House Bill 554

Moderators: Charles L. Cotton, carlson1

Locked
User avatar

Topic author
larrytate1
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 6:53 pm

House Bill 554

#1

Post by larrytate1 » Thu May 14, 2015 6:58 pm

Before I get into this, I am a Life Member of the NRA, an Endowment Member of the TSRA, and a CHL holder. I preface with this to demonstrate my commitment to the Second Amendment (not as any kind of boast). You might have guessed there is a however coming here. I cannot abide stupidity and carelessness when it comes to firearms. Any CHL holder who is not aware of where their firearms are and who has access to them at ALL times has crossed over into the aforementioned territory and probably should face some kind of penalty in addition to the abject shame they should already be experiencing. Penal or financial judgments are inappropriate but something along the lines of a required refresher course in firearm safety would fit the crime. That is an even-handed penalty that would be fair despite the depth of one's pockets. I hold Texans to a higher standard than I would, say, a Californian.

Lawrence Tate

User avatar

Charles L. Cotton
Site Admin
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 17231
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
Location: Friendswood, TX
Contact:

Re: House Bill 554

#2

Post by Charles L. Cotton » Thu May 14, 2015 7:12 pm

HB554 addresses a violation that has no victims. No one tries to get past metal detectors with a gun; it's always an accident. Even if HB554 passes, the person still faces a civil fine by the TSA.

I seriously doubt that you would be as stringent on the many other aspects of human activity as you are about guns. How do you feel about people who don't know where their children are every second and they drown in the family pool? How about the child who unlocks their seat belt and is injured or killed in a car accident?

I'm quite certain you would not want to be judged by the standard you would set for others.

Chas.
Image

User avatar

Topic author
larrytate1
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 6:53 pm

Re: House Bill 554

#3

Post by larrytate1 » Thu May 14, 2015 7:49 pm

"I seriously doubt that you would be as stringent on the many other aspects of human activity as you are about guns."

To be honest I do take a bit of a "drill sergeant" attitude when it comes to firearms. This is the level of seriousness that I was indoctrinated with. The tone of my post reflects this attitude, a bit of preaching to the choir. And, no, I am not at all stringent in hardly any* other area of human activity. I do believe that it is a very serious matter to know where one's firearms are at all times. I have been guilty of firearm safety violations (such as showing up at an indoor range with a round chambered in one of my firearms, et al) and I was subjected to a certain degree of shame for which I felt no resentment whatsoever.

I suppose a civil fine would be enough but I still like the idea of a mandatory safety refresher instead. I'm not a fan of flat rate fines of any kind.

*On a side note it would be folly indeed for me to get into my opinions about the level of accountability that should be assigned to parenting. ;-)

Larry

User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 24087
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: House Bill 554

#4

Post by The Annoyed Man » Thu May 14, 2015 8:36 pm

larrytate1 wrote:To be honest I do take a bit of a "drill sergeant" attitude when it comes to firearms.
.......but you're not my drill sergeant. BTW, every time I go to the range, I have a round chambered in one of my guns.......on my hip.
larrytate1 wrote:Any CHL holder who is not aware of where their firearms are and who has access to them at ALL times has crossed over into the aforementioned territory and probably should face some kind of penalty in addition to the abject shame they should already be experiencing.
Unless a tragedy results, how on earth are you going to know that the person did not know where their gun was? You are generally right to think that people ought to know where their guns are, and make sure that unauthorized access to them won't happen, BUT, this is essentially no different than having mistakenly entered a 30.06 posted business because you didn't see the sign, and then leaving as soon as you receive effective notice.
SECTION 1. Section 46.03, Penal Code, is amended by adding Subsections (e-1) and (e-2) and amending Subsection (f) to read as follows:
  • (e-1) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(5) that the actor:
    • (1) possessed, at the screening checkpoint for the secured area, a concealed handgun that the actor was licensed to carry under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code; and
      (2) exited the screening checkpoint for the secured area immediately upon notification that the actor possessed the handgun.
It is against federal law to carry firearm into a post office, and yet, several members of this forum, myself included, have done exactly that - because we forgot that we weren't supposed to: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=77486" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. As one of the members said in that thread:
goose wrote:It is one of those unfortunate dichotomies. We dress for the comfort to be able to forget. And then we try to never forget. As others have said, a good reminder for the mortals, of which I am one.
Should we all be thrown in jail?
Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself.—Hookalakah Meshobbab
I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes.—The Annoyed Boy


joelamosobadiah
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 243
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 12:03 am

Re: House Bill 554

#5

Post by joelamosobadiah » Thu May 14, 2015 9:21 pm

I worked for TSA for eight years. I even spent a couple of those years in DC drafting rules and regulations. Trying (unsuccessfully) to bring a little more common sense into some of the regulations. My take on this is that those who need to be prosecuted, fined, etc. rarely ever do and those that simply forgot (and yes, I can understand how that accident can happen), got way more of a hassle than they deserved usually.

We had a lawyer attempt to carry his handgun into the airport past the metal detectors 3 times before the FBI picked him up the last time since the local authorities wouldn't prosecute him. These are the types of people that need a law. The 80-year old guy that forgot his rattlesnake pistol in his overalls shouldn't be handcuffed and have his gun confiscated "indefinitely" because he forgot to leave it in his truck while putting his grandaughter on the plane. :banghead:

Believe it or not, TSA and their civil fines are usually dealt with pretty fairly and have a good amount of common sense in my experience. The local authority's interpretation about when to prosecute and do something about the situation is much more varied.

So in short, I am good with this change.


smusparty
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2015 12:36 pm

Re: House Bill 554

#6

Post by smusparty » Tue Jun 09, 2015 12:49 pm

Larry,

I totally understand your point of view. I am 6 year Army veteran ( combat arms, not desk jockey) and I act, speak and think like a drill sergeant often as my kids can verify. The problem is that sometimes there are gray areas. What about the lady that takes a bag down from the closet not knowing her husband had left/hid a pistol in that bag? That's not forgetting. Maybe careless but what if that was your wife or even you? The post just before mine from the TSA individual makes a lot of sense and I have heard similar accounts from folks on the frontline. Remember, you must have intent to commit a crime. These people have CHL's, they've passed the background checks, they are good citizens who had no intent to commit a crime.

Locked

Return to “2015 Legislative Session”