TexasCHLforum.com

Thank you Charles. I really like to keep abreast of the Texas legislature when in session.

Thank you. From reading other threads, it looks like the anti-gun people are out in force again this year.

HB259 (Anchia, D, F) Relating to the creation of certain offenses concerning firearm sales at gun shows; authorizing a fee
Impact: Requires a background check for all sales at “gun shows” except to LEO’s and LTC. Has a very broad definition of “gun show.”

Only part I like is granting LEOs the same exemption on the background check as a LTC holder. I always found it funny being a commissioned Texas Peace Officer means nothing regarding background checks. It's one of two reasons I keep my LTC up to date.

nightmare69 wrote:

HB259 (Anchia, D, F) Relating to the creation of certain offenses concerning firearm sales at gun shows; authorizing a fee
Impact: Requires a background check for all sales at “gun shows” except to LEO’s and LTC. Has a very broad definition of “gun show.”

Only part I like is granting LEOs the same exemption on the background check as a LTC holder. I always found it funny being a commissioned Texas Peace Officer means nothing regarding background checks. It's one of two reasons I keep my LTC up to date.

Granting the exemption is not in the state's power.

The Permanent Brady Permit Chart is administered by the BATFE.

nightmare69 wrote:

HB259 (Anchia, D, F) Relating to the creation of certain offenses concerning firearm sales at gun shows; authorizing a fee
Impact: Requires a background check for all sales at “gun shows” except to LEO’s and LTC. Has a very broad definition of “gun show.”

Only part I like is granting LEOs the same exemption on the background check as a LTC holder. I always found it funny being a commissioned Texas Peace Officer means nothing regarding background checks. It's one of two reasons I keep my LTC up to date.

The federal law requires a background check every five years -- that's why some state licenses don't qualify, some states don't do a federal background check at all. That's why the chart that Pawpaw linked says licenses from states that do qualify are good only for five years from the date of issue.

And of course the license to carry exception to a NICS check every time is in federal law. For a police commission to qualify it would have to be put in a piece of federal legislation as well.

Pawpaw wrote:

nightmare69 wrote:

HB259 (Anchia, D, F) Relating to the creation of certain offenses concerning firearm sales at gun shows; authorizing a fee
Impact: Requires a background check for all sales at “gun shows” except to LEO’s and LTC. Has a very broad definition of “gun show.”

Only part I like is granting LEOs the same exemption on the background check as a LTC holder. I always found it funny being a commissioned Texas Peace Officer means nothing regarding background checks. It's one of two reasons I keep my LTC up to date.

Granting the exemption is not in the state's power.

The Permanent Brady Permit Chart is administered by the BATFE.

How can the state create a bill exempting LEOs?

nightmare69 wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:

nightmare69 wrote:

HB259 (Anchia, D, F) Relating to the creation of certain offenses concerning firearm sales at gun shows; authorizing a fee
Impact: Requires a background check for all sales at “gun shows” except to LEO’s and LTC. Has a very broad definition of “gun show.”

Only part I like is granting LEOs the same exemption on the background check as a LTC holder. I always found it funny being a commissioned Texas Peace Officer means nothing regarding background checks. It's one of two reasons I keep my LTC up to date.

Granting the exemption is not in the state's power.

The Permanent Brady Permit Chart is administered by the BATFE.

How can the state create a bill exempting LEOs?

My guess is going to be that a Dimocrat introduced a bill that creates more onerous requirements on lawful gun owners. In the hope of getting it passed, he tries to throw Law Enforcement a bone to try to get them to buy into it. Researching whether the state has the authority is just too much trouble.

Edit: I just read the bill and it's not quite what your post had me thinking it was. This thing is attempting to "close the gun show loophole" and defining "gun show" as anywhere other than a brick and mortar gun store. In other words, "universal background checks". Throwing a bone to LEOs and CHL/LTC holders does not make it in the least bit palatable.

Folks, I moved several posts from the "Please add the following bill(s) to the Bill Status Report" thread to this general discussion thread. I need to keep the other one limited to bill requests to make it easier for me to confirm I have all relevant bills listed in the Bill Status Report.

Chas.

Pawpaw wrote:My guess is going to be that a Dimocrat introduced a bill that creates more onerous requirements on lawful gun owners. In the hope of getting it passed, he tries to throw Law Enforcement a bone to try to get them to buy into it. Researching whether the state has the authority is just too much trouble.

Edit: I just read the bill and it's not quite what your post had me thinking it was. This thing is attempting to "close the gun show loophole" and defining "gun show" as anywhere other than a brick and mortar gun store. In other words, "universal background checks". Throwing a bone to LEOs and CHL/LTC holders does not make it in the least bit palatable.

I might be able to support universal background checks, but only if there was a simple, quick, and easy way for me as an individual seller to conduct the check, LTC's were exempt, and there was no reporting or record keeping required of me as an individual seller. I doubt that any proposal meets these criteria, so I am leery of any mention of universal background checks.

Also, the anti's need to stop being disingenuous. If you want universal background checks then say so. Me selling or giving a gun to my brother in law in my living room is not a "gun show".

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:My guess is going to be that a Dimocrat introduced a bill that creates more onerous requirements on lawful gun owners. In the hope of getting it passed, he tries to throw Law Enforcement a bone to try to get them to buy into it. Researching whether the state has the authority is just too much trouble.

Edit: I just read the bill and it's not quite what your post had me thinking it was. This thing is attempting to "close the gun show loophole" and defining "gun show" as anywhere other than a brick and mortar gun store. In other words, "universal background checks". Throwing a bone to LEOs and CHL/LTC holders does not make it in the least bit palatable.

I might be able to support universal background checks, but only if there was a simple, quick, and easy way for me as an individual seller to conduct the check, LTC's were exempt, and there was no reporting or record keeping required of me as an individual seller. I doubt that any proposal meets these criteria, so I am leery of any mention of universal background checks.

Also, the anti's need to stop being disingenuous. If you want universal background checks then say so. Me selling or giving a gun to my brother in law in my living room is not a "gun show".

I forgot what it was called, but I actually heard of a way to allow for universal background checks while not risking the government turning it into a defacto universal registration.

Let's say we have a list that is part of public record of all persons who are prohibited from owning firearms. Much of this is public record anyways (felony & misdemeanor charges). Before you sell a gun to someone, you cross-reference their name & DOB with the list. If they are on the list, you don't sell it to them. If they are not on the list, you can sell to them. Make it so everyone has access to the list, not just FFL's. This would also alleviate the staffing requirement for NICS and FFL's would know immediately if someone was prohibited.

The problem with "universal background checks" is that NICS is a badly broken system. There are thousands of prohibited persons who can pass a NICS check because their state didn't report to NICS, even though the law requires it. Also, thousands of good people get an undeserved "deny" because of bad information in NICS. If you get a denial, you can file an appeal. That was never a timely process and the FBI quit processing appeals. As it stands today, file an appeal and nothing will happen... you sit in limbo.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/2016012 ... al-appeals

Currently, if you're a veteran and appoint someone else to manage your finances, the VA will submit your information to NICS and suddenly you can't buy a firearm. No due process or anything else, just some bureaucrat puts your name on the list and you're stuck.

http://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/new ... ights-away

The system has to be fixed before anyone starts talking about changes.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/2016100 ... -narrative