Need YOUR legislative input

[karlac]

I'm assuming the main purpose of this is to allow CHL holders to carry onto public skreewl grounds?

Nope, to stop the intimidation of those legally carrying by using our tax dollars to scoff at State laws.

Posting unenforceable, _unlawful_ 30.06 signs by a municipality or state agency, for whatever reason, and by any reasonable assessment should be an _illegal_ act punishable by penalty.

(Black’s Law Dictionary defines unlawful as not authorized by law. Illegal is defined as forbidden by law. Something illegal is expressly proscribed by statute, and something unlawful is just not expressly authorized.)

 

[rushthezeppelin]

Nope, to stop the intimidation of those legally carrying by using our tax dollars to scoff at State laws.

Posting unenforceable, _unlawful_ signs by a municipality or state agency, for whatever reason, and by any reasonable assessment should be an _illegal_ act punishable by penalty.

(Black’s Law Dictionary defines unlawful as not authorized by law. Illegal is defined as forbidden by law. Something illegal is expressly proscribed by statute, and something unlawful is just not expressly authorized.)

Ahhh, definitely a good one. Still guess I would add to the convo that we need to allow teachers and administrators at least, who are CHL holders, the ability state wide to carry at school (I believe a few local municipalities have done this but statewide with preemption is definitely the way to go IMO).

 

[Byrd666]

Can something be added that would nullify federal government proposals/laws that contradict the Texas laws and or Constitution? In such a manner that Texas law would "trump" federal law/jurisdiction?
That per Texas laws, there will be no limiting of what type of semi automatic rifle, shotgun, or handgun that can be owned by an individual or company. Or any limits to the magazine capacity of said rifle, shotgun, or handgun. Within that the Texas laws on hunting not to be overridden.
That per Texas laws, a legally licensed Concealed Handgun License holders may carry his/her weapon into/onto any facility or property within the state of Texas. Private residential property not withstanding.

 

[Wiliamr]

First, the myth that a state law will trump a federal law must be accepted as that. Federal laws do trump state laws. Yes, long court fights might with a favorable US Supreme Court negate a fed law. Here is the sad fact. Obama most likely will get the chance in the next three years to appoint 2 Supreme Court Justices and completely turn the tide of National legal interpretions. A major push to get our like minded gun rights folks to get out and vote is a major need. Secondly, at the state level, coordination with the TSRA will be essential to having a successful legislative session to maintain our current rights. A major effort must be fought to defeat Wendy William and those Demos who are being pumped up to run for state offices. This next election will be critical to Texas' future.

 

[Shorts]

First, the myth that a state law will trump a federal law must be accepted as that. Federal laws do trump state laws. Yes, long court fights might with a favorable US Supreme Court negate a fed law. Here is the sad fact. Obama most likely will get the chance in the next three years to appoint 2 Supreme Court Justices and completely turn the tide of National legal interpretions. A major push to get our like minded gun rights folks to get out and vote is a major need. Secondly, at the state level, coordination with the TSRA will be essential to having a successful legislative session to maintain our current rights. A major effort must be fought to defeat Wendy William and those Demos who are being pumped up to run for state offices. This next election will be critical to Texas' future.

Who's Wendy William?

 

[benenglish]

Who's Wendy William?

If he meant to write "Wendy Williams", I think the answer would be: a chemical flashback.

OTOH, Wendy Davis of the famous pink shoes is the only Wendy "being pumped up to run for state office" that comes to mind for me.

 

[Shorts]

If he meant to write "Wendy Williams", I think the answer would be: a chemical flashback.

OTOH, Wendy Davis of the famous pink shoes is the only Wendy "being pumped up to run for state office" that comes to mind for me.

lol Ok

Davis came to mind for me too.

 

[jbgramps]

I didn't read the whole thread so I apologize if this has already been mentioned. Several States have removed the names\addresses of CCL holders from public records. You can't get the info with a open records request. Texas should do the same.

Also, I believe there is pending legislation in Florida allowing for warning shots to be legal. Don't know the details, but it became an issue when the lady fired a warning shot at her ex and was arrested\convicted.

 

[Shorts]

Also, I believe there is pending legislation in Florida allowing for warning shots to be legal. Don't know the details, but it became an issue when the lady fired a warning shot at her ex and was arrested\convicted.

I'm here in FL. That case you mentioned is not applicable. The lady was convicted because she left the scene, retrieved a gun and went back and shot the guy. It is not a good case; IMO it wasn't a good shoot either.

As for warning shots, those are a no no. It isn't proper gun handling, it ignores one of the four rules. There should not be legislation that says it is ok to do. Warning shots are for wild animals or trying to get found in the wilderness. It is not for say "I'm serious, I will shoot you". Legislation saying warning shots are ok allows firearm and self defense irresponsibility. We as gun owners and CHLers should demand the best and such bill would not support that.

 

[Ole Cowboy]

I didn't read the whole thread so I apologize if this has already been mentioned. Several States have removed the names\addresses of CCL holders from public records. You can't get the info with a open records request. Texas should do the same.

Also, I believe there is pending legislation in Florida allowing for warning shots to be legal. Don't know the details, but it became an issue when the lady fired a warning shot at her ex and was arrested\convicted.

Not sure that would float without a lot of rules to go along with it.

While the movies show a lot of warning shots the fact is the bullet after leaving the muzzle soon settles on terra firma and it knows not where, all too often it tried to occupy the same space as a human when its in a densely populated area...

 

[Shooter McGavin]

^^^A well placed laser dot makes a fine substitute for a warning shot.^^^
Question: How would Texas fair as a state if we collectively decided not to adopt or enforce federal gun laws? I recall Rick Perry and company vowing not to enforce stricter gun laws that were coming down the pipe in DC following Sandy Hook. Was that just a bluff, as most knew very little if any would get passed? Looking at places that have legalized marijuana I rarely hear about the Feds coming in and cracking down on citizens that are partaking in the use of a federally banned substance. Do you think that's something that could be brought to the table for discussion or would an attempt to free ourselves of certain federal gun laws paint cross hairs on Texas citizens?

 

[karlac]

I didn't read the whole thread so I apologize if this has already been mentioned. Several States have removed the names\addresses of CCL holders from public records. You can't get the info with a open records request. Texas should do the same.

Is that not the case now? Just asking, as things change in the blink of a byte.

"Information on individuals who are licensed to carry a concealed handgun is confidential and not subject to requests under the Public Information Act. However, the Department may release information about a concealed handgun licensee to criminal justice agencies for law enforcement purposes."

 

[dsukid]

The 9th and 10th amendment both cry every time someone says Federal law trumps State law. You ALWAYS need to add, in cases where the federal government has Constitutionally approved requirements or influence. I would go so far as to say that even the shared powers should not be exclusively deferred to Federal law.

 

[jbgramps]

Is that not the case now? Just asking, as things change in the blink of a byte.

"Information on individuals who are licensed to carry a concealed handgun is confidential and not subject to requests under the Public Information Act. However, the Department may release information about a concealed handgun licensee to criminal justice agencies for law enforcement purposes."

Thanks, I actually wasn't sure.

 

[rushthezeppelin]

Is that not the case now? Just asking, as things change in the blink of a byte.

"Information on individuals who are licensed to carry a concealed handgun is confidential and not subject to requests under the Public Information Act. However, the Department may release information about a concealed handgun licensee to criminal justice agencies for law enforcement purposes."

I was reading a thread on THR basically saying that these records are easily obtainable by authorities (and probably others).

I don't know if they know when a cop runs your plates but he definitely knows when he runs your license. Granted in this state we are required to inform police when we get pulled over regardless if we are carrying. Perhaps that would be another welcome change as well, not having the duty to inform. Granted this usually isn't a problem in this state and in fact seems to get you out of tickets many times but we should not be forced by the heavy hand of the government to do such things against our consent.

Of course in the case of non-authorities being able to request this info that is a clear violation of privacy. Some enterprising thugs (if it this info is truly obtainable by the public) could potentially use these records to find out which house not to case, or even worse if they are looking for weapons, which house to case. Having some law in place to prevent these from ever becoming public record would be wise IMO.

 

[Ole Cowboy]

I was reading a thread on THR basically saying that these records are easily obtainable by authorities (and probably others).

I don't know if they know when a cop runs your plates but he definitely knows when he runs your license. Granted in this state we are required to inform police when we get pulled over regardless if we are carrying. Perhaps that would be another welcome change as well, not having the duty to inform. Granted this usually isn't a problem in this state and in fact seems to get you out of tickets many times but we should not be forced by the heavy hand of the government to do such things against our consent.

Of course in the case of non-authorities being able to request this info that is a clear violation of privacy. Some enterprising thugs (if it this info is truly obtainable by the public) could potentially use these records to find out which house not to case, or even worse if they are looking for weapons, which house to case. Having some law in place to prevent these from ever becoming public record would be wise IMO.

I do not believe that is currently true, it has not been in the past and it may be possible the law has changed but I cannot find validation. Do you have a code or link to confirm????

 

[Younggun]

Requirement is there, penalty is gone.

 

[karlac]

I do not believe that is currently true, it has not been in the past and it may be possible the law has changed but I cannot find validation. Do you have a code or link to confirm????

If you're not carrying, you do not have to carry your CHL, nor are you required to "inform". Although it may be difficult to find a Texas CHL holder not doing so just because he/she is not currently carrying.

 

[stdreb27]

There are 2 things bugging me right now.
1. the length of time it's taking the dang texas gubbermint to process the chl application. I'm at 2 months. That's bs.

2. I'd like to see some sort of legislation making it burdensome for an entity to ban guns. Now I know this goes against some of my other beliefs. (Sorta). But if you're going to ban guns, 30.06, you aught pay a tax an expensive tax, register, demonstrate your ability to secure the premises in order to infringe on people's constitutional rights. (And the state aught to only have 1 person with a month worth of vacation built up processing these applications)
Because that's the crap I have to go through to just carry a gun.
After all that's what I have to do to carry one.

 

[stdreb27]

There are 2 things bugging me right now.
1. the length of time it's taking the dang texas gubbermint to process the chl application. I'm at 2 months. That's bs.

2. I'd like to see some sort of legislation making it burdensome for an entity to ban guns. Now I know this goes against some of my other beliefs. (Sorta). But if you're going to ban guns, 30.06, you aught pay a tax an expensive tax, register, demonstrate your ability to secure the premises in order to infringe on people's constitutional rights. (And the state aught to only have 1 person with a month worth of vacation built up processing these applications)
Because that's the crap I have to go through to just carry a gun.
After all that's what I have to do to carry one.

And they'd need a Cleo sign off before they received their permit.