The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://texaschlforum.com/
The first time I read it, I thought you said sadists and that made sense too.bblhd672 wrote:Statists all..interested only in maintaining power over the peons who pay their salaries, recognizing that power is threatened by an armed citizenry.
That's pretty much it. It's all about ego, campaign contributions, getting invited to the correct barbecues, and re-election.doncb wrote: I've said it before, politicians are only interested in themselves and don't give a you know what about the people they represent. Lot of good it does to have a majority.
Ruark wrote:I personally don't think 1911 will pass. It's just too messy in more ways than I care to describe here.
That's pretty much it. It's all about ego, campaign contributions, getting invited to the correct barbecues, and re-election.doncb wrote: I've said it before, politicians are only interested in themselves and don't give a you know what about the people they represent. Lot of good it does to have a majority.
Another thing about this whole fiasco is that it shows the relative powerlessness of the governor's office. Here we have perhaps the most pro-gun governor in Texas history, yet he has no influence whatsover on this whole process, except to sign a bill when the lege is done with it.
ninjabread wrote:The first time I read it, I thought you said sadists and that made sense too.bblhd672 wrote:Statists all..interested only in maintaining power over the peons who pay their salaries, recognizing that power is threatened by an armed citizenry.
(maybe even more so than the original....) 
Which is as it should be but it still sucks...Ruark wrote: Another thing about this whole fiasco is that it shows the relative powerlessness of the governor's office. Here we have perhaps the most pro-gun governor in Texas history, yet he has no influence whatsover on this whole process, except to sign a bill when the lege is done with it.
That's a good article.. Someone should make it a sticky in the legislative forum...Flightmare wrote:https://www.texastribune.org/2017/05/03 ... -140-days/
That is pretty depressing reading material.Flightmare wrote:https://www.texastribune.org/2017/05/03 ... -140-days/
I agree. I think this is what happened to HB 560. I suspect a great many good bills have suffered a similar fate. Unfortunately, there's nothing that the good reps/senators can do about this. If the powers that be want to slow roll a bill to death, they have that authority. The rules would need to change if we want to see progress.Lynyrd wrote:That is pretty depressing reading material.Flightmare wrote:https://www.texastribune.org/2017/05/03 ... -140-days/
But with a web of procedural deadlines fast approaching, it's unclear if the Legislature is prepared to pull the trigger and bring the measure to the floor.
"If you really feel passionate about something, you keep talking to your colleagues and keep making changes. That's what we're doing," said bill author Rep. James White, R-Hillister. "I'm always confident, but confidence doesn't amount much to probability."
House rules create a number of avenues for those in leadership to kill bills without ever putting them to a vote. Mark Jones, a political science professor at Rice University, said it looks like White's unlicensed carry bill could run the risk of getting lost in the calendar shuffle. Thursday is the last day the House can give preliminary approval to bills that originated in the lower chamber.
"This is the time of the year where Todd Hunter does that voodoo he does so well," Jones said, referring to the chairman of the powerful Calendars Committee that sets the House schedule. "Since there doesn't seem to be a real groundswell of either public support or even party support to push it through, that Representative Hunter may just never schedule it to be considered on the floor. In which case, when the clock strikes midnight on May 11th, it will be dead."
That is the antithesis of limited government. Frankly, I like the fact that only about 15-25% of the proposed bills get passed in any given session. It means that change in the state of Texas comes slowly and we don't have major knee-jerk reactions without getting the vast majority of the legislators onboard.Ruark wrote:What we should do is allow them X number of days for the session, but require them to stay until they have voted on ALL of the bills, no matter how long it takes. That would get some stuff done. All this racing against the clock is just plain stupid.
Papa_Tiger wrote:That is the antithesis of limited government. Frankly, I like the fact that only about 15-25% of the proposed bills get passed in any given session. It means that change in the state of Texas comes slowly and we don't have major knee-jerk reactions without getting the vast majority of the legislators onboard.Ruark wrote:What we should do is allow them X number of days for the session, but require them to stay until they have voted on ALL of the bills, no matter how long it takes. That would get some stuff done. All this racing against the clock is just plain stupid.
Yes it means good change comes slowly too, but it also means that bad changes can be more easily headed off.
Bingo! This is why I like that Texas only meets every other year for 150 days, instead of round the year legislation.It's simply not true that Abbott has no power to influence the process. The Governor can veto bills, which gives him indirect power to influence the process (i.e. he can behind the scenes threaten to veto some legislator's pet bill if they don't support his priority bills).Ruark wrote:Another thing about this whole fiasco is that it shows the relative powerlessness of the governor's office. Here we have perhaps the most pro-gun governor in Texas history, yet he has no influence whatsover on this whole process, except to sign a bill when the lege is done with it.
ralewis wrote:
What seems to me to be the issue here is the philosophical view that the 2nd Amendment should not require a license. Practically speaking, the 2A says what the courts say it says, and the best we have now is the Licensing system which (again to me) seems a reasonable compromise that contributes to putting the public more at ease with the idea of carrying in public.