Wish list for 2009

Relevant bills filed and their status

Moderator: Charles L. Cotton

User avatar

Bart
Senior Member
Posts: 718
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 2:23 pm
Location: Deep in the Heart
Contact:

Re: Wish list for 2009

Postby Bart » Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:09 pm

If property rights allow someone to ban CHLs carrying then they should also be able to ban LEOs carrying. Also their property rights should allow them to ban piercings, tattoos, speaking Spanish on the property, possession of tobacco, Muslim scarves, underwear, or anything else they want. If property owners can't ban those things then why should they be able to ban guns?
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.


KBCraig
Banned
Posts: 5251
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 3:32 am
Location: Texarkana

Re: Wish list for 2009

Postby KBCraig » Sun Jul 27, 2008 11:22 pm

Liberty wrote:
KBCraig wrote:He brought up parking lots, and his desire for a strong parking lot bill. We talked about the challenge of getting a bill passed in Texas with the number or large international corporations who oppose it. I didn't mention that I actually oppose such a bill as a violation of property owners' rights, because we just didn't have time for an in-depth discussion.

But what which property rights are more important? The Property rights of the car owner or the property rights of the publicly accessible parking lots. Should the parking lot owner employer have more property rights than the automobile owner?


Just as your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins, your right to do as you wish in or on your property, ends where my property begins. The parking lot owner can ban your car because it's an import, or a low-rider, or a monster truck, or too heavy for his lot, or too wide/long for his parking spaces, or because you've got Aggie plates. Or, because you've got a gun inside.


Just curious on your thought processes. My thinking is that a the privately owned car owner has more rights to privacy than the semipublic property owner has a right to access.

There's no such thing as "semipublic property". The legal construct of "a place of public accommodation", where owners are allowed little discretion about who enters, is itself an abrogation of property rights.

Property is either owned privately, owned publicly (by the people in common, or by the government), or it's unclaimed property (good luck finding any of that). A store with big flashing signs inviting the public is just as much private property as is your bedroom, and the owner should have just as much right to deny entry to his store, as you do at your home.


Pinkycatcher
Senior Member
Posts: 490
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 4:25 pm
Location: Fort Worth

Re: Wish list for 2009

Postby Pinkycatcher » Mon Jul 28, 2008 12:28 am

KBCraig wrote:
Just as your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins, your right to do as you wish in or on your property, ends where my property begins. The parking lot owner can ban your car because it's an import, or a low-rider, or a monster truck, or too heavy for his lot, or too wide/long for his parking spaces, or because you've got Aggie plates. Or, because you've got a gun inside.


There's no such thing as "semipublic property". The legal construct of "a place of public accommodation", where owners are allowed little discretion about who enters, is itself an abrogation of property rights.

Property is either owned privately, owned publicly (by the people in common, or by the government), or it's unclaimed property (good luck finding any of that). A store with big flashing signs inviting the public is just as much private property as is your bedroom, and the owner should have just as much right to deny entry to his store, as you do at your home.


I agree, but in my opinion for employee's (at least) they should make them place 30.06 signs except with more words to make it more annoying ( :lol:: ) and if it's for employees they must allow for quickly accessible parking.

User avatar

stevie_d_64
Senior Member
Posts: 7588
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 11:17 pm
Location: Houston, Texas 77089
Contact:

Re: Wish list for 2009

Postby stevie_d_64 » Sat Aug 02, 2008 7:33 am

"Just as your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins, your right to do as you wish in or on your property, ends where my property begins."

Absolutely Mr. K...

There is not a single person here who works for a company that desires to put a fist in their employers nose at a high velocity...Nor do we desire to pick the nose for any purpose either...I figure all we want to do is leave other peoples boogers alone... ;-)

We pick ours just fine by ourselves and do not need to be told we can or cannot do so when the need arises...Our noses are all in this together, and no ones nose is above the other in this case...

Proboscis-ly speaking of course... :thumbs2:
"Perseverance and Preparedness triumph over Procrastination and Paranoia every time.” -- Steve
NRA - Life Member
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Μολών λαβέ!


Russell
Senior Member
Posts: 2774
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 12:46 pm

Re: Wish list for 2009

Postby Russell » Sun Aug 03, 2008 9:10 pm

Bart wrote:If property rights allow someone to ban CHLs carrying then they should also be able to ban LEOs carrying. Also their property rights should allow them to ban piercings, tattoos, speaking Spanish on the property, possession of tobacco, Muslim scarves, underwear, or anything else they want. If property owners can't ban those things then why should they be able to ban guns?



Piercings - Legal to ban
Tattoos - Legal to ban
Speaking Spanish on the property - Legal to ban
Tobacco - Legal to ban
Muslim scarves - Not legal to ban (Religious affiliation, protected by the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Underwear - Legal to ban


Property owners can ban 5 out of the 6 things you mentioned. Unfortunately firearm possession is not a protected class.
http://www.texas3006.com - Texas 30.06 and 30.07 Signage Database.
Join us on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/texas3006

User avatar

boomerang
Senior Member
Posts: 2629
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:06 pm
Contact:

Re: Wish list for 2009

Postby boomerang » Sun Aug 03, 2008 11:55 pm

Good thing my religion requires me to bear arms.
"rlol"
"Ees gun! Ees not safe!"


bdickens
Senior Member
Posts: 2807
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 10:36 am
Location: Houston

Re: Wish list for 2009

Postby bdickens » Wed Aug 06, 2008 9:31 am

Since firearm posession is an individual right enumerated in the Constitution (thank you, SCOTUS for clarifying some people's confusion about that), people who carry firearms should be a protected class.
Byron Dickens


Douva
Senior Member
Posts: 390
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 3:08 pm

Re: Wish list for 2009

Postby Douva » Mon Oct 13, 2008 11:58 am

I have a problem with the proposed open carry legislation, as it is currently written.

The wording of the bill, as posted, seems to indicated that 30.06 would affect open carry in the same way it affects concealed carry. If that's the case, I would oppose this legislation because I don't want to see the number of places I'm allowed to carry concealed reduced by public fears over open carry. Business owners who never gave much thought to concealed carry may decide that they don't like the idea of visible guns in their establishments and choose to post 30.06 signs, which would also prohibit concealed carry.

EDITED TO ADD:

Just to clarify, I'm not saying that property owners shouldn't be able to restrict open carry on their property; I'm saying that they shouldn't be required to post 30.06 to restrict open carry on their property. I have no interest in open carrying. I currently carry concealed virtually everywhere I go and encounter less than one 30.06 sign a year. I'm not interested in seeing half the businesses in Texas suddenly become off-limits to concealed carry so that open carry proponents can walk down Main Street proudly displaying their firearms.

If you want to push for open carry, that's fine, but please find a way to do it that won't inadvertently infringe on my ability to legally carry concealed.


biggyin
Member
Posts: 166
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2008 10:16 am
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Wish list for 2009

Postby biggyin » Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:42 pm

carlson1 wrote:
tornado wrote:
RKirby wrote:My wishes for 2009 are simple...give CHL's the right to carry anywhere that an LEO legally can, and remove the restrictions related to carrying in school buildings.

:iagree: :iagree: :iagree: :iagree: :iagree: :iagree: :iagree: :iagree: :iagree: :iagree:

:thumbs2:

:iagree:
It is a cliche that most cliches are true, but then like most cliches, that cliche is untrue.

User avatar

tomneal
Senior Member
Posts: 911
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 2:26 pm
Location: Houston
Contact:

Re: Wish list for 2009

Postby tomneal » Sat Oct 25, 2008 8:23 am

Open Carry thoughts.

I just got back from a 2 week driving vacation to New Mexico and Arizona. I spent an evening and a day at the Gun Rights Policy Conference.

The only open carry firearm I saw in either state, was at the Gun Rights Policy Conference.

I did see one "no guns" sign in Alpine Arizona.

Your Mileage may vary.
See you at the range
NRA Life, TSRA Life, USPSA Life, Mensa (not worth $50 per year so it's expired)
Tom Neal

User avatar

tomneal
Senior Member
Posts: 911
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 2:26 pm
Location: Houston
Contact:

Re: Wish list for 2009

Postby tomneal » Sat Oct 25, 2008 8:27 am

oops

I guess I should have mentioned my point.

Both New Mexico and Arizona allow open carry.
My "sample" indicates that it is rare.


If open carry were allowed in Texas, it might be a fad for a while then most folks would conceal.
The big question is:
Would open carry in Texas, galvanize the Anti-Rights folks, and give them some support in Austin?
See you at the range
NRA Life, TSRA Life, USPSA Life, Mensa (not worth $50 per year so it's expired)
Tom Neal


KBCraig
Banned
Posts: 5251
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 3:32 am
Location: Texarkana

Re: Wish list for 2009

Postby KBCraig » Tue Oct 28, 2008 12:28 pm

I sent the following to my state rep and state senator, both with good TSRA and NRA ratings:

(Rep),

I enjoyed speaking with you about changes for 2009 at the (event) this past summer. Now that the new session is just around the corner, I wanted to touch base again on the issues that matter to me.

In the 2009 Legislative Session, there will be many bills proposed to change Texas firearms laws, both good and bad. I would like to share my thoughts on a couple of subjects, even though the potential proposed bills aren't yet available for review.

First: campus carry. There is no good reason why licensed, law-abiding adults should be disarmed just because they pass through a doorway. Current Texas law allows legal, licensed, concealed carry on school grounds, but not in school buildings.

"School" is not defined in the statutes, and could theoretically include a beauty school, dance school, Sunday school, pre-K daycare, or karate school. This has to be clarified in the statutes. Or even better, just remove all statutory prohibitions on school carry by legal, licensed adults.

Most, perhaps all, public colleges and universities forbid students from possessing any firearms at all while on campus. Since they are political subdivisions and taxing authorities of the State of Texas, no public post-secondary institution should be able to violate our strong preemption laws and restrict carry on campus by students or employees.

(Private schools at all levels, as private property owners, should continue to be able to restrict guns however they see fit, but no private property should ever be statutorily off-limits except through trespass laws.)

I urge you to support expanding legal concealed carry to anywhere the licensee may legally be. Governor Perry, after the Virginia Tech murders, said that he supports the same thing.

Second: open carry. Texas is one of only six states that outlaw open carry of handguns. With the added pain of wearing a jacket or cover garment in Texas summers, this is needlessly burdensome on Texans who lawfully carry handguns. There is no good reason why an adult who can legally carry a handgun, should not be able to do so openly.

Long-standing statutes about "deadly conduct" adequately cover brandishing or threatening. A handgun that is holstered and openly worn on a citizen's hip is no more threatening than it would be if covered by a shirt or jacket. Nor, for that matter, than it would be if it was on the hip of a peace officer in plain clothes.

So, my general request for 2009 is expanded gun freedom. Specifically, fewer places off limits by statute (all public schools and universities, and all private property), and fewer restrictions on mode of carry.

If you would like to discuss these issues, please don't hesitate to contact me by mail, or by phone at (number).

Thanks for your time,

Kevin Craig


KBCraig
Banned
Posts: 5251
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 3:32 am
Location: Texarkana

Re: Wish list for 2009

Postby KBCraig » Tue Oct 28, 2008 8:45 pm

Reply from my state senator (nothing from my rep, yet):

Mr. Craig,
Thanks for your email. I agree with you and have always and will
continue to fully support expanding right to carry.

Thanks again,
(senator)


Return to “2007 Texas Legislative Session”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest