Page 12 of 15 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 141

Thread: Texas law enforcement ‘skeptical and nervous’ about constitutional carry gun bill

  1. #111
    Quote Originally Posted by RoyGBiv View Post
    A third ugly sign will be required. 30.05. The "Firearms" vs "Handgun" language is already being debated. We may need the AG to clarify, or, it may mean that you can ban non-licensed from carrying "firearms", but licensed can only be banned from carrying "handguns"... Definitely a possible flaw. Still need to see the non lined version once adopted. The committee version has a lot of changes out of context and is not simple to read.

    Also good.... if you get caught not having seen the signs, it's reduced to a $200 fine unless you are asked to leave and fail to do so.
    So with all the ambiguity, is the 3rd "30.05" sign the likely solution or are they going to update the existing 30.06 and 30.07 signs to apply to licensed and unlicensed both?

    Wasn't there an update to the TABC blue sign that was coming as well? I never did get a straight answer on those regarding things like saps/blackjacks/etc. I think I saw one version of the sign that had changed the wording to include "except if that weapon is a handgun" but now I don't see it anywhere on the internet.

  2. #112
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by jh9 View Post
    So with all the ambiguity, is the 3rd "30.05" sign the likely solution or are they going to update the existing 30.06 and 30.07 signs to apply to licensed and unlicensed both?

    Wasn't there an update to the TABC blue sign that was coming as well? I never did get a straight answer on those regarding things like saps/blackjacks/etc. I think I saw one version of the sign that had changed the wording to include "except if that weapon is a handgun" but now I don't see it anywhere on the internet.
    30.05 will apply to unlicensed and .06 and .07 will apply to licensed.
    There is already debate about "what if a business only posts 06 and 07, can I carry because they didn't post 05?"...
    I think it'll take a while for the dust to settle and whatever flaws in this bill will get a fix next session.

    Regarding TABC code... The Blue "Unlicensed Possession" signs go away... 11.041 and 61.11.

    Regarding weapons other than handguns... I'm not sure what happens when the unlicensed possession sign goes away... The current sign says "unlawful for a person to carry a weapon on the premises unless the weapon is a handgun the person is licensed to carry".... So.. if this sign goes away, is it ok to carry any legal weapon? I don't see this addressed in the bill, but may have missed it.
    "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776

  3. #113
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    The cleaned up Enrolled version is now available here: https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup...7R&Bill=HB1927
    Much easier to read, but, still digesting.
    "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776

  4. #114
    Revolvers Revolvers 1911s Stephanie B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    East 860 by South 413
    Quote Originally Posted by Caballoflaco View Post
    I think the biggest beneficiaries of constitutional carry aren’t “gun people” and the 2A crowd. It’s the poor folks who actually live in shitty neighborhoods and can’t affiord the time or money for a class. Those same people are also far more likely than the average member of PF to be a victim of violent crime.
    Quote Originally Posted by jtcarm View Post
    That’s been John Lotts take on licensing: it discriminates against the poor.
    That's also been the basic issue with the demonization of "Saturday Night Specials". It was a coded push to ensure that those people couldn't afford a gun.

    That sort of classism continues. The editor of the local bird-cage liner had this response to people who pointed out that licensing requirements adversely impacted those who were of low-income:
    Another reasonably comfortable white guy deciding just what it is that poor people need. Not much changes.
    If we have to march off into the next world, let us walk there on the bodies of our enemies.

  5. #115
    Site Supporter OlongJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    "carbine-infested rural (and suburban) areas"
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephanie B View Post
    That's also been the basic issue with the demonization of "Saturday Night Specials". It was a coded push to ensure that those people couldn't afford a gun.

    That sort of classism continues. The editor of the local bird-cage liner had this response to people who pointed out that licensing requirements adversely impacted those who were of low-income:

    Another reasonably comfortable white guy deciding just what it is that poor people need. Not much changes.
    People wanna lecture a bleeding person about diet and exercise.
    .
    -----------------------------------------
    Not another dime.

  6. #116
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephanie B View Post
    That's also been the basic issue with the demonization of "Saturday Night Specials". It was a coded push to ensure that those people couldn't afford a gun.

    That sort of classism continues. The editor of the local bird-cage liner had this response to people who pointed out that licensing requirements adversely impacted those who were of low-income:

    Another reasonably comfortable white guy deciding just what it is that poor people need. Not much changes.
    Exactly. As you point out, the actual justification for gun control is often classism and racism.

    You're spot on with the old focus on Saturday Night Specials: https://www.nraila.org/articles/1999...night-specials The formatting on that article is a bit odd because it has been moved at least twice to different content management platforms.

    It's also easy to see that these problems persist when looking at a map of the states that have permitless carry. There are a number of states that many would consider very "pro-gun" that continue to resist permitless carry.

    The good news for the future is that diffusion of certain policies (like concealed carry) is likely linked to changing attitudes on those same policies: https://curate.nd.edu/show/g732d794517

  7. #117
    Site Supporter HeavyDuty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Not very bright but does lack ambition
    Local news reports the TX Gov signed this yesterday?
    Ken

    BBI: ...”you better not forget the safe word because shit's about to get weird”...
    revchuck38: ...”mo' ammo is mo' betta' unless you're swimming or on fire.”

  8. #118
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by HeavyDuty View Post
    Local news reports the TX Gov signed this yesterday?
    Indeed it was.
    https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup...7R&Bill=HB1927

    I'm reading rumors about a ceremony at the Alamo today.
    "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776

  9. #119
    Member Zincwarrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Central Texas
    Is there a summary of the final bill anywhere, something with decent detail and not the usual opinion blah blah?

  10. #120
    Site Supporter CleverNickname's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    TX
    Quote Originally Posted by Zincwarrior View Post
    Is there a summary of the final bill anywhere, something with decent detail and not the usual opinion blah blah?
    https://cdn.brandfolder.io/5Z10RK5F/...Pg-Digital.pdf

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •