TexasCHLforum.com

TexasComputerDude wrote:

jimlongley wrote:

Russell wrote:Yeah, that is a quote from "The Matrix", when the kid is holding up the spoon to Neo.

Uh? Whut's thuh matrix?

a trilogy that could have been A LOT better than it was...

it was still pretty good though.

[Jedi mind trick]There was no second or third Matrix movie.[/Jedi mind trick]

Owens wrote:Wow!
Looking at the bill text, something is a bit confusing. I thought it had been delayed for enactment until 2010, but the last line says 9/1/2009. Do I misunderstand? and what does the floor amendment mean for us. Assuming of course that this all flies over the rest of the hurdles without being further molested.

It is confusing (lawyer language gives me a headache ), but the section delaying implementation of parts of the bill is still there.

SECTION 7. Subsections (a) and (c), Section 46.03, Penal
Code, as amended by this Act, and Subsection (k), Section 46.035,
Penal Code, as added by this Act, apply only to an offense committed
on or after September 1, 2010. An offense committed before
September 1, 2010, is covered by the law in effect when the offense
was committed, and the former law is continued in effect for that
purpose. For purposes of this section, an offense was committed
before September 1, 2010, if any element of the offense occurred
before that date.

It delays implementation of the changes in the Penal Code, without which the bill is worthless.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I was afraid that "parental request" amendment might pass and it would have created a nightmare scenario.

Chas.

I'm glad it didn't. I have nothing against students being able to request a non-CHL roomate (Utah has such a system), but the vast majority of college students are legally adults and it should be their responsibility (not Mommy and Daddy's) to make such a request.

scott_dfw wrote:I work at a private university, so they already have the ability to allow me to carry on campus if they so desire. (which they will fight tooth and nail against letting us carry until Johnny law forces them to)

Any school can presently set their own policy regarding carry on campus:

Sec. 46.03. PLACES WEAPONS PROHIBITED. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly possesses or goes with a firearm, illegal knife, club, or prohibited weapon listed in Section 46.05(a):

(1) on the physical premises of a school or educational institution, any grounds or building on which an activity sponsored by a school or educational institution is being conducted, or a passenger transportation vehicle of a school or educational institution, whether the school or educational institution is public or private, unless pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the institution;

There was a news story last year about a school district in North Texas adopting a policy to allow teachers to carry. No Texas college has a blanket policy allowing carry as far as anyone here knows; I wouldn't be surprised if a few upper administrators have written authorization but have no personal knowledge of such.

scott_dfw wrote:State and public universities are the ones that have a state law preventing carry there, as well as their university policies preventing carry. So the decriminalization thing would allow state/public schools to set their own policy to allow or ban concealed carry. Also it wouldnt be "illegal" to carry there, but you could still be expelled or fired if you violated their policy.

Carry at any institution of higher education is illegal unless specifically authorized, per TPC Sec. 46.03.

There were several permutations of bills to change that this year:
1. The campus carry bills (HB 1893 and SB 730) as originally written changed the law to allow CHL holders to carry on college premises and at college activities, and prohibited all institutions from making any regulation that prohibited carry.
2. HB 1893 passed out of committee with an amendment to allow private institutions to have regulations prohibiting carry on their premises.
3. When it became apparent that neither bill was going to make it to the floor for a vote, an amendment to the DPS Sunset Bill was (briefly) offered that would have allowed CHL holders to carry on campus, with nothing prohibiting any institutions from prohibiting carry by regulation. Posting a Section 30.06-compliant sign would have been allowed by that amendment, but would have been invalid if posted at a state school per Section 30.06(e). Schools would have still been allowed to fire or expel those who carried on campus.