TexasCHLforum.com

Called everyone except the bill author. The man answering for Rep Wray said Wray is opposed. None of the others said one way or the other.

Done

treadlightly wrote:I don't understand the enthusiasm for monkeying around with 30.06, or, frankly, posting the signs at all.

They apply to almost nobody, and the few they do apply to walk very softly, particularly considering the big sticks on their hips.

Making the calls.

If you're a business owner and you would lose your lease and/or your liability insurance for not being in compliance with their policies, the sign and effect of the law the sign represents, could be very applicable to your business.

In addition to my letters to the committee opposing HB 2405, I sent an email to the author, Rep. Nevarez, asking what sign would I use if my business allowed concealed carry but not open carry, or the other way around, open carry but not concealed carry? I'm sure, based on past correspondence attempts, it will be a while before I get an answer, if ever.

I emailed Rep. Nevárez also. I don't figure he'll change his mind, but I feel that he should have more exposure to pro-2A folks who aren't threatening him.

I emailed all:

Representative XYZ,
As a lifelong resident of this State, a Texas peace officer for over 25 years and a member of my local school Board of Trustees for over 20 years, I strongly urge opposition to HB2405 as it relates to notice given by a property owner prohibiting a concealed handgun license holder from carrying a handgun on certain property.
While this bill may have been crafted with the best intentions, I believe there to be unintended consequences. This bill does not provide a solution to any current issue, has conflicts with various other statutes, and could potentially add increased costs and time to businesses and the DPS.
Thank you for your consideration

Done

All called.. Nevarez office hung up on me

Roger Howard wrote:All called.. Nevarez office hung up on me

Must be getting a lot of contacts on this today...

Roger Howard wrote:All called.. Nevarez office hung up on me

That's not very friendly.

I'll start calling all.

Called everyone except Rep Navarez. was told by Rep Wavy and Metcalf aide that they opposed... rest gave non-committal answers...


I am in Austin for a few days... it might be something to watch... know that am allowed in Capital but since that is a govt meeting am I allowed to watch while carrying...



ETA: sent emails to everyone except Rep Navarez.....

Before commenting on a bill I read the Fiscal Notes if available and on HB2405, LBB Director Ursula Parks states that the "..costs could be absorbed within current resources.." and in the case of enforcement by Local Government, "..could likely be absorbed with existing resources.."

This probably means those departments will need to shuffle their staff from existing tasks to the new tasks of designing a new "no guns" image for download, providing instructions on how to do that, IT resources to make it available on their web sites, training enforcement officers on recognizing the sign changes and what they mean..and I could go on. And the download topic assumes that every business owner has internet access and proper printer hardware to download and print the new sign images. I find it hard to believe there will be no additional effort or costs to accommodate the new signage.

I guess I originally posted the following in the wrong place.

I called every one except the knucklehead author of the bill. I politely said "I'm calling about a bill coming up in Mr. Blank's committee tomorrow, HB2405, and am opposed and hope Mr. Blank can do whatever possible to see those changes do not go through.". One or two asked where I was from, the rest asking nothing. Then I said thank you for allowing me to have my say and that was it. Two of the offices, Metcalf and Wray, told me they are against the bill. None of the others gave any indication either way.

LDB415 wrote:I guess I originally posted the following in the wrong place.

I called every one except the knucklehead author of the bill. I politely said "I'm calling about a bill coming up in Mr. Blank's committee tomorrow, HB2405, and am opposed and hope Mr. Blank can do whatever possible to see those changes do not go through.". One or two asked where I was from, the rest asking nothing. Then I said thank you for allowing me to have my say and that was it. Two of the offices, Metcalf and Wray, told me they are against the bill. None of the others gave any indication either way.

I can understand why some of the others didn't indicate for or against. I've noticed while watching these committee hearings that it's evident to me that some of the members don't read the bills covered in the hearing, until they get to the meeting! I guess they're too busy on the floor presenting and listening to the many many RESOLUTIONS that are presented there.

Got in touch with everyone but Nevarez and Wray. I'll send them a note later. All were very pleasant, but Joe Moody's aide gave me a long dissertation about how he will listen carefully to the testimony before he makes a decision. She did affirm that she is receiving a lot of calls opposed.