Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick says Senate currently lacks the votes to pass permitless carry

[rotor]

Truth be told.....even if they get it passed and signed, I'm still not voting for Patrick, Abbott, and any rep that voted for Phelan. This should have been done six years ago. You don't get a bonus for shoddy work that misses the deadline.....

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Primary is where you make the change if you want to, not in the general election unless you want to see a democrat win. You know that anyhow.

 

[1911'S 4 Me]

What about the convenience stores signs that read something to the effect; state felony entering premises with unlicensed firearm;?

 

[TexasRedneck]

What about the convenience stores signs that read something to the effect; state felony entering premises with unlicensed firearm;?

I've been TOLD it's been stricken - but as I said earlier...I'm waiting for the final bill version, then we'll get some legal opinions.

 

[Darkpriest667]

I think what needs to be said here is that we need to be DAMN sure we understand this law once it gets passed. A ton of people will enter this forum asking questions and since we lost SC we don't have a real legal beagal to answer those questions. We'll be looked to as the experts.

 

[Army 1911]

I just heard Rick Roberts say both the house and senate have reached agreement and all that's left is Abbott's signature.

To quote Lou Costello, "Hey Abbott!"

 

[Army 1911]

You can download it. just click on it and in the upper right are several options in the new window that comes up.

 

[1911'S 4 Me]

I think what needs to be said here is that we need to be DAMN sure we understand this law once it gets passed. A ton of people will enter this forum asking questions and since we lost SC we don't have a real legal beagal to answer those questions. We'll be looked to as the experts.

Or just stop putting their .02 worth.

 

[Cob]

we need to be reminded that laws are written by lawyers for lawyers. For those of us who
Wish to stay within in the law while we do what it says we are allowed to have to hirer a lawyer to Tell us what the lawyers we already hired and paid intended for the law to mean in
Plain English. Texas here the lawyers we elect to public office are merely acting to provide a steady stream of income to them selves and others.

that should make about as clear crude oil

 

[Random Vato]

So far my biggest concern for LTC holders with this bill is the added TPC 30.05 language. It appears that having an LTC is a defense to prosecution, not an exception.

Overall the 30.05/.06/.07 changes need to aligned or, preferably, struck from the books in the next session.

Lots of room for alignment in other places such as method of carry and MPA too, but 50 pages is a lot to digest.

I had the same concerns initially. I had to go back and re-read, it turns out the defense to prosecution has always been there. These changes for constitutional carry will not change anything for where license holders can carry.


We need to keep the 30.06 & 30.07 signs no matter what. Property owners will always have the right to deny people carrying guns from entering their property. We need to keep consistent signs across Texas that tell LTC people not to enter with guns.

I’d rather we keep the 30.05 sign. If I didn’t have a license I wouldn’t want to eliminate 30.05 signs and have any sign (such as a no guns ghostbuster sign) stop me from legally entering with a gun.

Requiring 30.05, 30.06, & 30.07 signs helps us. It’s one more sign the anti-gun people need to post, keeps the signs consistent, and it keeps them from playing games.

 

[1911'S 4 Me]

I had the same concerns initially. I had to go back and re-read, it turns out the defense to prosecution has always been there. These changes for constitutional carry will not change anything for where license holders can carry.


We need to keep the 30.06 & 30.07 signs no matter what. Property owners will always have the right to deny people carrying guns from entering their property. We need to keep consistent signs across Texas that tell LTC people not to enter with guns.

I’d rather we keep the 30.05 sign. If I didn’t have a license I wouldn’t want to eliminate 30.05 signs and have any sign (such as a no guns ghostbuster sign) stop me from legally entering with a gun.

Requiring 30.05, 30.06, & 30.07 signs helps us. It’s one more sign the anti-gun people need to post, keeps the signs consistent, and it keeps them from playing games.

Did you just step out of a democrap voting booth?

 

[Random Vato]

Did you just step out of a democrap voting booth?

Property rights in Texas are just as important as gun rights. Property owners will always have the right to keep you from carrying a gun in their property. How would you like to be notified that you can’t take your gun into private property? What’s your solution?

 

[Wolfwood]

Defense was removed a few years ago and it is now non-applicable.

Thanks!

 

[Sasquatch]

Property rights in Texas are just as important as gun rights. Property owners will always have the right to keep you from carrying a gun in their property. How would you like to be notified that you can’t take your gun into private property? What’s your solution?

What they don't see doesn't hurt them. A person's right to defend their life is more important than someone's property rights. Unless your business is only open to members, and is access controlled with real security you shouldn't be able to exclude customers / members of the public from carrying. You can put up no-guns signs, but those signs should NOT have the force of law behind them. A person's home can be different, as a man's home is his castle - but "private property" that everyone is talking about when talking about carrying a firearm typically means businesses that are open to the public. They should be considered a public place.

Remember the Luby's shooting? That can still easily happen thanks to 30.05/06/07 signage. You want to legally exclude patrons / customers / public from carrying on your property - great, lets put in to the law that you assume complete responsibility for that person's health & safety while they're on your property. Something bad happens to them, you're criminally and civilly liable.

There comes a point where rights need to be prioritized because in the end, one person's rights must come out as more important than another's, so this needs addressed in a better way. The "no guns" signs carrying force of law creates de facto ban on carrying, because the anti-gun politicians will happily encourage businesses to post their places as "gun free zones" - and the places you can legally carry will shrink. And if you take away the "good faith" clause and make it an arrestable offense for simply walking past one of those stupid signs armed all you are doing is punishing and criminalizing an otherwise good person.

Consistency among language you say? Eliminate the 30.05/6/7 verbiage entirely, don't put any weight of law behind any sign, and make it incumbent upon the property owner/manager/agent to ask the person to leave. If the person then refuses, THEN you get the crime of criminal trespass.

 

[candcallen]

The private property rights issue is one I think about alot. Is a business open to the public the same as your home? Should your rights in either place be absolute? Are they really under all circumstances?

Obviously there is what some would call hypocrisy there if you dig deep.

I would never suggest anyone violate the law but I will not abdicate my right or responsibility to protect myself and my loved ones.

I wont be found cowering in some isle or rack of clothes praying "God make me a stone" while some evil coward around me takes advantage of a free fire gun free zone. God help you if one of my loved ones die with their gun locked in a car in a parking lot cause of your hoplophobic bullshit. We all know in reality there are times and places where you just cant go elsewhere. Obviously that's preferred..

I havnt reconciled the two to my satisfaction yet. Maybe I never will. Flame away.

 

[toddnjoyce]

I had the same concerns initially.

You aren’t thinking hard enough. Scenario: 30.05 only posted at a business; LTC open carries inside. What happens next? Why is DtP and not an exception problematic for the LTC holder?

30.06/30.07 posted business. Can a non-LTC legally enter if 30.05 is not posted? Is that person legal?

These are not edge cases.

 

[Cob]

1927 is being debated right now in the senate

 

[gll]

It just happened!

Next step, Governor Abbott's desk!

 

[candcallen]

Outphuckingstanding!

 

[jordanmills]

It just happened!

Next step, Governor Abbott's desk!

Glad someone beat me to post this.

 

[rotor]

It just happened!

Next step, Governor Abbott's desk!

Yup. Just got the text from GOA.