HB1911 Unlicensed Carry

[locke_n_load]

HB1911 just filed for unlicensed carry (2nd bill of this sort). Supposedly has the support of Alice Tripp who is big member of TSRA and I think the NRA.

With her backing, which makes me think that the TSRA and possibly NRA support this bill, I would think that unlicensed carry has a much better chance of passage this year.


I wonder if unlicensed carry passed first, if it would make passing 560 (removal of off-limit areas of license holders) much more difficult to pass, since that would mean any person not prohibited from owning a firearm would be able to carry a handgun in places like a school. I personally believe that it should be allowed, but I'm sure some of our congress critters would not agree.


Or would they amend 560 to give license holders the ability to carry in those original off-limit areas, and people without a license would still be barred?


Just some thoughts of mine. I really hope both pass in an order that gives Texan's more of their rights back. I also don't want there to be a huge rift between these supporters so that neither pass.

 

[motorcarman]

I wonder if Charles Cotton will fight this?


On January 1, the day Texas’s new open carry law took effect, excitement gave way to anxiety for some gun owners. On TexasCHLForum.com, a message board moderated by National Rifle Association (NRA) board member Charles Cotton, reports started piling up of the measure’s unintended effects. Members noted the spread of so-called “30.07” signs, which bar openly-carried guns, in businesses around the state. But they also noticed an increased number of establishments choosing to display “30.06” signs, which forbid concealed weapons, prompting one user to lament that “we have lost more than we gained.” At one point, Cotton himself weighed in. “I truly wish that open-carry supporters would admit that they were wrong and that there is a problem,” he wrote. “If I cannot carry my self-defense handgun into a store because they put up 30.06 and 30.07 signs, then someone’s ability to show their handgun to everyone will have cost me the ability to defend myself.”



https://www.thetrace.org/2016/01/open-carry-texas-cj-grisham-charles-cotton/

He is one of 4 Texans running for a seat on the NRA Board of Directors.

bob

 

[locke_n_load]

I screwed up my title. It's just unlicensed carry, not unlicensed "open" carry. Goes for both open and concealed carrying. My bad.

Mods please change thread title to "HB1911 Unlicensed Carry" please, thanks.

 

[Maverick44]

I wonder if Charles Cotton will fight this?


On January 1, the day Texas’s new open carry law took effect, excitement gave way to anxiety for some gun owners. On TexasCHLForum.com, a message board moderated by National Rifle Association (NRA) board member Charles Cotton, reports started piling up of the measure’s unintended effects. Members noted the spread of so-called “30.07” signs, which bar openly-carried guns, in businesses around the state. But they also noticed an increased number of establishments choosing to display “30.06” signs, which forbid concealed weapons, prompting one user to lament that “we have lost more than we gained.” At one point, Cotton himself weighed in. “I truly wish that open-carry supporters would admit that they were wrong and that there is a problem,” he wrote. “If I cannot carry my self-defense handgun into a store because they put up 30.06 and 30.07 signs, then someone’s ability to show their handgun to everyone will have cost me the ability to defend myself.”



https://www.thetrace.org/2016/01/open-carry-texas-cj-grisham-charles-cotton/

He is one of 4 Texans running for a seat on the NRA Board of Directors.

bob

Cotton can go **** himself.

 

[BRD@66]

The bill has a cool number.

 

[seeker_two]

Interesting take on the two CC bills.....

https://opencarrytexas.wordpress.com/2017/02/15/a-comparison-of-hb-375-and-hb-1911/

 

[locke_n_load]

Interesting take on the two CC bills.....

https://opencarrytexas.wordpress.com/2017/02/15/a-comparison-of-hb-375-and-hb-1911/

Thanks. Interesting read. The only thing I had issue with in that article is that "intoxicated" still has the same old definition is it always had, nothing really changes in that regard with 375. I do like that 375 is much clearer on who is allowed to carry - if you can legally own a gun, you can carry, as opposed to 1911, where you would have to meet all the criteria of having a license to carry (no class A/B misdemeanors in the past 5 years, etc.). As long as one of those and 560 pass, I will be a happy Texan. And maybe holding gov't officials who post signage fiscally liable as well.

 

[popo22]

I think the bills "may" be a step in the right direction but still do not like the idea of being able to forbid a person his/her right to carry simply because you committed a "Class A or B misdemeanor".

 

[Ranger60]

Another thought. If Unlicensed Carry passes and the LTC is eliminated, will anyone buying a gun in a retail store or at a gun show have to do NICS. Currently with a LTC you show the LTC, fill out the 4473 and walk out with your gun. What about those with a "John Smith" type name? They would most certainly get the three day wait. Potential impact to out of town dealers at gun shows. When I had my FFL, had a guy with a name like that, never got a CHL and was interested only in surplus rifles. He was delayed every time.

 

[Younggun]

Do either of these bills eliminate the LTC?


I've not seen any push for that as it would **** up reciprocity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ranger60]

Do either of these bills eliminate the LTC?


I've not seen any push for that as it would **** up reciprocity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Correct, as an example, Vermont has never had a license requirement and a Vermont resident cannot legally carry in Texas, but a Texas resident can carry in Vermont.

 

[TexasRedneck]

Hi guys....okay, a little clarification.

TSRA supports BOTH CC bills - but understand it WILL be an uphill battle all the way with either of them. 1911 has some things that could be better, but one of the things that the author tried to do was include language to help assuage some concerns he was hearing. As with anything else, the more support you can get for something, they better the odds of getting it through. Once passed, we can work on things - but first, you have to get it passed. I'll remind you of the huge restrictions on the initial CHL licenses - most of which have now been removed.

NEITHER bill will negate the LTC currently in effect - everyone is aware of its' importance in terms of both reciprocity AND NICS bypassing.

Both Fuelfather's better half and myself testified in the Senate hearings yesterday, both to reduce the LTC fees AND to remove the minimum caliber requirements on range qualifying. I intend to be present for both the CC bills.

Wish us luck - and contact YOUR legislator TODAY to show YOUR support! Trust me - support BOTH CC bills. If nothing else, it'll perhaps make them realize they need to do SOMEthing!

 

[45tex]

I took the CHL class back near the beginning.it included class, picture, fingerprints, and all the paperwork. $126.
Today its $80 and your on your own beyond the class time. I'd love to see these "instructors" go back to patrol.
I understand reciprocity but the LTC is not necessary. The Feds could just fix the reciprocity thing.

 

[Younggun]

This doesn't do away with the chl. It would leave it for you to decide.

And the "instructors" are usually no LE. There is no requirement to be LE and it often has little bearing on class quality. I'm not sure what you think the "instructor" should go back to patrolling.

Maybe it's a retired LE making some extra income, but I see no reason to force him out of retirement and put him in a patrol car at 70 years old.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Younggun]

Hi guys....okay, a little clarification.

TSRA supports BOTH CC bills - but understand it WILL be an uphill battle all the way with either of them. 1911 has some things that could be better, but one of the things that the author tried to do was include language to help assuage some concerns he was hearing. As with anything else, the more support you can get for something, they better the odds of getting it through. Once passed, we can work on things - but first, you have to get it passed. I'll remind you of the huge restrictions on the initial CHL licenses - most of which have now been removed.

NEITHER bill will negate the LTC currently in effect - everyone is aware of its' importance in terms of both reciprocity AND NICS bypassing.

Both Fuelfather's better half and myself testified in the Senate hearings yesterday, both to reduce the LTC fees AND to remove the minimum caliber requirements on range qualifying. I intend to be present for both the CC bills.

Wish us luck - and contact YOUR legislator TODAY to show YOUR support! Trust me - support BOTH CC bills. If nothing else, it'll perhaps make them realize they need to do SOMEthing!

Thanks for the info.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TexasRedneck]

I took the CHL class back near the beginning.it included class, picture, fingerprints, and all the paperwork. $126.
Today its $80 and your on your own beyond the class time. I'd love to see these "instructors" go back to patrol.
I understand reciprocity but the LTC is not necessary. The Feds could just fix the reciprocity thing.

Some instructors DO still offer a more comprehensive package, although with the electronic fingerprinting that DPS wants now, that's harder for them to do. And while I"ve no doubt that there are lousy instructors, I have always tried to keep in touch with at least several GOOD ones to refer folks to. As with any kind of teacher, there will be some better than others. Most I've encountered were good ones, and more than earned every penny of their fee.

The feds can't FORCE reciprocity in terms of CC - it's my understanding that it falls under "states rights". However, the door WAS opened to require them to accept LTC's from other states within THEIR state by requiring acceptance of drivers licenses, marriage licenses, etc.

 

[oldag]

HB375 sounds like a much better option according to the article.

 

[TexasRedneck]

HB375 sounds like a much better option according to the article.

Unfortunately, it faces a major uphill battle. The bill is TOO aggressive (in the view of many of our lawmakers AND the general public) in how it allows us to expand/regain our rights - and you have to remember that not everyone is a gun fan on either side of the aisle. If I can get there, I DO intend to testify in favor of it, just as I will try to do for HB 1911 - but I'm seeing more support for 1911 across the board. What everyone needs to remember is that you eat an elephant one bite at a time - and licensed OC was that first bite. There's still a LOT of concern over THAT law, much less one that reduces the restrictions any further, so it WILL be an uphill battle. There are a number of legislator's willing to accept HB 1911 that are having vapors over HB 375, simply because they see more "control". Give us either one - because they can be modified over time as folks become more accustomed to the idea.

I can't urge EVERYONE enough to write their legislator's in support of BOTH bills - because again, even an imperfect bill is better than what we have now.

BTW - the bill to rewrite Texas law regarding suppressors seems to be in VERY good shape. Essentially, it is being rewritten to mirror current AND proposed federal law regarding possession/use of a suppressor. As currently written, it requires you to be able to show your tax stamp for a suppressor - and if the HPA passes, there won't be a stamp to display.

 

[oldag]

The gun control proponents will not vote for either bill.


On the other hand, we do have CHL and open carry. May as well go big rather than put through a flawed bill. No great loss if it doesn't pass.

Go big while we have the majority.

 

[TheDan]

TSRA supports BOTH CC bills

That is outstanding to hear! They wouldn't have ever publicly supported such a bill several years ago.