"we are so close" is what the anti-CCW on campus one texas are saying

[thelaststand]

The bill has stalled twice now and if we don't act, it will fail again this year.

Here is the website of students for gun-free schools (no CCW): "we are so close"

http://us1.campaign-archive1.com/?u=21153b83953bbe58bebc80b81&id=e1deb9f74e

It's time to get busy, as we sit back and do nothing, the anti gun groups have spread enough lies and deception to build up some support.

Here's the website for CCW on campus
http://www.concealedcampus.org/

and here's the website for the facebook group that will keep you informed:
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/group.php?gid=14713857073

 

[thelaststand]

we need to call these senators and ask them to support the bill.

Senator Eddie Lucio, Jr: (512) 463-0127
Senator Mario Gallegos, Jr. (pronounced gah-YAY-goess): (512) 463-0106
Senator Robert Duncan: (512) 463-0128
Senator Chuy Hinojosa (pronounced ee-no-HO-suh): (512) 463-0120
Senator Carlos Uresti: (512) 463-0119

 

[GEM]

It is naive to think that antigun groups are causal to the failure of these bills, if that is what happens.

Thinking that diverts you from the real opposition. Remember what Alice Tripp says in the TSRA reports. We have a 'conservative' legislature and gun totin', coyote shootin' governor. Why we even can buy a LCP with Perry's signature on it. Alice says if it fails - you can't blame antigunners and liberals.

Look at hypocritical 'conservatives' who bend over to monied interests.

If you accept that standard rant - you are naive. Now Charles Cotton says all is not lost. Hope not.

But if this has to be tried again in a couple of years, the standard progun presentation and rants against liberal/antis has to be rethought on a strategic level.

Now, I could be wrong. Direct electoral threats to the no voters might work. But could that work? You going to tell a socalled progun Rep that you are going to vote for the Democrat? Going to generate a wave of more progun than the GOP Republican Democrats.

The new no votes, if that is what happens, from the GOP aren't because they are convinced by anti arguments. Don't be naive, they are sell outs to powerful monied interests.

 

[Spec ops Grunt]

The GOP sells out to monied interests? Who knew?

In seriousness, look at all the "Big Buisiness" type Republicans, Bloomberg, Giulliani, Bush, Cheny, they are no friends of the RTKBA.

 

[Deltaboy1984]

We need to pass this; I have told mine 1 armed student could have stopped the mess at VT.

 

[GEM]

The more dangerous to the RKBA are the GOP types are those who proclaim the cause and then act in shadows against expanding gun rights.

Bloomberg is overt against guns - his connection to the GOP was simply a move to get on the ballot in NYC.

Here's the crucial bit of data from Alice Tripp. The gun bills (campus and parking lot) could have been put on the emergency agenda to expedite through the committee crap. But he didn't. He did put an antiabortion bill on it - as according to the political press he wanted to provide some 'red' meat to the conservatives. Note that a gun bill wasn't red meat to the conservative (HUH?) or was it that business and money don't care about an abortion bill that might be unconstitutional. So the game was give something of bread and circuses to ranting conservatives (they really can't think this through - ) but don't give something that the money folks don't like.

And - by the way - did he make a speech lately saying - I want these bills! There may be more coyotes out there.

On our campus we are having wild dog attacks. Maybe Rick can bring his LCP here and take care of business. OH, wait - you can't have guns on campus Rick.

Now I may be wrong and Mr. Cotton is correct and the bills will pass. I've annoyed our fac representatives by being a proponent of guns rights and pointing out their official faculty opposition was irrational.

I await to see what happens but I and my progun faculty friends are not holding their breath.

 

[64zebra]

I've contacted mine several times.
I'll be happy when my wife can go to work with her G26 on her instead of locked up in the car.
They were actually told in a faculty/staff meeting during the "safety" portion, that if someone came in shooting they were to duck under their desk or run away if possible!
They did practice scenarios and when the 'shooter' came in my wife made a gun with her finger and stood up saying "BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG"
and the guy asked what she was doing, she replied 'what I should be able to do to stop the murdering'
They moved on to the next group and didn't address anything.

 

[GEM]

Also suggested is throwing your lap top, everyone huddling into a mass in the corner of the room. Great plans.

Actually, running for your life is not a bad plan - if the opportunity arises. When you get a message to stay where you are - that indicates that the authorities have no idea what's up and you should run for your life, if you can.

We have cell phone alerts. I told folks that if you can read the cell phone alert - you aren't where the action is - so isn't that special.

I did try an experiment with the famous throw your lap top technique. In any large classroom - you can't reach the guy with a throw and the time it takes to throw it, 8 people can be shot. Oops.

Of course, maybe Governor Perry can throw his lap top at the next coyote or run away, leaving his pooch in the lurch.

 

[gavelwacker]

Remember..."911 is government sponsored Dial-A-Prayer"

I'll take my chances with defending myself and not waiting for the Calvary to show up.
David.

 

[64zebra]

GEM
also forgot to mention that their new building is equipped with panic buttons in the classrooms.....located by the door....and the teachers podium/equipment is at the front of the room 30-40 feet away

 

[GEM]

The panic button might sound the alarm to the authorities but it won't save the first classroom. If a large lecture - many are shot.

The police, even if competent and fast (as some departments are) will arrive minutes after the damage is done. Then the shooter probably kills himself. Or the shooter has taken the class as hostage for evil purposes.

Also, it's been shown to launch a campus wide phone alert, it might take 3 to 11 phone calls and decisions. Again the first 30 are shot or held hostage.

All of these messages are calculate mainly to avoid liability later = after the critical incident. Yes, there is a warning function if it were a prolonged Mumbai style incident but the first folk are toast.

 

[64zebra]

GEM it sounds as if you may have misunderstood my viewpoint based on your replies....my posts were examples of what my wife (college prof) has to deal with at work and how ridiculous it is for their safety, if you were just embellishing my posts then thanks

our department will respond fast and we all have very good active shooter training, but it will be a minute or two before first officer arrives and that is unacceptable

My wife has to lock up her Glock in her truck at school but carries a Taser, OC, and knife on her. She would be one of many thousands that would instantly be able and in position to stop a threat before any, or any more lives would be taken at the school shooting.

Its absolutely absurd that our legislators are looking at expanding their carrying capabilities but won't get rid of the commonly known disarmament zones for the dirtbags/homicidal maniacs to take advantage of.

 

[GEM]

No, sorry - I didn't misunderstand and thought her action was excellent. Told my friends about it at lunch.

I was commenting on the stupidity or initial futility of the school plans for a critical incident.

I apologize if I sounded critical of you. Didn't mean it.

I've been the bad guy in simulations and worked with our department. Thus, the objections to carry based on other measures being efficacious are ridiculous. I was trying - perhaps badly to point that out. The best way to stop the initial wave or mitigate damage is for reasonable people to have the ability to have a firearm.

Now I'm sad.

Glenn

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Thinking that diverts you from the real opposition. Remember what Alice Tripp says in the TSRA reports. We have a 'conservative' legislature and gun totin', coyote shootin' governor. Why we even can buy a LCP with Perry's signature on it. Alice says if it fails - you can't blame antigunners and liberals.

Reminds me of Ted Nugent's efforts to reach non-NRA gun owners by blaming them for what anti-gunners are doing.

Buying a LCP with Perry's signature on it has nothing to do with the Texas legislature. It has to do with big monied interests - Ruger being engaged in a marketing campaign.

Already contacted my legislators, but if they are sellouts, then it won't matter if i contacted them or not.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

TSRA's April 12 update explains who the problem children are and what can be done to move the bill forward:

First Senator Lucio and then Senator Gallegos!
Greetings!

Rumors include the Brady Campaign funneling money into Texas to kill CHL on Campus!

Background:

SB 354by Sen. Jeff Wentworth (R-San Antonio) would allow adult students, faculty, and staff with a concealed handgun license to carry in buildings located on college campuses currently prohibited by Texas law. SB 354 would also stop colleges and universities from creating administrative rules which serve to expel a student or terminate an employee for simply having their licensed handgun in their personal vehicle.

You might be interested in knowing that every college and university in the state of Texas has such administrative rules on the books. That's what local control buys you: zip, nada, nothing!

Update and Status:

SB 354 became eligible to be debated on the Senate floor last week. TSRA worked to help Senator Wentworth count the required votes to reach the two-thirds rule. The Texas House uses a Calendars Committee which prioritizes and sets the House Calendar; the Senate requires 2/3s of the total senators present to agree to bring a bill up for discussion. There are 31 senators and the required number is 21. The final vote is an up or down simple majority.

It's a gentlemen's agreement. I'll hear your bill even though I might ultimately vote against it, and you'll hear mine. It also gives power to the minority party and in the case of SB 354, a great deal of power. Two Senators have taken SB 354 hostage, two with help from their "friends".

Senator Wentworth had counted his votes and turned in his list to the Lt. Governor and we were good-to-go with 22 votes, counting Senator Wentworth.

Lt Governor Dewhurst recognized Senator Wentworth who made the required motion to suspend the rules and consider SB 354. A debate followed.

The list of senators agreeing to the two-thirds rule included Senator Lucio (D-Brownsville). Senator Lucio requested language that would address a primary, secondary, and child-care facility on one of his college campuses. Over night the language was hammered out and Senator Lucio's staff believed the correction would address the school's concerns, would be acceptable to Senator Lucio, and wasn't harmful to Senator Wentworth's bill. Good-to-go...

The next day, last Thursday, as Senator Wentworth laid out and began explaining his bill, Senator Lucio decided that he wanted his college to take the weekend (Friday, Saturday, and Sunday) to review this language and insisted Senator Wentworth hold off.

Wentworth was ready and anxious to get on with it. He would keep the language but did not want to wait three more days. Lucio removed his name from the list and now we were down to 21 but still Good-to-go.

For quite a while the debate continued among those who opposed the bill. This included Senator Steve Ogden (R-Bryan). Ogden insisted that so few students would have a concealed handgun license, how could this number possibly make a college campus more safe. Senator, this is about personal safety! Not policing a college campus.

After a couple of hours a group of senators gathered around Senator Mario Gallegos' desk. Gallegos was on the two-thirds list. Senator Gallegos supported a similar bill last session and told me he had no problem supporting it again. However, with some pressure from the opposition, he too took his name off and now we were at 20 and below the required number. The wheels came off!

Senators Lucio and Gallegos signed the sheet and pledged to vote for the two-third rule to bring up SB 354. The pledge sheet was submitted to the Lt. Governor's desk. Nothing happened to cause these two senators to go back on their commitment, their word to Senator Wentworth and to Texans.

Below is the list of contact information for Texas state senators:

Please pay special attention and email and to call Senators Lucio (D-Brownsville), Gallegos (D-Houston), and Ogden (R-Bryan). It's not a waste of time, it's important that everyone hears from you but particularly the "opposition". If you have children or grandchildren in a Texas college let the Senate know this information too.

Senate Contact Part 1
*Senator Brian Birdwell (R-Granbury) (Co-author) u
[email protected]
512-463-0122

*Senator John Carona (R-Dallas)
(Co-author)
[email protected]
512-463-0116

Senator Wendy Davis (D-Fort Worth)
[email protected]
512-463-0110

*Senator Robert Deuell (R-Greenville) (Co-author)
[email protected]
512-463-0102

Senator Robert Duncan (R-Lubbock)
[email protected]
512-463-0128

Senator Rodney Ellis (D-Houston)
[email protected]
512-463-0113

*Senator Craig Estes (R-Wichita Falls) (Co-author)
[email protected]
512-463-0130

*Senator Troy Fraser (R-Horseshoe Bay) (Co-author)
[email protected]
512-463-0124

Senator Mario Gallegos, Jr. (D-Houston)
[email protected]
512-463-0106

*Senator Chris Harris (R-Arlington) (Co-author)
[email protected]
512-463-0109

*Senator Glenn Hegar, Jr. (R-Katy) (Co-author)
[email protected]
512-463-0118

Senator Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa (D-McAllen)
[email protected]
512-463-0120

Senator Joan Huffman (R-Southside Place)
[email protected]
512-463-0117

*Senator Mike Jackson (R-La Porte) (Co-author)
[email protected]
512-463-0111

Senator Eddie Lucio, Jr. (D-Brownsville)
[email protected]
512-463-0127

*Senator Jane Nelson (R-Flower Mound) (Co-author)
[email protected]
512-463-0112

Senator Robert Nichols (R-Jacksonville)
[email protected]
512-463-0103

Senate Contact Part 2
[email protected]
512-463-0105

*Senator Dan Patrick (R-Houston)(Co-author)
[email protected]
512-463-0107

Senator Jose Rodriguez (D-El Paso)
[email protected]
512-463-0129

*Senator Kel Seliger (R-Amarillo) (Co-author)
[email protected]
512-463-0129

Senator Florence Shapiro (R-Plano)
[email protected]
512-463-0108

Senator Carlos Uresti (D-San Antonio)
[email protected]
512-463-0119

Senator Leticia Van de Putte (D-San Antonio)
[email protected]
512-463-0126

Senator Kirk Watson (D-Austin)
[email protected]
512-463-0114

**Senator Jeff Wentworth (R-San Antonio) (Bill Author)
[email protected]
512-463-0125

Senator Royce West (D-Dallas)
[email protected]
512-463-0123

Senator John Whitmire (D-Houston)
[email protected]
512-463-0115

*Senator Tommy Williams (R-The Woodlands) (Co-author)
[email protected]
512-463-0104

Senator Judith Zaffirini (D-Laredo)
[email protected]
512-463-0121

SB 354 is a personal safety bill for concealed handgun licensees. What good is protection with outrageous limitations.

Thanks for your help and join, renew, or upgrade your membership at www.tsra.com or call 512-615-4200.

Keep the Faith!

Alice Tripp
Texas State Rifle Association

Legislative Director

 

[Quoheleth]

Senator Eddie Lucio, Jr: (512) 463-0127
Senator Mario Gallegos, Jr. (pronounced gah-YAY-goess): (512) 463-0106
Senator Robert Duncan: (512) 463-0128
Senator Chuy Hinojosa (pronounced ee-no-HO-suh): (512) 463-0120
Senator Carlos Uresti: (512) 463-0119

I just spent a few minutes on the phone, calling these senators' offices.

Of the five, only three wanted my name, which tells me they took my opinion seriously. Of those three, only one asked for my full name and address (which means I'll get a letter asking for a contribution, most likely).

Lucio's staffer gave me the 3rd degree, wanting to know why I support the bill, can individual campuses hold reforendums to chose, locally, to not allow CCW, and another question which I now forget. Obvious anti-CCW sentiment.

Hinojosa's office grilled me on if I or anyone in my immediate family attend or work at a state college or university. I answered that no, we do not but my wife recently completed her MEd at Lamar in Beaumont and I wished she had an option of carrying (nevermind what she thinks of CCW ).

We shall see...

Q

 

[nigmalg]

That website's posting was by a "John Woods" of Virginia Tech. I imagine he brought up Virginia Tech in his signature as proof of experience in why we need to ban weapons on campus... Is he actually stretching to make the claim that a campus-permissive cwp law would have had a further negative effect on the VT murders?

What a silly position.

I must read more about John Woods apparently psychosis.

 

[woerm]

Lucio and Gallegos

Talked to their staffs

drivel

drivel

'don't want guns on campus etc etc etc.

'want this exception / that exception yada yada yada.'

morons

:banghead::banghead:

 

[GEM]

That's right. Told them I would support their opponents due to their actions as described by the TSRA report. Even if not in my district - I could contribute.

But I am not a rich dude.

 

[woerm]

?? Shaprio

Shaprio's staff doesn't even know where she is on thsi:banghead:

 

[CapnMac]

Well, the "stop mad gunman" argument should not really be the issue.

First off, only about 25% of a college student population will be old enough (21) to have a CHL. So, the "anti" arguments about students "gunning" the prof can be held to be specious.

No, the way to pitch this is for the University employees who have to work all hours of the night. Often they work in remote locations; or they have to travel to diverse locations. Presently, they can have their firearms in their vehicles, but must abandon them to enter buildings. Buildings that often have security systems or locked doors, making the employees vulnerable until egress is achieved. While then making the (few) vehicles in the parking lot more attractive for break-in.

What of an employee, not faced with a lone gunman, but with 2-3 thugs breaking into cars in the parking lot? Breaking into the one car the innocent employee knows has an arm within?

We changed the law to allow CHL-bearers into our Governmental buildings for this very reason.

We ought be asking "If it's good enough for the Capitol, Why not on Campus?"

Or, that's my 2¢

 

[GEM]

That's a good point - but unfortunately the argument seems to be concentrated on rampage killers as the reason for campus carry. That's my take.

Lots of campuses offer escorts at night for staff and have emergency signal poles (yeah, I know). So that would be the counter to the walk at night argument.

The problem with the rampage centric arguments is that the countercarry arguments are:

1. The carriers are for the most part untrained to shoot under stress.
2. They will shoot an innocent (studies show that hurting an innocent has enormous impact on considering consequences).
3. The arriving police will shoot the carrier by mistake (a version of don't shoot an innocent). The police fear this and there is reasonable evidence that accidents do happen.

Add the fear of the irresponsible gun toting frat boy as a great risk to the university than the deterrence of muggers - and you get the antipackage based on gun issues.

Also, add liability and socio-political opposition to guns - you get campus carry bills in trouble.

The liability issue is the one that turns the big money and powerful lobbies loose on the supposedly progun TX legislature so the 'gun' fold or give tepid support.

That's my view of the situation from being in the business. No one hardly mentions muggers, it's all rampage.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Woerm, if you mean Senator Florence Shapiro, she is a co-sponsor and voted for the bill to be heard. Don't know why her staff didn't know this.

 

[rhenriksen]

The campus carry bill is scheduled for the Senate floor again tomorrow. We have well over the simple majority to pass it there in the Senate, and since it's already come to the floor twice before, a two thirds majority is irrelevant now.

After Monday, the focus will shift to the House - to get the equivalent house bill out of the House Calendar committee and onto the floor for a vote there.