Bills to fix the private entity leasing a government building loophole

This forum will be open on Sept. 1, 2016.

Moderators: carlson1, Keith B, Charles L. Cotton


Papa_Tiger
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 472
Joined: Fri May 24, 2013 9:55 am

Re: Bills to fix the private entity leasing a government building loophole

#31

Post by Papa_Tiger » Wed Apr 26, 2017 7:47 am

Liberty wrote:What is discouraging is that HB560 died without a vote without even a discussion. It disappointing to get beaten after a good fight, but frustrating as all Hades to get beaten silently without even a whimper of protest. We get a compromise of $70 renewall instead of free.

Meanwhile, OCT moves on. They get their open carry last year, maybe CC this year. They aren't being so quiet about things. Maybe the loudmouths win.
Disagree with you on two major points. The new or renewal fee for a Texas LTC as proposed in SB16 (and unchanged in the House committee) is $40, with a $5 discount if you belong to certain classes or a $25 cost if you are a current or retired peace officer. That is a pretty big difference from the $70 you quote above.

Additionally, OCT said they will support HB1911, but they are pretty upset about it as it is not true "constitutional carry". See their post when the bills were introduced:
https://opencarrytexas.wordpress.com/20 ... d-hb-1911/
OCT wrote:In the end, I believe that HB 375 is a much better bill. The problems with it can easily solved with amendments to add the missing sections. There is no reason that non-violent, minor offenses should result in the loss of a fundamental right. HB 1911 creates too many disqualifiers for lawful carry without a license. There are two major factors that we rely on in supporting one bill over another (not that we oppose the other): which bill allows for more lawful carry by more Texans and which bill offers protections for those carrying lawfully. HB 375 does that. We don’t base our decisions on which bill “stands a better chance” by settling for inferiority over constitutional policy. Neither bill is perfect and we will always support any bill that moves in the right direction, but if we’re going to call it constitutional carry, we shouldn’t be preventing people “convicted” of minor offenses – like flipping the bird to someone – from carrying lawfully. Besides California, we are the only state doing that. This is Texas! Let’s act like it!
Emphasis mine

While the issue of "constitutional carry" may be somewhat addressed this legislative session, the bill that has the best likelihood of passing isn't exactly what some of the more vocal gun rights organizations in Texas wanted. Last session, Open Carry and Campus Carry were two legislative priorities from the Lieutenant Governor and both had significant support in both the House and Senate. This year reduction of fees for LTCs was a legislative priority in the Senate and had significant support in the House as well. So-called "constitutional carry" really only had a significant amount of interest in the House. I think we have a fantastic chance of getting the reduction of fees, but am not as optimistic about "constitutional carry".

I understand your point about HB560 dying on the vine, but that is politics in the State of Texas where the government moves deliberately slowly. Lots of bills that people think are good do not become law. Some of them just happen to be ones that we think are good ideas.

User avatar

nightmare69
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 2024
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:03 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: Bills to fix the private entity leasing a government building loophole

#32

Post by nightmare69 » Wed Apr 26, 2017 10:24 am

The renewal fee for Peace Officers doesn't change with this new bill.
2/26-Mailed paper app and packet.
5/20-Plastic in hand.
83 days mailbox to mailbox.


Papa_Tiger
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 472
Joined: Fri May 24, 2013 9:55 am

Re: Bills to fix the private entity leasing a government building loophole

#33

Post by Papa_Tiger » Wed Apr 26, 2017 11:28 am

nightmare69 wrote:The renewal fee for Peace Officers doesn't change with this new bill.
Sorry... Should have said active or retired judicial officer.
GC 411.201 wrote: (d) An applicant for a license who is an active or retired
judicial officer must submit to the department:
.
.
.
(5) a nonrefundable application and license fee of $25

Locked

Return to “2017 Texas Legislative Session”