83(R) HB 700 - Open Carry Bill

[Vaquero]

Although I firmly believe in constitutional carry, I understand the challenges faced in obtaining such. That said, lets consider the scope of ANY firearm law in Texas. One size fits all may be fine for Rhode Island, but will ultimately fail to cover all the bases in most other states. Metro areas have issues to address that vast rural expanses don't. My hometown has a population of 1200 +-. If I go due North to the Oklahoma border, I'm going to see Childress as the largest "city". Most threats outside of interstate corridors have 4 legs and teeth. I don't think they are gonna " go for my gun". If I visit one of your fair cities, bet your ass, my guns are secure and hidden.
Just a Western perspective.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

Sure does muddy the water when someone comes in half assed and starts advertising their first post talking about tactics when we're talking about rights.

Yep, you're right. I guess I've just come to expect a total circus on these threads.

BTW, everyone can go here (Texas House of Representatives : House Members) to ping their state rep and here (The Texas State Senate: Current Members of the Texas Senate) to ping their state senator.

 

[XinTX]

I'd really like two separate 30.06 signs. I think it relieves some of the concerns about more signs going up that also bar concealed carry, while giving property owners more say in exactly what they want / don't want happening on their property.

I think separate signage is a win-win.

It's one of the reasons I'd like to see OC in a completely separate section than CC. Two sections. Two fights. More likely a store won't post BOTH signs (though some will). But if the end goal is to get to Constitutional Carry, I think two sections are a good step. If OC is challenged in court (and the bed wetters will try) and is survives, it's not too far to jump from there to Constitutional Carry.

 

[txinvestigator]

It's one of the reasons I'd like to see OC in a completely separate section than CC. Two sections. Two fights. More likely a store won't post BOTH signs (though some will). .

I think that is a leap. I have not polled many business owners. On what do you base your "more likely"?

 

[biglucky]

Yep, you're right. I guess I've just come to expect a total circus on these threads.

BTW, everyone can go here (Texas House of Representatives : House Members) to ping their state rep and here (The Texas State Senate: Current Members of the Texas Senate) to ping their state senator.

Thanks for this. Bookmarked and emailed both my rep and Senator.

 

[JaredW]

IANAL, but does this bill reduce the requirements for a 30.06 sign?
It seems it edited 30.06 as follows:

(A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: “Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun”; or

to

(1)AAa card or other document on which is written language indicating that pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed or unconcealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, may not enter the property with a concealed handgun or with any handgun, whether concealed or not, as applicable;or

Which could mean a "Gun Buster" sign (regardless of size) with "TPC 30.06" written underneath in 1" lettering would now be legally enforceable for both CC and OC? Since the "identical language" is no longer required?
Can anyone with a better grasp of legal speak confirm or deny this?

 

[txinvestigator]

IANAL, but does this bill reduce the requirements for a 30.06 sign?
It seems it edited 30.06 as follows:

(A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: “Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun”; or

to

(1)AAa card or other document on which is written language indicating that pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed or unconcealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, may not enter the property with a concealed handgun or with any handgun, whether concealed or not, as applicable;or

Which could mean a "Gun Buster" sign (regardless of size) with "TPC 30.06" written underneath in 1" lettering would now be legally enforceable for both CC and OC? Since the "identical language" is no longer required?
Can anyone with a better grasp of legal speak confirm or deny this?

I have read it more times than I care to admit, and I have reached the same conclusions.

Just noticed your screen name. Are you a current PPO?

 

[soada101]

Get it passed. Regardless of small concerns. The bill is bigger than the holster and sign. Then constitutional carry!
@vaquero Childress is really small. I drive through to go to Amarillo on a run. The pawnshop that sells guns(next to gas station on 287) there has a dick of a owner from an outsider point of view.
But with people reactions who don't know about oc in Dallas would be interesting if it passes.

Sent from Samsung Galaxy SIII using Tapatalk.

 

[jordanmills]

IANAL, but does this bill reduce the requirements for a 30.06 sign?
It seems it edited 30.06 as follows:

(A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: “Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun”; or

to

(1)AAa card or other document on which is written language indicating that pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed or unconcealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, may not enter the property with a concealed handgun or with any handgun, whether concealed or not, as applicable;or

Which could mean a "Gun Buster" sign (regardless of size) with "TPC 30.06" written underneath in 1" lettering would now be legally enforceable for both CC and OC? Since the "identical language" is no longer required?
Can anyone with a better grasp of legal speak confirm or deny this?

This is a concern of mine too. Hopefully that can be changed to match the original.

 

[London]

This is a concern of mine too. Hopefully that can be changed to match the original.

That would be the suck but honestly I only go into 30.06ed places if I have no other choice so it shouldn't be a huge deal for me!

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

I pinged my rep and Lavender about the dual signage.

Going from proscribed language to door busters would be a big step back. We all should bring up this concern as well with our reps.

 

[JaredW]

"I want to thank everyone who has expressed support for Open Carry in our state. The response has been phenomenal ! I also want to say that some folks believe that our bill changes the 30.06 signage requirement. That is not our intent. We worked with the NRA, who has been very supportive, to come up with a bill that would not make a business bar concealed carry because they may have concerns about Open Carry. The new signage applies only to Open Carry. We will have several more attorneys and interested parties review the language next week to make sure that's what we have done. If we missed the mark, it will be fixed. The last thing we want is to diminish our right to concealed carry in an attempt to expand our legal carry rights. Thank you all."

The above quote is from Rep. Lavender's facebook page on Saturday (1/26/13)
https://www.facebook.com/pages/George-Lavender-for-State-Representative/118702241499237?fref=ts

Hopefully this gets straightened out this week.

 

[Charlie]

Although I firmly believe in constitutional carry, I understand the challenges faced in obtaining such. That said, lets consider the scope of ANY firearm law in Texas. One size fits all may be fine for Rhode Island, but will ultimately fail to cover all the bases in most other states. Metro areas have issues to address that vast rural expanses don't. My hometown has a population of 1200 +-. If I go due North to the Oklahoma border, I'm going to see Childress as the largest "city". Most threats outside of interstate corridors have 4 legs and teeth. I don't think they are gonna " go for my gun". If I visit one of your fair cities, bet your ass, my guns are secure and hidden.
Just a Western perspective.

Bingo! We've got at winner! (at least in reference to us out here in the sticks).

 

[txinvestigator]

"I want to thank everyone who has expressed support for Open Carry in our state. The response has been phenomenal ! I also want to say that some folks believe that our bill changes the 30.06 signage requirement. That is not our intent. We worked with the NRA, who has been very supportive, to come up with a bill that would not make a business bar concealed carry because they may have concerns about Open Carry. The new signage applies only to Open Carry. We will have several more attorneys and interested parties review the language next week to make sure that's what we have done. If we missed the mark, it will be fixed. The last thing we want is to diminish our right to concealed carry in an attempt to expand our legal carry rights. Thank you all."

The above quote is from Rep. Lavender's facebook page on Saturday (1/26/13)
https://www.facebook.com/pages/George-Lavender-for-State-Representative/118702241499237?fref=ts

Hopefully this gets straightened out this week.

Nice, thanks

 

[soada101]

Any info on to when they will try to have this passed? like a "date" saying they will vote or if it will even proceed?

 

[ShootWhenICan]

As long as it's legal open carry where it isn't illegal to conceal I'm all for it, so I can choose to do either.
Would hate to go to a meeting or a fancy dinner party packing a full size 1911.
Thus concealing needs to stay an option.
I say this because I think I read something about some state(s) making it illegal to conceal a weapon once they had ok'd open carry.

 

[matefrio]

Any info on to when they will try to have this passed? like a "date" saying they will vote or if it will even proceed?

Some bills are effective as soon as they are signed by The Governor and others have an effective date set as part of the bill. Who knows, this bill has an uphill climb.

As far as dates things are happening, keep checking the link in the first post for updates. If there is a public hearing they give 5 day notification at least.

 

[matefrio]

As long as it's legal open carry where it isn't illegal to conceal I'm all for it, so I can choose to do either.
Would hate to go to a meeting or a fancy dinner party packing a full size 1911.
Thus concealing needs to stay an option.
I say this because I think I read something about some state(s) making it illegal to conceal a weapon once they had ok'd open carry.

I can't think of a state that revoked concealed carry once open carry was made legal.

 

[outdare]

I emailed my Representative (Gary Elkins). He is not showing sponsorship of any bills at this time. We as gun owners need to take the time and write to our representatives to make sure this is a priority.

 

[matefrio]

We have a winner here, if I'm reading this correctly. I'll call it stealth open carry.

SB 299 Relating to the unintentional display of a weapon by a person licensed to carry a concealed handgun. Red below is stricken.

SECTION 1. Section 46.035, Penal Code, is amended to read as
	follows:
	Sec. 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE
	HOLDER. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license
	holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person
	under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,
	and intentionally [fails to conceal the handgun] displays the
	handgun in plain view of another person in a public place in a
	manner calculated to cause alarm and not pursuant to a justified use
	of force or threat of force as described in Chapter 9.
	(b) A license holder commits an offense if the license
	holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun
	under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,
	regardless of whether the handgun is concealed, on or about the
	license holder's person: