TexasCHLforum.com

ELB wrote:

jmra wrote:

ELB wrote:

v7a wrote:Comimittee HB910 Analysis

The committee substitute to H.B. 910 removes language from the House's engrossed version providing that the police cannot stop someone who is openly carrying and demand to see identification simply because the person is openly carrying. This language was redundant, because basic principles of constitutional law already establish that the fact that a person is engaged in an activity that is only legal with a license is not sufficient cause for the police to stop the person. All police detentions require reasonable suspicion of criminal activity at a minimum, and that will remain the case for people who openly carry in Texas after this bill becomes law.

So there was no real legal reason to put it in the bill in the first place....but once it was in, there was also no real legal reason to take it out either. But doing so forces the bill to go back to the House. Sigh.

If you search Chas' posts he gave an excellent explanation as to why it was removed in committee.

No. He addressed only the political reason for doing it in the committee instead of on the floor. My point is that there is no legally effective reason it had to come out in the Senate once it had been put in by the house. It was only political eyewash and it delayed progress.

canvasbck wrote:To be honest, the Dutton amendment being in or not being in is really not worth getting worked up over. All indications are that HB910 is just fine as currently written.

SB11 seems to be the bill in trouble right now. The speaker is continuing to allow it to languish in Calendars. I fear that the senate will take action since the House is refusing to and attach CC to HB910. It's a great move if it works. If it doesn't work, it could spark a conflict between the two chambers that runs out the clock on both measures if an impasse develops in the concurrence committee.

safety1 wrote:

canvasbck wrote:To be honest, the Dutton amendment being in or not being in is really not worth getting worked up over. All indications are that HB910 is just fine as currently written.

SB11 seems to be the bill in trouble right now. The speaker is continuing to allow it to languish in Calendars. I fear that the senate will take action since the House is refusing to and attach CC to HB910. It's a great move if it works. If it doesn't work, it could spark a conflict between the two chambers that runs out the clock on both measures if an impasse develops in the concurrence committee.

If my understanding is correct, it will not be a concurrence committee. It will go to the House floor for a concurrence vote.
Up or down vote only...and it only takes a simple majority to pass there. Would make no sense to kill them both over
CC being attached, both chambers have already approved similar bills. Its a roundabout if the Speaker is truly trying to
kill CC, which I'm not sold on the fact that he is. JMHO

canvasbck wrote:

safety1 wrote:

canvasbck wrote:To be honest, the Dutton amendment being in or not being in is really not worth getting worked up over. All indications are that HB910 is just fine as currently written.

SB11 seems to be the bill in trouble right now. The speaker is continuing to allow it to languish in Calendars. I fear that the senate will take action since the House is refusing to and attach CC to HB910. It's a great move if it works. If it doesn't work, it could spark a conflict between the two chambers that runs out the clock on both measures if an impasse develops in the concurrence committee.

If my understanding is correct, it will not be a concurrence committee. It will go to the House floor for a concurrence vote.
Up or down vote only...and it only takes a simple majority to pass there. Would make no sense to kill them both over
CC being attached, both chambers have already approved similar bills. Its a roundabout if the Speaker is truly trying to
kill CC, which I'm not sold on the fact that he is. JMHO

Yes, it would have to fail a straight up or down vote before a concurrance committee. The cautious side of me isn't comfortable risking it, the speaker has a ton of influence with a lot of members.

mojo84 wrote:I suspect the passage of the $3+ Billion construction bond secured open carry's passage but killed any chance of campus carry.

safety1 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:I suspect the passage of the $3+ Billion construction bond secured open carry's passage but killed any chance of campus carry.

I respectfully disagree, I think the OC & CC bills moved forward because of a compromise on the tax reduction issues.
The 3+ billon in Bonds that has passed might have opened up the passage of CC. Just a thought from the other direction.

mojo84 wrote:

safety1 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:I suspect the passage of the $3+ Billion construction bond secured open carry's passage but killed any chance of campus carry.

I respectfully disagree, I think the OC & CC bills moved forward because of a compromise on the tax reduction issues.
The 3+ billon in Bonds that has passed might have opened up the passage of CC. Just a thought from the other direction.

I don't think we will see CC as long as Straus is speaker. I hope I am wrong on this.

safety1 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

safety1 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:I suspect the passage of the $3+ Billion construction bond secured open carry's passage but killed any chance of campus carry.

I respectfully disagree, I think the OC & CC bills moved forward because of a compromise on the tax reduction issues.
The 3+ billon in Bonds that has passed might have opened up the passage of CC. Just a thought from the other direction.

I don't think we will see CC as long as Straus is speaker. I hope I am wrong on this.

Straus can't individually stop it, especially on a concurrence vote, that's just my opinion. I too hope you are wrong.
If the House is allowed to be lead to the slaughter...well that would fall on the heads of them all. Both Chambers wanted
these bills...one man can't stop it...."IF" he can, shame on them all!

mojo84 wrote:

safety1 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

safety1 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:I suspect the passage of the $3+ Billion construction bond secured open carry's passage but killed any chance of campus carry.

I respectfully disagree, I think the OC & CC bills moved forward because of a compromise on the tax reduction issues.
The 3+ billon in Bonds that has passed might have opened up the passage of CC. Just a thought from the other direction.

I don't think we will see CC as long as Straus is speaker. I hope I am wrong on this.

Straus can't individually stop it, especially on a concurrence vote, that's just my opinion. I too hope you are wrong.
If the House is allowed to be lead to the slaughter...well that would fall on the heads of them all. Both Chambers wanted
these bills...one man can't stop it...."IF" he can, shame on them all!

I think you underestimate the power of the Speaker of the House in Texas. He has much more control than people realize. He also dictates much to his cronies and they help run interference for him. If the leadership of either chamber doesn't want something passed or wants something passed, they will likely get their way.

safety1 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

safety1 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

safety1 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:I suspect the passage of the $3+ Billion construction bond secured open carry's passage but killed any chance of campus carry.

I respectfully disagree, I think the OC & CC bills moved forward because of a compromise on the tax reduction issues.
The 3+ billon in Bonds that has passed might have opened up the passage of CC. Just a thought from the other direction.

I don't think we will see CC as long as Straus is speaker. I hope I am wrong on this.

Straus can't individually stop it, especially on a concurrence vote, that's just my opinion. I too hope you are wrong.
If the House is allowed to be lead to the slaughter...well that would fall on the heads of them all. Both Chambers wanted
these bills...one man can't stop it...."IF" he can, shame on them all!

I think you underestimate the power of the Speaker of the House in Texas. He has much more control than people realize. He also dictates much to his cronies and they help run interference for him. If the leadership of either chamber doesn't want something passed or wants something passed, they will likely get their way.

Not underestimating it, just don't agree nor like it. Let's hope for the best. I'm still falling back on that truce that was made last week

mojo84 wrote:

safety1 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

safety1 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

safety1 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:I suspect the passage of the $3+ Billion construction bond secured open carry's passage but killed any chance of campus carry.

I respectfully disagree, I think the OC & CC bills moved forward because of a compromise on the tax reduction issues.
The 3+ billon in Bonds that has passed might have opened up the passage of CC. Just a thought from the other direction.

I don't think we will see CC as long as Straus is speaker. I hope I am wrong on this.

Straus can't individually stop it, especially on a concurrence vote, that's just my opinion. I too hope you are wrong.
If the House is allowed to be lead to the slaughter...well that would fall on the heads of them all. Both Chambers wanted
these bills...one man can't stop it...."IF" he can, shame on them all!

I think you underestimate the power of the Speaker of the House in Texas. He has much more control than people realize. He also dictates much to his cronies and they help run interference for him. If the leadership of either chamber doesn't want something passed or wants something passed, they will likely get their way.

Not underestimating it, just don't agree nor like it. Let's hope for the best. I'm still falling back on that truce that was made last week

I'm 100% with you about not liking it and I do not think any one person should have that much power. I'm sure we will get to have some candid conversations after the session is over.

safety1 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

safety1 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

safety1 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

safety1 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:I suspect the passage of the $3+ Billion construction bond secured open carry's passage but killed any chance of campus carry.

I respectfully disagree, I think the OC & CC bills moved forward because of a compromise on the tax reduction issues.
The 3+ billon in Bonds that has passed might have opened up the passage of CC. Just a thought from the other direction.

I don't think we will see CC as long as Straus is speaker. I hope I am wrong on this.

Straus can't individually stop it, especially on a concurrence vote, that's just my opinion. I too hope you are wrong.
If the House is allowed to be lead to the slaughter...well that would fall on the heads of them all. Both Chambers wanted
these bills...one man can't stop it...."IF" he can, shame on them all!

I think you underestimate the power of the Speaker of the House in Texas. He has much more control than people realize. He also dictates much to his cronies and they help run interference for him. If the leadership of either chamber doesn't want something passed or wants something passed, they will likely get their way.

Not underestimating it, just don't agree nor like it. Let's hope for the best. I'm still falling back on that truce that was made last week

I'm 100% with you about not liking it and I do not think any one person should have that much power. I'm sure we will get to have some candid conversations after the session is over.

BTW, you can "quote" as many times and pages as you'd like with me