HB308

Moderators: Charles L. Cotton, carlson1


cowhow
Member
Posts: 63
Joined: Tue May 28, 2013 7:01 pm
Location: Fort Worth
Contact:

Re: HB308

Postby cowhow » Fri May 08, 2015 8:44 am

RHenriksen wrote:From what I can figure out on first reading of the committee substitute, we get a reduction of violating a 30.06 sign from Class A misdemeanor to Class C, and.... I really can't see anything else of significance.


That's my take on it also. The take away I get is you can carry just about anywhere if you're willing to pay $200 for the privelige. I am very curious to read what Charles' opinion is because it looks like the committee removed several sections of the original bill.

But, hey, i'm more than happy to get the Class C reduction.


Papa_Tiger
Senior Member
Posts: 453
Joined: Fri May 24, 2013 9:55 am

Re: HB308

Postby Papa_Tiger » Fri May 08, 2015 8:48 am

It also changes how we can carry in a polling place.

You still cannot carry into the portion of the premises where the voting is going on, but you can carry into other portions of the building. This is good for early voting locations like Randall's/HEB where currently the entire building is off limits if early voting is happening.

User avatar

Beiruty
Senior Member
Posts: 8416
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2008 9:22 pm
Location: Allen, Texas

Re: HB308

Postby Beiruty » Fri May 08, 2015 8:49 am

The reduction is already part of OC bill.
Beiruty,
United we stand, dispersed we falter
2014: NRA Endowment member


CJD
Senior Member
Posts: 455
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 4:38 pm
Location: Conroe

Re: HB308

Postby CJD » Fri May 08, 2015 8:50 am

It also made 46.035 (except the intoxication subsection) a Class C for first offense. This includes intentional display, bars, sporting events, correctional facility, and posted meetings of governmental entities.


Topic author
MikeHoncho
Junior Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 6:22 pm

Re: HB308

Postby MikeHoncho » Fri May 08, 2015 8:53 am

It also removed the 46.02 and 46.03 exemption for CHL's. Teachers and students will now be helpless victims for two more years.

User avatar

tornado
Senior Member
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 7:00 pm

Re: HB308

Postby tornado » Fri May 08, 2015 8:55 am

MikeHoncho wrote:It also removed the 46.02 and 46.03 exemption for CHL's. Teachers and students will now be helpless victims for two more years.

Along with those of us parents who like to volunteer at schools and on field trips.

User avatar

C-dub
Senior Member
Posts: 11759
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: DFW

Re: HB308

Postby C-dub » Fri May 08, 2015 9:09 am

tornado wrote:
MikeHoncho wrote:It also removed the 46.02 and 46.03 exemption for CHL's. Teachers and students will now be helpless victims for two more years.

Along with those of us parents who like to volunteer at schools and on field trips.

Unless you're not officially on the trip with them or a chaperon, but just happen to be at the same place at the same time like many other people.
I am not and have never been a LEO. My avatar is in honor of my friend, Dallas Police Sargent Michael Smith, who was murdered along with four other officers in Dallas on 7.7.2016.


NotRPB
Senior Member
Posts: 975
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 8:24 am

Re: HB308

Postby NotRPB » Fri May 08, 2015 9:12 am

C.S.H.B. 308
BILL ANALYSIS

By: Springer

Homeland Security & Public Safety

Committee Report (Substituted)

Scroll down for >> COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTE
http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/84 ... 00308H.htm

C.S.H.B. No. 308
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/ ... 00308H.htm
Last edited by NotRPB on Fri May 08, 2015 9:20 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar

tornado
Senior Member
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 7:00 pm

Re: HB308

Postby tornado » Fri May 08, 2015 9:16 am

C-dub wrote:Unless you're not officially on the trip with them or a chaperon, but just happen to be at the same place at the same time like many other people.

It's a "defense to prosecution" not a "does not apply." It might be hard to defend showing up where you know your kid will be on a field trip on the grounds that you're not an official chaperone. At least I imagine it would be here in the People's Republic of Travis County.

User avatar

RoyGBiv
Senior Member
Posts: 6862
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:41 am
Location: Fort Worth

Re: HB308

Postby RoyGBiv » Fri May 08, 2015 9:25 am

Although I hoped for school carry, I didn't give it much of a chance.

So... What's left?
Class C for first violation.
Clarifications in 30.06 re: schools, polling places and what happens if you stumble upon a field trip.
UCW strikes hospital and amusement parks

Is it ok to say that I liked the original Bill better? :lol:
I am not a lawyer. This is NOT legal advice.!
Image
Nothing tempers idealism quite like the cold bath of reality.... SQLGeek

User avatar

C-dub
Senior Member
Posts: 11759
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: DFW

Re: HB308

Postby C-dub » Fri May 08, 2015 9:28 am

tornado wrote:
C-dub wrote:Unless you're not officially on the trip with them or a chaperon, but just happen to be at the same place at the same time like many other people.

It's a "defense to prosecution" not a "does not apply." It might be hard to defend showing up where you know your kid will be on a field trip on the grounds that you're not an official chaperone. At least I imagine it would be here in the People's Republic of Travis County.

Maybe currently, but with the clarification it might not be.
I am not and have never been a LEO. My avatar is in honor of my friend, Dallas Police Sargent Michael Smith, who was murdered along with four other officers in Dallas on 7.7.2016.

User avatar

CleverNickname
Senior Member
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 6:36 pm

Re: HB308

Postby CleverNickname » Fri May 08, 2015 9:38 am

RoyGBiv wrote:Although I hoped for school carry, I didn't give it much of a chance.

So... What's left?
Class C for first violation.
Clarifications in 30.06 re: schools, polling places and what happens if you stumble upon a field trip.
UCW strikes hospital and amusement parks

Is it ok to say that I liked the original Bill better? :lol:


It's still not a bad bill by any means, but removing the section of the bill that exempts licensees from 46.02 and 46.03 pretty much guts it.

User avatar

tornado
Senior Member
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 7:00 pm

Re: HB308

Postby tornado » Fri May 08, 2015 9:43 am

CleverNickname wrote:It's still not a bad bill by any means, but removing the section of the bill that exempts licensees from 46.02 and 46.03 pretty much guts it.

I can agree with this. We don't lose anything, and it's better than HB308 dying in committee. It's not the big jump we wanted, but progress is good.


CJD
Senior Member
Posts: 455
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 4:38 pm
Location: Conroe

Re: HB308

Postby CJD » Fri May 08, 2015 9:50 am

Why the Jan 1 effective date...?

User avatar

RoyGBiv
Senior Member
Posts: 6862
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:41 am
Location: Fort Worth

Re: HB308

Postby RoyGBiv » Fri May 08, 2015 9:51 am

(a) Sections 46.02 and 46.03 do not apply to:
.
.
(5) a person who is carrying a concealed handgun and a valid license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, to carry a concealed handgun of the same category as the handgun the person is carrying.


Image
Last edited by RoyGBiv on Fri May 08, 2015 9:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
I am not a lawyer. This is NOT legal advice.!
Image
Nothing tempers idealism quite like the cold bath of reality.... SQLGeek


Return to “2015 Legislative Session”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests