Texas 87th Legislative Session Pre-filed Gun Bills

[Vaquero]

OMG, and I am looking to move to TX, it appears Cali-Commie-legislation is creeping in...

If it's looking anything like Cali, they will push and push until they get their way.
If it doesn't pass the first time, they will try again as the firearm-ignorant move into the state, and tyranny reigns.

If not right away BABY STEPS, ALWAYS. Jerry Brown wasn't horrible for gun owners, he vetoed some crazy crap, but then as the gen-pop got more ignorant, it got worse, daily...

Don't let this happen!!! You'll be Cali in no time. It's horrible in Cali.

I been preaching this for decades.
George W started the exodus.
Rick Perry begged for kalifonia to come here.
Abbot removed any remaining roadblocks or bottlenecks.

Tax dollars mean more than content citizens.

Texas is rich with resources and talent. Our state and local governments are pissing it away and encouraging urban sprawl. I die a little everytime a big chunk of farmland or ranchland gets bought out by a mega buck developer.
My little chunk of "rural" is in jeopardy.

I won't be bought out. I won't give in and go away.
I'll raise hell and fight to the death on my turf.

Austin has fallen. As have the other Texas metro areas. Time for talk has expired. We see where things are headed. I ain't going.
The media will judge me as a fanatic. A lunatic. Etc.....

My judgement is reserved for my maker.

Austin and it's "leaders" can kiss my ass.

Hey china! **** you too!

 

[toddnjoyce]

Filed today. On it’s surface, this may be hard a hard bill to kill, but it really does need to die in committee.

Texas Legislature Online
Subject Alert
The following bills were assigned subjects of interest:

Subject: Weapons
HB 693
Relating to the prosecution of the offense of making a firearm accessible to a child; increasing a criminal penalty.

edited to add link to bill

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Isn't it already illegal?

 

[toddnjoyce]

OMG, and I am looking to move to TX, it appears Cali-Commie-legislation is creeping in...

A lot of these bills come up every other year when the lege meets and die in committee. What’s changed significantly in this session’s pre-filing is the lack of bills that strengthen or expand 2A rights.

Having said that, I still need to take a deeper look at who’s filing what and which bulls have companion bills.

With a new speaker, it will also be telling to see who gets what committee assignments and what bills go to which committee. 2019 was a very weird year for that, but that speaker is gone now.

 

[toddnjoyce]

Isn't it already illegal?

The text of the statute is changing significantly, to include felony level offense.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Thanks.

 

[Axxe55]

I been preaching this for decades.
George W started the exodus.
Rick Perry begged for kalifonia to come here.
Abbot removed any remaining roadblocks or bottlenecks.

Tax dollars mean more than content citizens.

Texas is rich with resources and talent. Our state and local governments are pissing it away and encouraging urban sprawl. I die a little everytime a big chunk of farmland or ranchland gets bought out by a mega buck developer.
My little chunk of "rural" is in jeopardy.

I won't be bought out. I won't give in and go away.
I'll raise hell and fight to the death on my turf.

Austin has fallen. As have the other Texas metro areas. Time for talk has expired. We see where things are headed. I ain't going.
The media will judge me as a fanatic. A lunatic. Etc.....

My judgement is reserved for my maker.

Austin and it's "leaders" can kiss my ass.

Hey china! **** you too!

Don't worry, you will be in good company.

My little slice of the world, has been in our family for over a hundred years. None of are selling out, ever. There are somethings in life worth more than money, like history and sentiment. Sentiment doesn't mean much to those that would bulldoze a hundred year old farmhouse to make room for more cookie cutter homes in suburbia. But they still mean something to some of us. Some of us are still proud of our rural Texas heritage, and willing to fight for it.

 

[jordanmills]

Filed today. On it’s surface, this may be hard a hard bill to kill, but it really does need to die in committee.

Texas Legislature Online
Subject Alert
The following bills were assigned subjects of interest:

Subject: Weapons
HB 693
Relating to the prosecution of the offense of making a firearm accessible to a child; increasing a criminal penalty.

edited to add link to bill

Well it's got a little good in it. I like how it goes from supervised to authorized. But the rest is junk. I'd be for it if they changed supervised to authorized and ditched the rest. But nah, it can die.

 

[toddnjoyce]

Ok, this is a weird one...something about juco school marshalls and frangible ammo and securing firearms. Probably should not be enacted.


Texas Legislature Online
Subject Alert

The following bills were assigned subjects of interest:

Subject: Weapons
HB 781
Relating to the carrying and possession of a handgun by a public junior college school marshal.

 

[popper]

hb781 frangible ammo only allowed! Silly. I don't carry frangible ammo.

 

[oldag]

No good 2A bills will pass because there the R majority in the senate is not high enough.

From another source:
Since 2018, D's have flipped 3 seats in the 31-member Texas Senate. While that gives them just 13 seats overall, under the Texas Senate rules that is just enough to block any bill from getting to the floor of the Senate to be debated.

 

[bbbass]

Where did this come from:

In Texas, State Representative Terry Meza (D-Irving) has introduced HB196. Her bill would repeal the state's "castle doctrine." This doctrine allows a homeowner to use deadly force against an armed intruder who breaks into his home.

Now listen to what she has to say...
"I'm not saying that stealing is okay," Meza explained. "All I'm saying is that it doesn't warrant a death penalty. Thieves only carry weapons for self-protection and to provide the householder an incentive to cooperate. They just want to get their loot and get away. When the resident tries to resist is when people get hurt. If only one side is armed fewer people will be killed."
Meza was quick to reassure that her bill "would not totally prevent homeowners from defending themselves.
Under the new law the homeowner's obligation is to flee the home at the first sign of intrusion. If fleeing is not possible he must cooperate with the intruder. But if violence breaks out it is the homeowner's responsibility to make sure no one gets hurt. The best way to achieve this is to use the minimum non-lethal force possible because intruders will be able to sue for any injuries they receive at the hands of the homeowner."

"In most instances the thief needs the money more than the homeowner does," Meza reasoned. "The homeowner's insurance will reimburse his losses. On balance, the transfer of property is likely to lead to a more equitable distribution of wealth. If my bill can help make this transfer a peaceful one so much the better."

Apparently, the actual text is about creating a duty to retreat when OUTSIDE the home??? But this legislator sounds like a real loon!!!

 

[oldag]

Where did this come from:

In Texas, State Representative Terry Meza (D-Irving) has introduced HB196. Her bill would repeal the state's "castle doctrine." This doctrine allows a homeowner to use deadly force against an armed intruder who breaks into his home.

Now listen to what she has to say...
"I'm not saying that stealing is okay," Meza explained. "All I'm saying is that it doesn't warrant a death penalty. Thieves only carry weapons for self-protection and to provide the householder an incentive to cooperate. They just want to get their loot and get away. When the resident tries to resist is when people get hurt. If only one side is armed fewer people will be killed."
Meza was quick to reassure that her bill "would not totally prevent homeowners from defending themselves.
Under the new law the homeowner's obligation is to flee the home at the first sign of intrusion. If fleeing is not possible he must cooperate with the intruder. But if violence breaks out it is the homeowner's responsibility to make sure no one gets hurt. The best way to achieve this is to use the minimum non-lethal force possible because intruders will be able to sue for any injuries they receive at the hands of the homeowner."

"In most instances the thief needs the money more than the homeowner does," Meza reasoned. "The homeowner's insurance will reimburse his losses. On balance, the transfer of property is likely to lead to a more equitable distribution of wealth. If my bill can help make this transfer a peaceful one so much the better."

Apparently, the actual text is about creating a duty to retreat when OUTSIDE the home??? But this legislator sounds like a real loon!!!

How wrong can you get?

 

[toddnjoyce]

Where did this come from:
...blah, blah, blah, BSC crazy lady talk...

That statement is unattributed, so now way tk find the answer to your question.

 

[SQLGeek]

Where did this come from:

In Texas, State Representative Terry Meza (D-Irving) has introduced HB196. Her bill would repeal the state's "castle doctrine." This doctrine allows a homeowner to use deadly force against an armed intruder who breaks into his home.

Now listen to what she has to say...
"I'm not saying that stealing is okay," Meza explained. "All I'm saying is that it doesn't warrant a death penalty. Thieves only carry weapons for self-protection and to provide the householder an incentive to cooperate. They just want to get their loot and get away. When the resident tries to resist is when people get hurt. If only one side is armed fewer people will be killed."
Meza was quick to reassure that her bill "would not totally prevent homeowners from defending themselves.
Under the new law the homeowner's obligation is to flee the home at the first sign of intrusion. If fleeing is not possible he must cooperate with the intruder. But if violence breaks out it is the homeowner's responsibility to make sure no one gets hurt. The best way to achieve this is to use the minimum non-lethal force possible because intruders will be able to sue for any injuries they receive at the hands of the homeowner."

"In most instances the thief needs the money more than the homeowner does," Meza reasoned. "The homeowner's insurance will reimburse his losses. On balance, the transfer of property is likely to lead to a more equitable distribution of wealth. If my bill can help make this transfer a peaceful one so much the better."

Apparently, the actual text is about creating a duty to retreat when OUTSIDE the home??? But this legislator sounds like a real loon!!!

That's been spreading around Facebook but I can't find anything that actually attributes most of what is said to her.

 

[toddnjoyce]

Quick roundup of the pre-fileds.

For bills indexed to weapons, 61 have been filed across both state chambers; Ds authored 43, Rs 18. That BSC filthy communist Terry Meza leads the pack with 16 filed, or 1 in 4 of all bills and 1 in 3 in the House.

There are 50 and 1 joint resolution bills in the House; 35 D bills, 15 Rs and the HJR is an R author.

In the Senate, 10 total, 8 D, 2 R. It appears 6 of the 10 SBs were filed by Cesar Blanco, the Senate version of Meza.

 

[kbaxter60]

This isn't related to any of those bills, but if this winner is your rep, you should be working to get her out:
ETA: woops, ninja'd by @bbbass!

 

[AZ Refugee]

What level of idiot is she? So its ok for the thief to be armed, but not the homeowner?

 

[bbbass]

How wrong can you get?

Not much more.... to think that people voted for her!!!

 

[sidebite252]

What level of idiot is she? So its ok for the thief to be armed, but not the homeowner?

Yeah that horseshit ain't gonna fly here in Texas. No way.