TexasCHLforum.com

Did I want HB 560 to pass? Yes.
Did I think it ever have a chance? No.

HB 560 would have basically given LTC's the right to carry where LEO's have the right to carry. The problem is that the vast majority of the voters see LEO's as being more responsible, trustworthy, and safer than LTC's when it comes to handguns. You can debate that on different points, but it is the public perception. When I talked about this bill with friends, the for and against sentiment was clearly LTC holders yes, non LTC holders no. The arguments against HB 560 included; LEO's have more training, LTC's might not be able to keep their gun from getting taken away from them but LEO's would, everybody can tell that the guy with a badge is a good guy but that doesn't work for LTC.

We all know that statistically LTC's are one of the most law abiding groups of the population. We also know that LTC's commit less crime per capita than LEO's. But making that comparison tends to denigrate LEO's, and is politically a non-starter. The statistics could be presented in a different way, but it would still be a hard sell. You could say that statistically LTC's are the most law abiding and safest group of the population, including LEO's.

The other problem I see with issues like HB 560, and the AG fines for signs fiasco, is that LTC's don't have a lobby. Face it, we don't. TSRA represents gun rights and their paid members, but they are not devoted specifically to issues affecting LTC holders. When legislation is proposed that specifically affects LTC's there is no paid lobby in Austin that I am aware of that works to get that legislation passed. Sure we have people like Mr. Cotton, and others, that work on pro 2A legislation of all kinds, and I am very grateful and respectful of their efforts. But there is not a person who can be introduced in Austin as representing the more than one million LTC holders of Texas. HB 560 was singularly an LTC issue. Fines for signs is an LTC issue. Constitutional carry is not.

There are over one million LTC holders in Texas now. Is that a big enough group to pay a lobbyist? I don't know. Would a paid lobbyist even help our cause? I don't know. But I do know that even among pro 2A Texans, non LTC holders are not terribly concerned or terribly sympathetic to these issues. And that my friends, is something our legislators know as well.

1911 10MM wrote:If incremental steps is what is necessary this seems backwards as HB 560 should be the priority not Constitutional Carry. It is apparent that the gun groups who I will not name are in control. I guess the squeaky wheel does get the oil!

I think it has to do more with the idea, that the Legislators can sign on to a bill, that they know will not pass, but they can say well, we tried, while not addressing the main topics. The same issues with campus carry, where they left so many decisions up to college administrators, and then after a year in place, did not clarify, or modify anything. It's like telling your kids, you will buy them a brand new expensive vehicle, with the, provision, that the other parent agrees, knowing full well, that it will be nixed. JMHO

Lynyrd wrote: There are over one million LTC holders in Texas now. Is that a big enough group to pay a lobbyist? I don't know. Would a paid lobbyist even help our cause? I don't know. But I do know that even among pro 2A Texans, non LTC holders are not terribly concerned or terribly sympathetic to these issues. And that my friends, is something our legislators know as well.

This brings up a thought. If CC was to pass, that number of 1 million legal gun carriers would instantly increase to almost the entire adult population of the state. How many of the non-LTC holders will start to carry? Who knows. Probably most of the non-LTC folks that are currently carrying their cars under MPA. But the point is that we would see an increase in the number of people who would have a dog in this hunt with regard to the rights of folks who carry guns. That definitely wouldn't hurt.

1911 10MM wrote:<snip>
I guess the squeaky wheel does get the oil!

The vocal minority can with a well articulated and coordinated game plan can get more traction with legislative members than a silent majority.

Lynyrd wrote:Did I want HB 560 to pass? Yes.
Did I think it ever have a chance? No.

HB 560 would have basically restored to citizen's the right to carry where LEO's have the authority to carry. The problem is that the vast majority of the voters see LEO's as being more responsible, trustworthy, and safer than LTC's when it comes to handguns. You can debate that on different points, but it is the public perception. When I talked about this bill with friends, the for and against sentiment was clearly LTC holders yes, non LTC holders no. The arguments against HB 560 included; LEO's have more training, LTC's might not be able to keep their gun from getting taken away from them but LEO's would, everybody can tell that the guy with a badge is a good guy but that doesn't work for LTC.

We all know that statistically LTC's are one of the most law abiding groups of the population. We also know that LTC's commit less crime per capita than LEO's. But making that comparison tends to denigrate LEO's, and is politically a non-starter. The statistics could be presented in a different way, but it would still be a hard sell. You could say that statistically LTC's are the most law abiding and safest group of the population, including LEO's.

The other problem I see with issues like HB 560, and the AG fines for signs fiasco, is that LTC's don't have a lobby. Face it, we don't. TSRA represents gun rights and their paid members, but they are not devoted specifically to issues affecting LTC holders. When legislation is proposed that specifically affects LTC's there is no paid lobby in Austin that I am aware of that works to get that legislation passed. Sure we have people like Mr. Cotton, and others, that work on pro 2A legislation of all kinds, and I am very grateful and respectful of their efforts. But there is not a person who can be introduced in Austin as representing the more than one million LTC holders of Texas. HB 560 was singularly an LTC issue. Fines for signs is an LTC issue. Constitutional carry is not.

There are over one million LTC holders in Texas now. Is that a big enough group to pay a lobbyist? I don't know. Would a paid lobbyist even help our cause? I don't know. But I do know that even among pro 2A Texans, non LTC holders are not terribly concerned or terribly sympathetic to these issues. And that my friends, is something our legislators know as well.

Fixed it for you.

anygunanywhere wrote:
Fixed it for you.

Good one.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

Lynyrd wrote: There are over one million LTC holders in Texas now. Is that a big enough group to pay a lobbyist? I don't know. Would a paid lobbyist even help our cause? I don't know. But I do know that even among pro 2A Texans, non LTC holders are not terribly concerned or terribly sympathetic to these issues. And that my friends, is something our legislators know as well.

This brings up a thought. If CC was to pass, that number of 1 million legal gun carriers would instantly increase to almost the entire adult population of the state. How many of the non-LTC holders will start to carry? Who knows. Probably most of the non-LTC folks that are currently carrying their cars under MPA. But the point is that we would see an increase in the number of people who would have a dog in this hunt with regard to the rights of folks who carry guns. That definitely wouldn't hurt.

My biggest concern about CC passing is the possibility of greater restrictions on where carrying is permitted, thus ending up with steps backwards for LTC holders.

But, if you say we can have both CC and the eased restrictions of HB560 on where LTC holders can carry then I could probably get behind that.

bblhd672 wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

Lynyrd wrote: There are over one million LTC holders in Texas now. Is that a big enough group to pay a lobbyist? I don't know. Would a paid lobbyist even help our cause? I don't know. But I do know that even among pro 2A Texans, non LTC holders are not terribly concerned or terribly sympathetic to these issues. And that my friends, is something our legislators know as well.

This brings up a thought. If CC was to pass, that number of 1 million legal gun carriers would instantly increase to almost the entire adult population of the state. How many of the non-LTC holders will start to carry? Who knows. Probably most of the non-LTC folks that are currently carrying their cars under MPA. But the point is that we would see an increase in the number of people who would have a dog in this hunt with regard to the rights of folks who carry guns. That definitely wouldn't hurt.

My biggest concern about CC passing is the possibility of greater restrictions on where carrying is permitted, thus ending up with steps backwards for LTC holders.

But, if you say we can have both CC and the eased restrictions of HB560 on where LTC holders can carry then I could probably get behind that.

That was the death knell for both bills this session. No one wanted to try to explain the differences to the Legislature, or at least none that I have heard about. When it was clear that permitless carry, was going to be the bell cow, no one wanted to touch 560.
Despite our understanding of the difference, as well as our track record, if a legislator backed one, there was fear of the other.
A lobbying group for our cause may been able to make a difference, but, with the apathy, of those who only want to increase the number of people able to carry, in public, I don't know that it would have made much difference. Especially, when TSRA threw all of their support behind CC, it silenced, or at least moved to the back of the room, those who were more concerned with 560. I can't speak for Charles, but I believe he feels our disappointment, and predicted just such a scenario, at the beginning if the session. JMHO

I thought reducing the fee to $40 is going to cause a flood of new LTC applicants, so why do we need unlicensed carry?

The only way to pursue "constitutional carry" is with the bill I've already written for 2019. It 1) moves all of TPC §46.035 to §46.03 so as to apply it to unlicensed carry; 2) renders LTC exempt from not only TPC §46.02, but §46.03 as well; and 3) makes anyone who can lawfully possess firearms under state and federal law eligible for a LTC. The Legislature will not pass constitutional-carry unless people are prohibited from carrying in locations currently in TPC §46.035. Removing off-limits areas for LTCs by exempting us from §§46.02 and 46.03 will give a strong incentive to get a license even though it is not required. This will give the Legislature a measure of comfort in supporting constitutional-carry.

This is the bill I'm going to promote, whether or not TSRA backs it or something else. I'm sick of HB560 being ignored for 10 years and I'm not about to support a constitutional-carry bill without providing relief for LTCs that they have deserved for years. I too am tired of "maybe next session."

Chas.

Wow that is a really elegant political solution that encapsulates pretty much what all the pro-gun constituencies want, with a bill that most legislators really ought to be able to vote for. I hope it gets the consideration and backing it deserves.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:The only way to pursue "constitutional carry" is with the bill I've already written for 2019. It 1) moves all of TPC §46.035 to §46.03 so as to apply it to unlicensed carry; 2) renders LTC exempt from not only TPC §46.02, but §46.03 as well; and 3) makes anyone who can lawfully possess firearms under state and federal law eligible for a LTC. The Legislature will not pass constitutional-carry unless people are prohibited from carrying in locations currently in TPC §46.035. Removing off-limits areas for LTCs by exempting us from §§46.02 and 46.03 will give a strong incentive to get a license even though it is not required. This will give the Legislature a measure of comfort in supporting constitutional-carry.

This is the bill I'm going to promote, whether or not TSRA backs it or something else. I'm sick of HB560 being ignored for 10 years and I'm not about to support a constitutional-carry bill without providing relief for LTCs that they have deserved for years. I too am tired of "maybe next session."

Chas.

Please keep us updated Charles, also let us know exactly how we can help, beyond just contacting current Legislators. I want to be all in on this, and will do whatever I can. Feel free to PM, email, or even call me, to let me know what I can do. I have no doubt there are others, here, who feel the same.

This will also bring in non-LTC holders, and add more voices to, speak in the ears of the Lege.

Charles, that sounds wonderful. If there's anything we can do at any point to get momentum on this before the next session, count me in.

(Of course in my case it would have to be something more than 'call your reps' because although I'm not in Austin, I'm close enough that my state lege representation is deep blue.)

tornado wrote:Charles, that sounds wonderful. If there's anything we can do at any point to get momentum on this before the next session, count me in.

(Of course in my case it would have to be something more than 'call your reps' because although I'm not in Austin, I'm close enough that my state lege representation is deep blue.)

Helping to change that before the next session should be your priority then.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:The only way to pursue "constitutional carry" is with the bill I've already written for 2019. It 1) moves all of TPC §46.035 to §46.03 so as to apply it to unlicensed carry; 2) renders LTC exempt from not only TPC §46.02, but §46.03 as well; and 3) makes anyone who can lawfully possess firearms under state and federal law eligible for a LTC. The Legislature will not pass constitutional-carry unless people are prohibited from carrying in locations currently in TPC §46.035. Removing off-limits areas for LTCs by exempting us from §§46.02 and 46.03 will give a strong incentive to get a license even though it is not required. This will give the Legislature a measure of comfort in supporting constitutional-carry.

This is the bill I'm going to promote, whether or not TSRA backs it or something else. I'm sick of HB560 being ignored for 10 years and I'm not about to support a constitutional-carry bill without providing relief for LTCs that they have deserved for years. I too am tired of "maybe next session."

Chas.

Sounds like an excellent topic for one of your TFC podcasts. I look forward to you resuming them again.