HB 356 The Utah Connection

[Griz44]

Would someone please explain why TFC has labeled HB 365 as "BAD IDEA"

My thoughts:
If you live in Texas, why would you NOT get a Texas License?
If you live in Texas, why would you want another Texan to be licensed to carry with a certificate that required less training, and virtually no proficiency testing?
Why would you want a fellow Texan to NOT be taught the Texas laws, instead of the state laws of a place many hundreds of miles away?

I have had this conversation with many other Texas instructors as well as with several Utah certified instructors. The response from the UTAH certified instructors is always the same, emotional and protective of their own financial interests in the classes they teach. There seem to no rational explanations of why. When I ask that question, all I get is that I must be anti-gun and anti-carry or anti-American to ask such a question. That is an emotional response that does not support the stance. Most responses I get from Utah instructors sounds more like liberal rhetoric than reasonable arguments. So if that's all you have to offer, then I would prefer you not respond. I am interested in a reasonable argument for the continued existence of this condition. It is my intent to support this bill with my dollars as I feel this is a good bill, that serves the best interest of Texans. If a Texan wants to ALSO carry another states license - GO FOR IT! I completely support training, from any source.
Several other states have already passed bills similar to HB 365, specifically because of the watered down training and qualification requirements of licenses from Utah and other states like it.

In my humble opinion, accepting UTAH or other states law here for our own residents concealed carry program is on the same keel as having NATO troops from France patrolling our streets. It's just not Texan.
So I will ask it here, and look for reasonable explanations.

[WildBill]

Edited to remove my comments. I don't know the answer.

[Beiruty]

measure may not be needed since, Utah require the to be real temp resident before you get a permit.

[Griz44]

measure may not be needed since, Utah require the to be real temp resident before you get a permit.

Please explain, your broken sentence does not make any sense. TEXAS does not require this, is this a requirement in UTAH to use a Texas license?
From the context of the UTAH law as I read it, they don't require you to be a resident of UTAH, or even take the class in UTAH, or to have ever even been in the the State of UTAH to get their license.
From the context of the Texas law, you are not required to be a UTAH residence to use a UTAH license to carry in Texas.
Many states do require that the license you display in their state be from the state you reside in, this is so far not true in Texas.

[Greybeard]

Yep Griz, I think many of us agree that the "Utah Problem" has contributed to the erosion of the integrity of Texas' CHL program. From what I read of the text, the really "bad" part of the bill as filed is no provision whatsover to recognize a new resident's license for a reasonable period of time (possibly something along the lines of 6 months).

[Crossfire]

Effective May 10, 2011, Utah will no longer issue non-resident permits to anyone who does not also hold a permit from their state of residence. Thread on that topic here: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=42141" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Barbi Q]

My thoughts:
If you live in Texas, why would you NOT get a Texas License?
If you live in Texas, why would you want another Texan to be licensed to carry with a certificate that required less training, and virtually no proficiency testing?
Why would you want a fellow Texan to NOT be taught the Texas laws, instead of the state laws of a place many hundreds of miles away?

If you think that, I urge you to write your congressman and both senators and demand LEOSA be repealed.

You should also write your state legislators and The Honorable Lon Burnam and encourage them to repeal reciprocity, because a Yankee with a Yankee license isn't going to know any more about TEXAS law than a Texan with a Yankee license, and probably knows less because at least the Texan lives here. If you don't trust a Texan "licensed to carry with a certificate that required less training, and virtually no proficiency testing" why would you trust a Yankee "licensed to carry with a certificate that required less training, and virtually no proficiency testing" and don't get me started on allowing them to practice religion with no license at all.

[Griz44]

Barbi,
Where did the reference to religion come from? This is the "emotional" response that I referred to. This response accomplishes nothing and educates no-one.
Are you a Utah instructor? Do you have a Utah license? Do you have a Texas license? Let us know WHY you feel this way. I asked the questions to gain insight, and stated WHY I asked the question.
These are not responses that enlighten us.

As to me writing my congressional representatives, I do, I have, and I will again, and I will do that with checks in the envelopes. But before I do that, I want all the facts, and the reasons that come with them why it needs supporting or why it needs defeating. Political debate leads to enlightenment. Upon reading the original text of the submitted bill, I could not understand why this bill was marked as a "bad idea" by the Texas Firearms Coalition. It seems simply written, and in the best interest for the people of the state of Texas. There is a reason they do not support it, but that reason is not stated.

Please keep the religion and emotional issues out of it, discuss the facts! Open discussion amongst rational adults will produce knowledgeable voters and supporters. The reason this section of the forum exists, is to do just that. The purpose is not to flame anyone that differs in political opinion. Unless of course, the response was not political opinion, but person interest, financial or otherwise, but we cannot know that if you do not state it. If you feel that this would be a financial issue for the State, then state that. If this would be a financial issue for you personally, then state that as well. If you are simply defending your choice to get a Utah license, then enlighten us as to why you chose the Utah license instead of the Texas license. Look inward, and tell us why you have such strong emotional feelings on this issue. This may help the other voters here decide if they want to support this bill or not, which is why we are in the topic to start with.

[Barbi Q]

Let us know WHY you feel this way. I asked the questions to gain insight, and stated WHY I asked the question.

Let me make a simple example.

Pete has a 2A license issued by Massachusetts. At this time, Texas unilaterally recognizes a Massachusetts license.

The background check and training required to get a Massachusetts license are relevant when deciding if Texas should recognize Massachusetts licenses in general. However, Pete's religion, skin color, and state of residence are not relevant IF he went through the same training and background check as others with a Massachusetts license.

So, it might be reasonable for Texas to stop recognizing Massachusetts licenses in general, but it's not logical or moral to recognize Pete's license as a tourist but deny his 2A rights if he moves here to go to graduate school at A&M. His training isn't less. His knowledge of Texas law isn't less. Where Pete hangs his hat is completely irrelevant to whether Pete's Massachusetts license is GOOD ENOUGH to allow him to carry a gun in Texas.

Now, if someone wants to come out and say it's about money (Nothing more. Nothing less. It's all about simple greed.) then I can't argue with that logic. (I can debate morals but not the logic if it's all about the filthy lucre.)

[WildBill]

Okay, now it's my turn.

First of all I won't talk about RTKBA or needing a "2A license". The laws are what they are.

For the record, I have both a Texas CHL and a Utah CFP and I am not an instructor for either state. I obtained my Texas CHL first and, originally, had no intention of getting a license from another state. The reasons that I obtained the Utah license were to 1) add a couple states that didn't have reciprocity with Texas and 2) to have a "back-up" if my Texas CHL expired before I was able to renew it. At the time I got my Texas CHL it was taking two to six months to get approval from the DPS.

Now my concerns about HB 365:

1) Passing HB 356 would negate my second reason for obtaining my Utah CFP.

2) I am against passing laws that are not needed. I think that HB 356 is a bill written to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

3) Voiding an out-of-state CHL just because someone has a domicile in Texas is arbitary. The law requires that you get a Texas DL within 90 days of moving to Texas. There is no written or driving test to do this. You just give them your out-of-state license and they give you a temporary license the same day.

The way the bill is currently written, my out-of-state CHL would be invalid the day that I rented an apartment in Texas. If I move to Texas, do my driving skills become obsolete, just because I got my license from another state? Obviously not. In order to avoid breaking the law, it is my responsibility to learn the differences in concealed carry laws and driving laws in each state that I visit or live.

4) Money was not a concern for me when taking classes and paying for the Texas and Utah classes and license fees. However, many people are not as fortunate as I and the fees could prohibit them from obtaining a Texas CHL. A less expensive out-of-state license might be the best option.

[Skiprr]

Here's a link to an article at TexasFirearmsCoalition.com that talks about the bill.

My quick take on it is this: it's completely unnecessary legislation. It is a solution in search of a problem. I think the bottom-line question is, why would we want to pass a bill that constrains or further limits 2A rights in any way whatsoever if there's no strong reason for that constraint or limitation?

And too, there's the disturbing origin of this bill, as well as its supporters:

"A lot of states are concerned with what Utah does," said Marsha McCartney, a Dallas volunteer for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "It just seems to be a moneymaker for them. They're willing to issue a license to anyone.

"Why would Texas put in place these restrictions if you could go elsewhere? If you live in Texas and you're going to conceal carry, you ought to have a concealed license from Texas," she said. "It's common sense."

When a gun bill is filed by a perennial, anti-gun, NRA F-rated Representative (Burnam), and is supported by the Brady Bunch, I tend to look very closely at what good can come of it. Any time a Brady spokesperson uses the clause, "It's common sense," the hair on my neck starts standing on end. In this case, I can see no need for the bill; certainly, out-of-state CCW holders in Texas aren't running around causing mayhem. But what the bill would do is create new legislation that, even if slightly, errodes 2A rights.

Any proposed gun bill that further limits any rights and that delivers no value is, to me, a bad bill. There are hundreds and hundreds of bills filed each legislative session, and only small fraction ever make it to committee and calendar. Having an unnecessary gun bill in the mix just dilutes time and attention from Representatives and Senators. There are two big gun-related issues that I want my legislators paying attention to and supporting this session. I don't want anything Lon Burnam or the Brady Bunch does to distract from that.

[srothstein]

Would someone please explain why TFC has labeled HB 365 as "BAD IDEA"

My thoughts:
If you live in Texas, why would you NOT get a Texas License?

Maybe the state won't give me one because of a long ago mistake. Or maybe because I could not afford $140 for a license plus another $125 for the class.

If you live in Texas, why would you want another Texan to be licensed to carry with a certificate that required less training, and virtually no proficiency testing?

Because I don't care about the other people carrying. I really do not care how much training they have or if they can hit the broad side of a barn. I might be concerned about the background check letting bad people carry, but I am not sure I agree with all the people the Texas law bars.

Why would you want a fellow Texan to NOT be taught the Texas laws, instead of the state laws of a place many hundreds of miles away?

Again, because I don't care what he knows. If he is wrong about the application of a law, he ends up going to jail. Either way, it really doesn't affect me.


See, I am a true believer in the Second Amendment. I really want to see all of chapter 46 repealed. So, when a law is passed and it has loopholes that allow more people to carry, I see that as an advantage and not a disadvantage. The more people who want to defend themselves carrying, the better I see us as. My pet theory is that the more people who take responsibility for themselves in this area, the more people will take responsibility for themselves in other areas also. And I see that as good for society overall.

So I see the old situation with Utah licenses as a general benefit to Texas and society in general. I see the argument against it as being monetarily related. Texas is losing money from these licenses. And the real problem with that is that the CHL license program was supposed to be revenue neutral. The state should not be losing money by having people take these licenses out of state because it is not supposed to be making money off of them anyway.

But, since Utah saw it as a problem and has corrected it (their new law has been posted), this whole debate is really a moot point right now. It may come up again with some other state, but it is moot right now.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Before I answer your questions, let me note that you don't get to tell our Members how to respond or what to post.

The reason the Texas Firearms Coalition lists HB356 as a "Bad Bill" is because it is a step in the wrong direction in terms of protecting the Second Amendment and expanding the holdings in Heller and McDonald. TFC will never support a gun control bill, period.

I've made it very clear that I think Texans should get a Texas CHL. I've made it equally clear that I think the handful of Utah CFP Instructors who are using irresponsible advertising tactics are doing a disservice to all Texas gun owners. With the change in Utah law, I hope every irresponsible Utah Instructor goes out of business. I also hope every Texas CHL Instructor that supports a bill that restricts rather than expands Second Amendment rights finds themselves without any students. Expansion of gun rights is far more important than any single person, group of people, or commercial interest.

That's why TFC opposes HB356

Chas.

Would someone please explain why TFC has labeled HB 365 as "BAD IDEA"

My thoughts:
If you live in Texas, why would you NOT get a Texas License?
If you live in Texas, why would you want another Texan to be licensed to carry with a certificate that required less training, and virtually no proficiency testing?
Why would you want a fellow Texan to NOT be taught the Texas laws, instead of the state laws of a place many hundreds of miles away?

I have had this conversation with many other Texas instructors as well as with several Utah certified instructors. The response from the UTAH certified instructors is always the same, emotional and protective of their own financial interests in the classes they teach. There seem to no rational explanations of why. When I ask that question, all I get is that I must be anti-gun and anti-carry or anti-American to ask such a question. That is an emotional response that does not support the stance. Most responses I get from Utah instructors sounds more like liberal rhetoric than reasonable arguments. So if that's all you have to offer, then I would prefer you not respond. I am interested in a reasonable argument for the continued existence of this condition. It is my intent to support this bill with my dollars as I feel this is a good bill, that serves the best interest of Texans. If a Texan wants to ALSO carry another states license - GO FOR IT! I completely support training, from any source.
Several other states have already passed bills similar to HB 365, specifically because of the watered down training and qualification requirements of licenses from Utah and other states like it.

In my humble opinion, accepting UTAH or other states law here for our own residents concealed carry program is on the same keel as having NATO troops from France patrolling our streets. It's just not Texan.
So I will ask it here, and look for reasonable explanations.

[EconDoc]

I saw somewhere that the Utah legislature was also thinking about changing their law to require that non-residents have a CHL or equivalent from their own state of residence before Utah would issue a non-resident permit to them. It has to do with protecting Utah's reciprocity agreements with other states. At least, that was the justification cited. I don't remember where I saw that. Maybe on the NRA-ILA website. If Utah passes that law, then it will moot anything that Texas does for Texas residents. Does anybody know about that?

[Keith B]

I saw somewhere that the Utah legislature was also thinking about changing their law to require that non-residents have a CHL or equivalent from their own state of residence before Utah would issue a non-resident permit to them. It has to do with protecting Utah's reciprocity agreements with other states. At least, that was the justification cited. I don't remember where I saw that. Maybe on the NRA-ILA website. If Utah passes that law, then it will moot anything that Texas does for Texas residents. Does anybody know about that?

The Utah bill passed. So, as of May 10, 2011 you will be required to have a valid concealed handgun license from your state of residence before Utah will issue you a non-resident permit.

After December 31, 2011 those that currently have a non-resident Utah permit will be required to send a copy of their state's resident permit to renew their Utah non-resident permit.