The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://texaschlforum.com/
Is the language identical?Charles L. Cotton wrote:I'm not putting that on a public forum.TXBO wrote:What can they possibly do? Is the amendment identical to Dutton?Charles L. Cotton wrote:Folks, if two F-rated Democrats (Ellis and West) are in favor of the Amendment, that should tell you something. They aren't worried about racial profiling, they have a plan.
Chas.
Chas.
I realize the potential of bad effects but if Estes succeeds in keeping this clean for the rest of the night, we win. Right? Or is the Dutton amendment a future plan to kill the actual law?Jasonw560 wrote:Yep.Charles L. Cotton wrote:Folks, if two F-rated Democrats (Ellis and West) are in favor of the Amendment, that should tell you something. They aren't worried about racial profiling, they have a plan.
Chas.
YesTXBO wrote:Is the language identical?Charles L. Cotton wrote:I'm not putting that on a public forum.TXBO wrote:What can they possibly do? Is the amendment identical to Dutton?Charles L. Cotton wrote:Folks, if two F-rated Democrats (Ellis and West) are in favor of the Amendment, that should tell you something. They aren't worried about racial profiling, they have a plan.
Chas.
Chas.
Thanks. That's what the Lt Governor's office stated to me.CJD wrote:YesTXBO wrote:Is the language identical?Charles L. Cotton wrote:I'm not putting that on a public forum.TXBO wrote:What can they possibly do? Is the amendment identical to Dutton?Charles L. Cotton wrote:Folks, if two F-rated Democrats (Ellis and West) are in favor of the Amendment, that should tell you something. They aren't worried about racial profiling, they have a plan.
Chas.
Chas.
Amendment 12 is only a thing because of some groups of people who think the Dutton amendment/amendment 9 are creating unlicensed open carry.Glockster wrote:Amend 11 tabled, 12 on deck.
EXACTLY. I am not giving Huffman a pass. I have stated more than once that I do not agree with her. But, she is a better political animal than he is, and she was using his inexperience against him - and by extension, against CHL holders. If he had not doggedly pursued his poor defense of his own amendment as displayed by his ignorance of existing law, she would not have taken him apart.Charles L. Cotton wrote:Huffines caused this problem. I'm not at all happy with Huffman, but this Bill would have passed this morning had he not pulled this garbage.TXBO wrote:I find it odd that you vilify him and give Huffman a pass. My understanding is that the Huffine amendment is identical to Dutton amendment. If this is true, Ellison will not get another chance to kill it. It goes straight to Abbott.The Annoyed Man wrote:Senator Huffman was just asked by Senator West if she would withdraw her amendment if Senator Huffines would withdraw his amendment. She said yes.... if Huffines would withdraw his, she would withdraw hers. Under further questioning, she concedes that failure to withdraw both amendments would force the bill into conference with the house, and possibly kill the bill.
HB910 is a good bill, AS IS, without further amendments.
I cannot support what Huffines is doing......... NOT necessarily because he's wrong on the issue (Oklahoma has a similar law)...... but because his tactic is threatening to sink the whole thing, and THAT is inexcusable. If you don't like what I've just said, Senator ELLISON has spoken in favor of Huffman's amendment precisely because it will open up a chance for him to filibuster the bill late in the session and kill it.
This is what happens when tyros play with political dynamite....... and Huffines is a tyro.
Chas.
Something's rotten in the city of Austin.mr1337 wrote:Oh no. What is Ellis up to?