Texas Next?

[rosewood]

Potentially good news for Texas, sadly, won't happen here in the Communistwealth of Virginia.

Did they ban open carry? I was told maybe 5 years ago by one of the gun stores that open carry was legal in VA without a permit and had been for years. Permit was only required for concealed. He even gave me a printout of the law to read on the subject. I had been visiting VA for decades and didn't know about the open carry law.

Rosewood

 

[TX-Dennis]

Also also, just because they are receiving calls doesn’t mean they come from people in your district. I live in the Houston area and can call anyone I want, including representative offices in any area i choose. I can deliver any message i choose but it’s up to the representative to decide whether the message i leave means anything relative to that particular constituency.

Back to topic: a senate session breakout committee meeting was held this morning to discuss HB1927’s “constitutionality”. Itried to listen to the live stream but the audio wasn’t working. Anybody know how it turned out?

It is still ongoing at this time. I have it open in another window. Lots of big city law enforcement officials, clergy, and left wing nuts testifying against the bill. Only a handful of folks testifying for it.

 

[SchemaEnigma]

The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to hear an appeal to expand gun rights in the United States in a New York case over the right to carry a firearm in public for self-defense.

If the Supreme Court rules in favor of constitutional carry that's a game changer. I'm all for states rights but, New York, California, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island would all have to allow CCW. and Texas!

The SCOTUS is not going to rule in favor of permitless constitutional carry. No way. (IDK if that is what you meant, but that is how I read it.)

The issue is a carry permitting process that never issues permits to ordinary law-abiding citizens.

 

[rosewood]

The SCOTUS is not going to rule in favor of permitless constitutional carry. No way. (IDK if that is what you meant, but that is how I read it.)

The issue is a carry permitting process that never issues permits to ordinary law-abiding citizens.

This is the way I see the challenge. Hopefully we will get a "shall issue" ruling that will upend those "may issue" states.

Rosewood

 

[ISCS Yoda]

The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to hear an appeal to expand gun rights in the United States in a New York case over the right to carry a firearm in public for self-defense.

If the Supreme Court rules in favor of constitutional carry that's a game changer. I'm all for states rights but, New York, California, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island would all have to allow CCW. and Texas!

THAT is not going to happen. The NY case is much tighter than that, it deals with "shall issue" and other permit-type matters. The SCOTUS is NOT going to go any further than it has to, presuming that it overturns any part of the NY statute/rules.

I’m bout ready to slap the next person i hear bragging about how gun friendly texas is. The people may be, but gummint AINT.

Texas had a blanket prohibition against carrying handguns for around 100 years, with exceptions for hunting, on personally owned or controlled premises/property, "traveling" (a vague exception that was mostly misunderstood - a discussion for another time), and maybe fishing, too, IIRC. The roots of that statute are also a discussion for another time but the late 19th century had its own problems.

So, enforcement of gun laws was hit or miss, depending on a lot of circumstances, and the people, including the police, were definitely far more gun friendly than the legislature. It took a late 20th century, enlightened legislature to get us concealed carry and then open carry with permits. Actually, it took Florida to get that ball rolling, proving the antis wrong about blood in the streets, etc.

AND, the next wrinkle, allowing concealed handguns in motor vehicles without a permit as an "extension of one's home" was a brilliant addition to the new "liberality" of carrying handguns.

But there is the government bureaucracy and the government legislative bodies and the two are not always in sync. Personally, I never had a problem in dealing with the bureaucracy and the permitting process. YMMV.

And I'll keep my "LTC" (as it is currently called) even after they pass Constitutional carry. Just because it makes it easier to buy guns, if nothing else. Plus the police respect it due to the background check.

I'll never forget that day around ten years ago when I was stopped by an LEO in Plano, Texas, and he refused to see my LTC by saying "I don't need to see that; every car in Plano has a gun in it!".

The big question I have is what will the new law say about private property owners/businesses/buildings/parks/etc., being authorized to prohibit open or concealed gun carrying on their premises. I expect to see a new section of the Penal Code called Section 30.08. Actually, I guarantee it, and here's why:

PENAL CODE CHAPTER 30. BURGLARY AND CRIMINAL TRESPASS

Sections 30.06 and 30.07 are on the books for that purpose in re concealed and open carry. I have no doubt that they'll add 30.08 if Constitutional carry passes.

 

[GaryS]

The NY case is specific to the issuance of permits and doesn't challenge that permits aren't needed. Since the court narrowed the scope of the question at issue, you're right that their decision will not expand on the question.

As to 30.08, why would that make a difference in binding signage? Well, other than the TABC regulation that stores post that says it's illegal to carry on the premises without a valid permit. The way I read it, it essentially says "Carrying illegally on these premises is illegal."

It shouldn't change the 51% rule either.

Before the Chinese Plague I used to visit Texas once or twice a year. Since I carried down there I spent some time reading the laws and regulations as as much as I like it there, I didn't want to have the state insist that I stay longer!

THAT is not going to happen. The NY case is much tighter than that, it deals with "shall issue" and other permit-type matters. The SCOTUS is NOT going to go any further than it has to, presuming that it overturns any part of the NY statute/rules.



Texas had a blanket prohibition against carrying handguns for around 100 years, with exceptions for hunting, on personally owned or controlled premises/property, "traveling" (a vague exception that was mostly misunderstood - a discussion for another time), and maybe fishing, too, IIRC. The roots of that statute are also a discussion for another time but the late 19th century had its own problems.

So, enforcement of gun laws was hit or miss, depending on a lot of circumstances, and the people, including the police, were definitely far more gun friendly than the legislature. It took a late 20th century, enlightened legislature to get us concealed carry and then open carry with permits. Actually, it took Florida to get that ball rolling, proving the antis wrong about blood in the streets, etc.

AND, the next wrinkle, allowing concealed handguns in motor vehicles without a permit as an "extension of one's home" was a brilliant addition to the new "liberality" of carrying handguns.

But there is the government bureaucracy and the government legislative bodies and the two are not always in sync. Personally, I never had a problem in dealing with the bureaucracy and the permitting process. YMMV.

And I'll keep my "LTC" (as it is currently called) even after they pass Constitutional carry. Just because it makes it easier to buy guns, if nothing else. Plus the police respect it due to the background check.

I'll never forget that day around ten years ago when I was stopped by an LEO in Plano, Texas, and he refused to see my LTC by saying "I don't need to see that; every car in Plano has a gun in it!".

The big question I have is what will the new law say about private property owners/businesses/buildings/parks/etc., being authorized to prohibit open or concealed gun carrying on their premises. I expect to see a new section of the Penal Code called Section 30.08. Actually, I guarantee it, and here's why:

PENAL CODE CHAPTER 30. BURGLARY AND CRIMINAL TRESPASS

Sections 30.06 and 30.07 are on the books for that purpose in re concealed and open carry. I have no doubt that they'll add 30.08 if Constitutional carry passes.

 

[rosewood]

In Georgia, we have to have a permit to carry openly or concealed unless you are hunting or fishing (and have the valid permit for that). The carry on private property laws are written in our favor. You can post all the signs you want on your door saying no firearms, but until you ask me to leave and I refuse, I have broken no laws. If you ask me to leave and I don't then I am trespassing. All state and local government buildings cannot ban your carry unless they have a guard at the door running a metal detector. There are a few exceptions like court house, mental hospital, grade school, nuclear power plant.

Rosewood

 

[rosewood]

From a Supreme Court stand point, there job isn't to write law. There job is to determine the Constitutionally of laws passed by government bodies. It isn't there job to expand on the court challenge. Even though there are times I wished they would, there are many times I am glad they didn't.

Rosewood

 

[HOUSTON RICK]

Texas is surprisingly bureaucratic and slow despite it's reputation. My daughter is a social worker there and they dragged their feet for months approving her license. First the claimed that she sent the wrong paperwork. Then that she sent incomplete paperwork. Then, it was in line to be reviewed, but it would take months. Then they lost the paperwork.

She called her state Senator and asked for help. As it happened, he was on the committee that approves funding for the department which controls that.

Suddenly, they found her paperwork and like that, it was approved.

I like the Texas approach to keeping state bureaucracy to a limit, but it seems that they are not able to keep up with the ever growing population.

But I digress.

Texas is "bureaucratic" due its lack of bureaucracy. If it isn't the Comptroller's Office, Legislature, Education or the National Guard it is deliberately underfunded and understaffed.

 

[shfy70]

Texas on its way to join other 20 or 21 states. haha!

 

[RobzGuns]

Yup... HB 1927 Passed in the Senate, but with a couple amendments, so back to committee to see if the amendments are agreeable to both the House & Senate. If so, then on to the Gov's desk for signing.