Search found 3 matches

by clarionite
Tue May 17, 2011 10:48 am
Forum: 2011 Texas Legislative Session
Topic: CALL TO ACTION: SB905
Replies: 172
Views: 55172

Re: CALL TO ACTION: SB905

JJVP wrote: I agree with you, CHL#3 should have know the law. However, that was not the point of my fictitious scenario. I was just trying to point out how 3 CHL holders who took the same training, passed the same background check, applied and received the same CHL license would be receive very different treatments for doing exactly the same thing.
I can't really argue with you on this point. As I stated, I'm not fond of the idea myself.
JJVP wrote: As far as not being offended for the officer running the CHL to confirm the validity of the 3rd renewal claim, it is very different than an officer checking on your DL. Very doubtful you will be handcuffed and put on the back of a police car while they check your DL. Very likely you will on the presented scenario. If you are not offended by that, more power to you.
I have a hard time seeing why an officer would cuff a CHL holder before knowing he broke a law. I do see an officer asking if (if there were no visible indicator on the license), and then verifying that, you were indeed allowed to carry in that venue. Maybe I'm just a jolly fat man, or maybe I've worked around Law Enforcement too long, but I have faith in most LEOs to do the right thing and to handle themselves appropriately and so far most of them haven't let me down. I have seen a few bad apples as both LEO and correctional officers, but as a general rule they're few and far between.
JJVP wrote: My problem with this bill is that SB905 creates an elitist group (legislators) that will receive special privileges not afforded to the rest of us. A proposed amendment, which I personally have not seen and might never be offered, further creates another group of CHL's with special privileges. We are supposed to support this amendment, which I don't agree with, based on information that something else is in the works that will make things wonderful for all of us. I don't like this back room secret negotiations that might or might not come to pass, whatever they are. Just because they agree on some back room deal to do this "unknown fantastic thing that will be wonderful for all" does not mean that they will not renege at the last minute and we will be stuck with SB905 as originally written. How soon we forget how 2 senators that supported campus carry changed their minds and opposed it. What should have been a catwalk for campus carry has turned into a nightmare and at the end of the day there are no guarantees that it will be passed. Like I said in a previous post, I don't trust ANY politician. At the end of the day, they ALL have their best interests at hand, not ours.

While I have the greatest respect and trust for Charles, I cannot in good conscience support an unseen amendment to a bad bill and an unseen who knows what "secret" that will make things right.

This will be my last post on this issue.
Some legislators already believe they're an elite group who should have special privileges. And believe it or not, there are a lot of laws that don't apply to certain groups. Our Federal Representatives and Senators are a great example of this.
by clarionite
Mon May 16, 2011 11:28 pm
Forum: 2011 Texas Legislative Session
Topic: CALL TO ACTION: SB905
Replies: 172
Views: 55172

Re: CALL TO ACTION: SB905

JJVP wrote:
CleverNickname wrote:
JJVP wrote:CHL #2 hands his CHL and informs the officer he is on his 4th renewal. The officer informs him, he can't take his word for it and since DPS is closed till Monday, he is now under arrest until they can verify his claim.
How does an officer verify a CHL is valid, period, and not a counterfeit? He puts the info in his squad car's computer, which contacts DPS's system and shows whether it's valid or not, right? And said system is available 24x7, right? If this amendment passes then the law will go into effect on Sep 1, which should give DPS time to modify their system to display whether a particular CHL is at or over 3 renewals.

There's good reasons to not like this amendment, but I don't think this is one of them.
OK, so CHL#2 does not spend the weekend in jail. He will still be put on the back of the patrol car in handcuffs until the officer checks the CHL. The fact still stands, 3 people, who took the same training, passed the same background check, applied and received the same piece of plastic will be treated very different for doing exactly the same thing. One will walk trough, another will be mildly inconvenienced and the third will go to jail and lose his right to that piece of plastic. Again I ask, is that fair? Is that what you want? I sure don't.
While I don't like the idea of different classes of CHL, I can't say that I agree with your logic here. The third, who looses his right to his license and takes a ride should have known the law and not attempted to enter the event. The second shouldn't be offended when his license is ran to make sure it's valid. I'm not offended when an officer runs my DL to make sure it's valid.
by clarionite
Mon May 16, 2011 11:47 am
Forum: 2011 Texas Legislative Session
Topic: CALL TO ACTION: SB905
Replies: 172
Views: 55172

Re: CALL TO ACTION: SB905

The Annoyed Man wrote:
RHenriksen wrote:
The Annoyed Man wrote:Truitt is my House Representative too. Isn't SB 905 a Senate bill? :mrgreen:
Yes, but can't House representatives offer amendments to a Senate bill once it passes the Senate and comes to the House?
I must be behind the 8-ball. Is that what happened?
It appears to be

http://www.legis.state.tx.us/BillLookup ... Bill=SB905" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Return to “CALL TO ACTION: SB905”