TexasCHLforum.com

Some t-shirts for those of you planning on Open Carrying in Austin



Jokes aside, I would recommend something slightly more tasteful:

doc540 wrote:link to the final bill as passed?

It's in the conference report.

This is the 30.06 language change:

CoffeeNut wrote:Now a quick question: Is it HB910 that postpones OC until Jan 1 2016 or can we OC in September?

January 1st.

@GregAbbott_TX tweet

Open Carry just passed in both the Texas House & Senate. Next destination: My Pen. #txlege #tcot @NRA

Charles, I cannot imagine the extraordinary effort behind the scenes to get HB910 back on track. It is truly astonishing we managed to get this passed after the many wrenches thrown into the process by certain dimwits.

THANK YOU!

Resolution passed. Now the final vote on HB910!

This vote was in the House (where there is no filibuster, although they can "chub").

Beiruty wrote:As it is a crime to drive a car without a driver's license, the mere observation of person driving a car is an articulated suspicion for LEO to stop the suspect and check his driver's license.

No, it is not.

Committee strips 'no stop' language from open carry bill

Since the "no stop" amendment was included in both chambers' open carry bills, Phillips said the House and Senate may each need to pass a special resolution to finally strip the language. Then each chamber would be able to vote on whether to agree with the bill before sending it to the governor.

Hopefully this resolution (if Patrick & Straus determine it's actually needed) will be taken care of earlier in the day today.

Am I correct in assuming that the earliest a vote could be held would be 24 hours after the conference report was distributed in the House, so after 07:21pm tomorrow?

Such a fast turnaround on conference committee report gives me hope. I'm calling it now: HB910 will pass!

Would it be possible to prevent a filibuster by scheduling the vote on conference report before some other must-pass bill like budget or border security? (or have all the must-pass bills already been passed by both chambers?)

Charles, if removing the amendment entirely in conference exposes it to a point of order (as removing entirely may not be allowed), couldn't they just flip the meaning of the amendment by removing these two words?

Sec. 411.2049. CERTAIN INVESTIGATORY STOPS AND INQUIRIES PROHIBITED. A peace officer may not make an investigatory stop or other temporary detention to inquire as to a person's possession of a handgun license solely because the person is carrying in a shoulder or belt holster a partially or wholly visible handgun.

So the amendment becomes:

Sec. 411.2049. CERTAIN INVESTIGATORY STOPS AND INQUIRIES. A peace officer may make an investigatory stop or other temporary detention to inquire as to a person's possession of a handgun license solely because the person is carrying in a shoulder or belt holster a partially or wholly visible handgun.

Not that I like flipping the meaning, but at this point anything to save HB910...