TexasCHLforum.com

treadlightly wrote:Kory Watkins up in a moment. That will be about as much as I can take. I'm sure I'll be able to shut off the live stream then.

That interchange was actually funny between him and Pancho and back
almost civilized ... almost

Ruark wrote: One erroneous claim that being frequently made is that it removes the background check as a safety measure. It doesn't. You still need an FBI background check to buy your gun in the first place.

Exception: Private party sale

I've been watching this all afternoon. It seems to be coming down to emotion and speculation (against) versus logic and facts (for).

Also about 80% for/20% Constitutional Carry.
Gotta hand it to Texas Carry and OCT, they brought numbers. Haven't seen it so lopsided in quite some time (pretty much never).

HB1911 (yes 1911) #ConstitutionalCarry http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLook ... ill=HB1911 <Bill Text | Video Feed http://tlchouse.granicus.com/MediaPlaye ... nt_id=2849 #TxLege #2A #RKBA #GunRights

Alice Tripp up in first panel

So what's the solve for federal statute that requires a CHl from the resident state to legally pass through a school zone? Are we supposed to ignore this?

Wish the powers that be who are involved in this constitutional carry fight would address this. They all seem to be missing this very important fact.

My neighborhood is surrounded by school zones. I won't be able to leave the house if I don't have a Chl even if constitutional carry passes.

This needs addressed or this is a moot law for many people...unless you're willing to drive around avoiding school zones.

Stripes Dude wrote:So what's the solve for federal statute that requires a CHl from the resident state to legally pass through a school zone? Are we supposed to ignore this?

Wish the powers that be who are involved in this constitutional carry fight would address this. They all seem to be missing this very important fact.

My neighborhood is surrounded by school zones. I won't be able to leave the house if I don't have a Chl even if constitutional carry passes.

This needs addressed or this is a moot law for many people...unless you're willing to drive around avoiding school zones.

This is a flaw with unlicensed carry and federal law. To fix this issue you would have to go to the federal level and correct the problem there.

Stripes Dude wrote:So what's the solve for federal statute that requires a CHl from the resident state to legally pass through a school zone? Are we supposed to ignore this?

1. GFSZA requires a license from the state the school is in, not a resident license.
2. MPA already opened that can of worms.

Lambda Force wrote:

Stripes Dude wrote:So what's the solve for federal statute that requires a CHl from the resident state to legally pass through a school zone? Are we supposed to ignore this?

1. GFSZA requires a license from the state the school is in, not a resident license.
2. MPA already opened that can of worms.

Ok, I stand corrected. Makes absolutely no difference. Still illegal federally. MPA was step one, constitutional carry is step two of going down the path of not dealing with the bigger issue.

If the bill authors were smart, they'd prohibit state LEO from bringing charges if carrying under constitutional carry in a school zone, unless much grater crimes are simultaneously being committed.

Still doesn't solve the problem though.

G.A. Heath wrote:This is a flaw with unlicensed carry and federal law. To fix this issue you would have to go to the federal level and correct the problem there.

I'll get excited about this when that is dealt with.

At minimum, we need an unofficial mandate to federal LEO like what was done in the pot legalization states (don't arrest for pot possession).

It would be nice if they repealed GFSZA but those bozos couldn't even repeal Obamacare.

I was pleasantly surprised to see Kory Watkins so well behaved, but then he compared his Glock, subject to licensed carry, to his AK47, which he said he carried all over the place with a full magazine and a round in the chamber.

Pardon me for being a prude, but I would never carry any weapon, rifle or pistol, with or without a safety, with a round in the chamber unless the gun was holstered with the trigger fully shrouded. An AK on a sling with a round in the chamber while contra dancing the aisles at Home Depot? No thanks. A properly holstered pistol with a protected trigger and a chambered round? Sure. No reason not to.

Up to the point he mentioned his hot AK, I thought he was almost reasonable.

treadlightly wrote:I was pleasantly surprised to see Kory Watkins so well behaved, but then he compared his Glock, subject to licensed carry, to his AK47, which he said he carried all over the place with a full magazine and a round in the chamber.

Pardon me for being a prude, but I would never carry any weapon, rifle or pistol, with or without a safety, with a round in the chamber unless the gun was holstered with the trigger fully shrouded. An AK on a sling with a round in the chamber while contra dancing the aisles at Home Depot? No thanks. A properly holstered pistol with a protected trigger and a chambered round? Sure. No reason not to.

Up to the point he mentioned his hot AK, I thought he was almost reasonable.

All my guns are hot...not that I carry my rifles in walmart but...if I WERE to carry my AR in the walmart, the chamber WOULD be occupied. Not a fan of Kory Watkins. One reason being that he says things that should be left unsaid. What he said served no point in regards tp chambered or not chambered. The law does not, in any way, differentiate a loaded gun from an unloaded one...irrelevant to the discussion...

RogueUSMC wrote:

treadlightly wrote:I was pleasantly surprised to see Kory Watkins so well behaved, but then he compared his Glock, subject to licensed carry, to his AK47, which he said he carried all over the place with a full magazine and a round in the chamber.

Pardon me for being a prude, but I would never carry any weapon, rifle or pistol, with or without a safety, with a round in the chamber unless the gun was holstered with the trigger fully shrouded. An AK on a sling with a round in the chamber while contra dancing the aisles at Home Depot? No thanks. A properly holstered pistol with a protected trigger and a chambered round? Sure. No reason not to.

Up to the point he mentioned his hot AK, I thought he was almost reasonable.

All my guns are hot...not that I carry my rifles in walmart but...if I WERE to carry my AR in the walmart, the chamber WOULD be occupied. Not a fan of Kory Watkins. One reason being that he says things that should be left unsaid. What he said served no point in regards tp chambered or not chambered. The law does not, in any way, differentiate a loaded gun from an unloaded one...irrelevant to the discussion...

I won't carry an unloaded gun. I also don't typically carry an AK, but if I did, it would have a round in the chamber.

I also agree that it was counter-productive for him to mention that specific fact in his testimony.

Whoops, I didn't mean to divert the thread, I only meant to comment on counterproductive testimony.

My apologies!

Here's to gun freedom in all forms for law abiding citizens.