HB 698--why is this necessary?

[hirundo82]

Rep. Dan Huberty (R-Kingwood) (ETA: freshman legislator with TSRA "A" rating) has introduced HB 698, which exempts school board members and superintendents with a CHL from PC §46.03(a)(i) (carry on school premises) and §46.035(c) (carry at a meeting of a government entity) while attending a school board meeting.

I don't like bills in general that create special classes of people for carry, but this bill is unnecessary.

Regarding the §46.03 exception, if the meeting is held at a school the people who write the school regulations (ie the superintendent and the school board) merely need to write in an exception for themselves while the meeting is in session.

Regarding the §46.035 exception, it is already not an issue if the meeting is not at a school and is not properly posted under §30.06. If it is posted, once again the people who would be exempted under this bill are the ones who already have the authority under Texas law to give permission to carry (you can carry past your own 30.06 sign of course).

[Keith B]

Rep. Dan Huberty (R-Kingwood) (ETA: freshman legislator with TSRA "A" rating) has introduced HB 698, which exempts school board members and superintendents with a CHL from PC §46.03(a)(i) (carry on school premises) and §46.035(c) (carry at a meeting of a government entity) while attending a school board meeting.

I don't like bills in general that create special classes of people for carry, but this bill is unnecessary.

Regarding the §46.03 exception, if the meeting is held at a school the people who write the school regulations (ie the superintendent and the school board) merely need to write in an exception for themselves while the meeting is in session.

Regarding the §46.035 exception, it is already not an issue if the meeting is not at a school and is not properly posted under §30.06. If it is posted, once again the people who would be exempted under this bill are the ones who already have the authority under Texas law to give permission to carry (you can carry past your own 30.06 sign of course).

While it might be legal for the School Board members to create an individual exemption for themselves, the issue I can see is getting it done without opposition from other anti-gun members and the anti teachers and parents. If the law is passed at a state level, then it becomes automatic and avoids the political pitfalls that each individual board and the members who want to carry would face.

[Charles L. Cotton]

This is not an NRA or TSRA bill.

Chas.

[Ameer]

People who propose laws like this have much in common with the original inspiration for the fictional character in the story.

[RHenriksen]

Glad to have heard of this - thanks for the link. Just sent him this:

==============================================

I'm intrigued by the text of the bill you've filed, HB 698. It appears you recognize the value of allowing people to defend themselves, and that the risk of a CHL holder committing a crime with their pistol to be very slim.

HOWEVER... you appear to only be interested in recognizing the value of self-protection to school officials? Are their lives worth more than the lives of CHL holding parents? Are there two different classes of CHL holders - school officials, and everyone else?

This smacks of George Orwell's Animal Farm... "some pigs are more equal than others"

While I commend you for chipping away at restrictions against CHL holders, I think the manner in which you are chipping is very poorly thought out. Part of the zeitgeist of the past election is a backlash against our elected employees' beginning to think they are a different class of citizen.

If you'd care to discuss this further, I would welcome such a conversation.

Robert Henriksen

[TexDotCom]

Your message to him was phrased very well. Here's hoping it opens the door to additional dialogue and consideration.

[RHenriksen]

Thanks. I'm not holding my breath, but stranger things have happened.