their 4th Amendnent rights is going to lose you your qualified immunity though. And that is true with or without the Dutton amendment.
 
Deaf Smith said:
Be glad it's a circus least laws can be rammed down our throat like Pelosi and Reid did Obamacare.

Deaf
Click to expand...
Problem is...by the time many of the laws that come out of the Texas legislature are so convoluted by appeasement and lack of definitive writ it takes, in many cases, more than several court decisions to even approach hammering it out. We have several cold hard laws in Texas that some police departments/agency simply ignore. They'll arrest someone knowing the person will get off but when it happens the police/dept/agency simply go..."Our bad."

This OC/CC pending law is ripe for that. A licensee has no capacity to argue with an arresting officer. The licensee will simply have to hope the small county judge doesn't need to pay his secretary out of court fines. There is an expression here, and it may be elsewhere also, "You may beat the time but you won't beat the ride."
 
Now how is a Texas cop gonna arrest a person OCing if they have a CHL on them?

Claim they never heard of the law???

New Mexico, Arizona, and Vermont have had the law for many years. Have you heard that happening there?

Deaf
 
Now how is a Texas cop gonna arrest a person OCing if they have a CHL on them?
Click to expand...
The concern is not that they'll arrest me as much as they might stop me and detain me for some time solely for the purposes of making sure that I have a CHL.
 
The concern is not that they'll arrest me as much as they might stop me and detain me for some time solely for the purposes of making sure that I have a CHL.
Click to expand...
Since you MUST carry your CCL when carrying(open or concealed) that should be a non starter. Simply comply and present your CCL along with your ID and be on your way.

Bill
 
"The Dutton amendment is still part of the bill and really does nothing but restate commonly understood 4th Amendment law that has been upheld with respect to open carry licenses specifically in several Circuit Court of Appeals."
Yeah, it's not like they'd put a penalty for violating that little bit of text they added ;)

TCB
 
Since you MUST carry your CCL when carrying(open or concealed) that should be a non starter. Simply comply and present your CCL along with your ID and be on your way.

Bill
Click to expand...
Why would I accept such a situation for doing something perfectly legal? Would you accept being randomly stopped in your car solely so that the police can verify that you have a drivers license? That's absurd, especially for something that is supposed to be considered a right and not a privilege.

It's also proven unnecessary, given the experiences of other states that support OC.
 
rbernie said:
Why would I accept such a situation for doing something perfectly legal? Would you accept being randomly stopped in your car solely so that the police can verify that you have a drivers license? That's absurd, especially for something that is supposed to be considered a right and not a privilege.

It's also proven unnecessary, given the experiences of other states that support OC.
Click to expand...
If you have a fishing pole near a lake or river and a Game warden sees you, they can stop you and ask for your fishing license. If you are in the woods with a gun and Game warden can stop you and ask for your hunting license.

If you are involved in a licensed activity, and OCing is a licensing activity according to the law to be passed, then they can ask for ID AND you have to produce it.

Simple, no?

Deaf
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Texas Senate approves open carry of handguns
2 3 4
Replies
82
Views
6K
Red Wind
Red Wind
C
  • Locked
West Virginia Castle Doctrine Bill to Governor
Replies
1
Views
486
Bubbles
B
M
  • Locked
Oklahoma: "Unlicensed Open Carry" Passes House
Replies
3
Views
1K
Midwest
M
G
  • Locked
Ohio House spanks Senate
Replies
1
Views
433
GhostShooter
G
J
  • Locked
Open Carry Passed in TX... now what?
Replies
24
Views
2K
Deltaboy1984
Deltaboy1984
Back
Top