TexasCHLforum.com

ELB wrote:No there is no GOOD reason Voter ID and campus carry and the parking lot bill shouldn't all come together in the next session.

Did the supporters form a Texas-based, Texas-controlled organization to work for parking lot carry? If Charles' suggestion had been acted upon, then you would have had over a year to organize and promote a responsible parking lot bill. More importantly, you would have had the opportunity to measure the real public support for parking lot carry by looking at the number of members this new organization would or would not have attracted. People who are serious about parking lot better start making plans for 2013 now, but I suspect this will again fall on deaf ears.

Tamie wrote:

ELB wrote:No there is no GOOD reason Voter ID and campus carry and the parking lot bill shouldn't all come together in the next session.

Did the supporters form a Texas-based, Texas-controlled organization to work for parking lot carry? If Charles' suggestion had been acted upon, then you would have had over a year to organize and promote a responsible parking lot bill. More importantly, you would have had the opportunity to measure the real public support for parking lot carry by looking at the number of members this new organization would or would not have attracted. People who are serious about parking lot better start making plans for 2013 now, but I suspect this will again fall on deaf ears.

TSRA supported both parking lot carry and campus carry in the last legislative session, IIRC. They have not supported open carry because not enough of their members have expressed a desire for them to do so, as yet.

TSRA supported both parking lot carry and campus carry in the last legislative session ...

TSRA supported them and they probably would have been passed and signed into law if they had come up for a floor vote.

Sock puppets were cute when the late Shari Lewis used them on her TV show. Now, not so much ...

- Jim

The ban on open carry is based on prejudice, just like the ban on carrying in schools, and should be repealed.

The parking lot prohibitions are not laws. Most private property owners can decide for themselves under current laws. That's how it should be.

SwimFan85 wrote:The ban on open carry is based on prejudice, just like the ban on carrying in schools, and should be repealed.

The parking lot prohibitions are not laws. Most private property owners can decide for themselves under current laws. That's how it should be.

The question is “Where does one person’s private property rights end and another person’s begin?” Our automobiles are typically considered extensions of our homes. We eat in them, change clothes in them, and sometimes even sleep in them. Like mobile personal embassies, they’re our territory on foreign soil. This “extended domain” is recognized both elsewhere in state law and by most insurance companies (your homeowners insurance typically covers items stolen from your automobile). That being the case, many people in Texas and across the country have found reason to question whether or not business owners should be allowed to regulate what an employee stores—within the limits the law—in his or her automobile.

There are already numerous restrictions on how business owners use their property (i.e., handicap parking, handicap ramps, number of parking spaces required, number of public restrooms required, anti-discrimination laws, etc.), so suggesting that the parking lot/employee protection bill represents an unprecedented infringement on private property rights is not really accurate. One of the realities of business ownership is that you forfeit certain private property rights when you make property accessible to the public.

As for the statutory prohibition against open carry being based on prejudice, you’re right—it’s definitely based on an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason. But as history has shown us, prejudice can be a very powerful tool for evil (both intended and unintended), and we needed to make sure that the collateral damage done by attacking that prejudice head-on doesn’t outweigh the good we would accomplish by defeating it. I and many others are concerned that we might win the battle, only to find in the end that we’d lost the war. That’s why the TSRA and other gun rights organizations are forced to muddle through the gray areas between the opposing points of view, looking for an answer that is much more elusive than some in this fight might have us believe.

The question is not whether anyone personally favors or opposes open carry, campus carry, or the parking lot bill. These questions have been debated ad nauseam.

The question is how to get RKBA bills through the next Legislature and avoid the fiasco that occurred in 2009.

The parking lot bill probably had majority support in 2009 (barring some last-minute loss of nerve by certain fair-weather allies).

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:The question is not whether anyone personally favors or opposes open carry, campus carry, or the parking lot bill. These questions have been debated ad nauseam.

The question is how to get RKBA bills through the next Legislature and avoid the fiasco that occurred in 2009.

- Jim

Again, thank you, Jim.

This thread is NOT to debate the merit/worthiness/opposition of any of the ideas/bills we're talking about. This thread is asking how to avoid a repeat of 2009.

Let's stick to that, please. We've argued the other points rather well (and sometimes not so well) in plenty of other threads.

You're welcome.

I have to add, these debates are necessary; but please keep in mind that they are completely public. It doesn't take much of a Google search to find threads on this forum (it happens to me all the time).

Then we are faced with our opponents saying, "Look, even NRA members are opposed to this." The Bradys use that tactic now.

- Jim