TexasCHLforum.com

RoyGBiv wrote:

twomillenium wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Even the most reluctant politicians, other than long time anti-gun people, are finally admitting that "gun free zones" are an illusion and that they are are in fact killing zones. We simply must stop creating target-rich environments for mass-murderers.

Chas.

Hallelujah!

I plan to come to Austin when these Bills come up, to speak on the issue of using "private property" as an excuse not to support removing restrictions on LTC's. I think I can politely express my argument in 2 minutes or less.

Private property is still private property and the owner/management does not have to allow anyone licensed or not to override their choices. Your desires do not override my rights on my property and should never ever change.

Sorry... I should have been clearer...
Private property.... IS... a place where "private property owners" do not invite the public to conduct commercial business.
Obviously deserving of full protection.. including the right to exclude anyone for any reason or no reason at all.

However, is .... Sprouts... for example... entitled to the same ability to exclude LTC's?
I plan to argue that there are MANY precedents that say the answer to that question is resoundingly NO.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Carrying inside a school or at a school-sponsored activity without written permission is a 3rd degree felony. The ramifications of a felony conviction are well known and will be devastating to both the felon and his/her family.

I just finished final proofreading of two of my bills. One would remove off-limits areas for LTCs while also removing the requirement to have an LTC to carry a handgun. (In other words, it creates unlicensed-carry.) People carrying without an LTC would be subject to all the provisions of TPC §46.03 and §46.035. (Section 46.035 would be repealed, but, by necessity, all of its provisions would be added to §46.03.)

The other bill simply removes all off-limits areas for LTCs.

Even the most reluctant politicians, other than long time anti-gun people, are finally admitting that "gun free zones" are an illusion and that they are are in fact killing zones. We simply must stop creating target-rich environments for mass-murderers.

Chas.

PriestTheRunner wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Carrying inside a school or at a school-sponsored activity without written permission is a 3rd degree felony. The ramifications of a felony conviction are well known and will be devastating to both the felon and his/her family.

I just finished final proofreading of two of my bills. One would remove off-limits areas for LTCs while also removing the requirement to have an LTC to carry a handgun. (In other words, it creates unlicensed-carry.) People carrying without an LTC would be subject to all the provisions of TPC §46.03 and §46.035. (Section 46.035 would be repealed, but, by necessity, all of its provisions would be added to §46.03.)

The other bill simply removes all off-limits areas for LTCs.

Even the most reluctant politicians, other than long time anti-gun people, are finally admitting that "gun free zones" are an illusion and that they are are in fact killing zones. We simply must stop creating target-rich environments for mass-murderers.

Chas.

When they are introduced, please let us know. I will be calling my reps to ask them to make this a priority and want to do so immediately after it is presented.

Thanks!

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

PriestTheRunner wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Carrying inside a school or at a school-sponsored activity without written permission is a 3rd degree felony. The ramifications of a felony conviction are well known and will be devastating to both the felon and his/her family.

I just finished final proofreading of two of my bills. One would remove off-limits areas for LTCs while also removing the requirement to have an LTC to carry a handgun. (In other words, it creates unlicensed-carry.) People carrying without an LTC would be subject to all the provisions of TPC §46.03 and §46.035. (Section 46.035 would be repealed, but, by necessity, all of its provisions would be added to §46.03.)

The other bill simply removes all off-limits areas for LTCs.

Even the most reluctant politicians, other than long time anti-gun people, are finally admitting that "gun free zones" are an illusion and that they are are in fact killing zones. We simply must stop creating target-rich environments for mass-murderers.

Chas.

When they are introduced, please let us know. I will be calling my reps to ask them to make this a priority and want to do so immediately after it is presented.

Thanks!

We have to get a GOOD bill "author" or it will be useless.

Chas.

RoyGBiv wrote:

twomillenium wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Even the most reluctant politicians, other than long time anti-gun people, are finally admitting that "gun free zones" are an illusion and that they are are in fact killing zones. We simply must stop creating target-rich environments for mass-murderers.

Chas.

Hallelujah!

I plan to come to Austin when these Bills come up, to speak on the issue of using "private property" as an excuse not to support removing restrictions on LTC's. I think I can politely express my argument in 2 minutes or less.

Private property is still private property and the owner/management does not have to allow anyone licensed or not to override their choices. Your desires do not override my rights on my property and should never ever change.

Sorry... I should have been clearer...
Private property.... IS... a place where "private property owners" do not invite the public to conduct commercial business.
Obviously deserving of full protection.. including the right to exclude anyone for any reason or no reason at all.

However, is .... Sprouts... for example... entitled to the same ability to exclude LTC's?
I plan to argue that there are MANY precedents that say the answer to that question is resoundingly NO.

twomillenium wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:

twomillenium wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Even the most reluctant politicians, other than long time anti-gun people, are finally admitting that "gun free zones" are an illusion and that they are are in fact killing zones. We simply must stop creating target-rich environments for mass-murderers.

Chas.

Hallelujah!

I plan to come to Austin when these Bills come up, to speak on the issue of using "private property" as an excuse not to support removing restrictions on LTC's. I think I can politely express my argument in 2 minutes or less.

Private property is still private property and the owner/management does not have to allow anyone licensed or not to override their choices. Your desires do not override my rights on my property and should never ever change.

Sorry... I should have been clearer...
Private property.... IS... a place where "private property owners" do not invite the public to conduct commercial business.
Obviously deserving of full protection.. including the right to exclude anyone for any reason or no reason at all.

However, is .... Sprouts... for example... entitled to the same ability to exclude LTC's?
I plan to argue that there are MANY precedents that say the answer to that question is resoundingly NO.

I understand what you mean and until some law forces us to do business with the "sprout " type stores it is still the property of the owner their rep.
I will do business else where, I don't want the slippery slope effect that takes ANY rights from ANY private property owners even if they do business with the public. I have choices and so should they, but let's not make my choices theirs or their choices mine.

RoyGBiv wrote:

twomillenium wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:

twomillenium wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Even the most reluctant politicians, other than long time anti-gun people, are finally admitting that "gun free zones" are an illusion and that they are are in fact killing zones. We simply must stop creating target-rich environments for mass-murderers.

Chas.

Hallelujah!

I plan to come to Austin when these Bills come up, to speak on the issue of using "private property" as an excuse not to support removing restrictions on LTC's. I think I can politely express my argument in 2 minutes or less.

Private property is still private property and the owner/management does not have to allow anyone licensed or not to override their choices. Your desires do not override my rights on my property and should never ever change.

Sorry... I should have been clearer...
Private property.... IS... a place where "private property owners" do not invite the public to conduct commercial business.
Obviously deserving of full protection.. including the right to exclude anyone for any reason or no reason at all.

However, is .... Sprouts... for example... entitled to the same ability to exclude LTC's?
I plan to argue that there are MANY precedents that say the answer to that question is resoundingly NO.

I understand what you mean and until some law forces us to do business with the "sprout " type stores it is still the property of the owner their rep.
I will do business else where, I don't want the slippery slope effect that takes ANY rights from ANY private property owners even if they do business with the public. I have choices and so should they, but let's not make my choices theirs or their choices mine.

I appreciate your position.
If there were not so many other laws that force government mandates onto business owners, I might agree with you. But, if government can force a business owner to comply with ADA or require them to have fire extinguishers in their building, I think it's hypocritical that an enumerated right is allowed to be infringed in the same place.

TreyHouston wrote: This bill needs its own post. Will his be heard in a special session or wait till next year? Can we get the Gov to hold a special session?

Charles L. Cotton wrote: ↑Tue May 22, 2018 11:05 am Carrying inside a school or at a school-sponsored activity without written permission is a 3rd degree felony. The ramifications of a felony conviction are well known and will be devastating to both the felon and his/her family.

I just finished final proofreading of two of my bills. One would remove off-limits areas for LTCs while also removing the requirement to have an LTC to carry a handgun. (In other words, it creates unlicensed-carry.) People carrying without an LTC would be subject to all the provisions of TPC §46.03 and §46.035. (Section 46.035 would be repealed, but, by necessity, all of its provisions would be added to §46.03.)

The other bill simply removes all off-limits areas for LTCs.

Even the most reluctant politicians, other than long time anti-gun people, are finally admitting that "gun free zones" are an illusion and that they are are in fact killing zones. We simply must stop creating target-rich environments for mass-murderers.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote: ↑Tue May 22, 2018 11:05 am Carrying inside a school or at a school-sponsored activity without written permission is a 3rd degree felony. The ramifications of a felony conviction are well known and will be devastating to both the felon and his/her family.

I just finished final proofreading of two of my bills. One would remove off-limits areas for LTCs while also removing the requirement to have an LTC to carry a handgun. (In other words, it creates unlicensed-carry.) People carrying without an LTC would be subject to all the provisions of TPC §46.03 and §46.035. (Section 46.035 would be repealed, but, by necessity, all of its provisions would be added to §46.03.)

The other bill simply removes all off-limits areas for LTCs.

Even the most reluctant politicians, other than long time anti-gun people, are finally admitting that "gun free zones" are an illusion and that they are are in fact killing zones. We simply must stop creating target-rich environments for mass-murderers.

Chas.