Posted on 05/06/2021 11:37:06 AM PDT by Yo-Yo
Texas seems to be inching closer to passing Constitutional Carry in the state, an increasingly common law that allows Americans to own firearms without permission from the government. However, Texas Gun Rights, the Second Amendment activist group championing the bill, says Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick has added a “poison pill” to the Senate version of the bill in a last minute bid to kill the legislation and prevent it from reaching Governor Greg Abbott’s desk.
At least two Texas legislators have expressed concerns that Patrick added amendments to the Senate version of the bill that would legally force the Texas House to reject it, stalling Constitutional Carry legislation for the next two years. On Facebook, Rep. Matt Schaefer wrote, “No celebration yet folks! We are now reviewing amendments that were added by the Senate to look for issues that would break House rules governing the purpose of HB 1927. Our first impression has us very concerned. Will share more as soon as we can. Our goal is to make Texas the 21st Constitutional Carry state.”
Separately, former Rep. Matt Rinaldi added, “So Dan Patrick’s plan to kill constitutional carry is to attach a non-germane amendment that will render it out of order in the House and blame [Texas House Speaker] Dade Phelan when he sustains the point of order.”
Speaking to National File, Matt McNutt of TX Gun Rights said, “In spite of his recent back pedaling, Lt. Gov. Patrick has been no friend to gun owners in the state of Texas. From threats of Universal Gun Registration to actively opposing open carry in 2015 and opposing Constitutional Carry every year since, Lt. Gov. Patrick has been a thorn in the side of law-abiding Texans wishing to defend their families without a government permission slip.”
“Now, it looks like Patrick may have successfully placed a poison pill in an amendment to Constitutional Carry, in hopes it would cause the House to kill the bill by a point of order. This will not be accepted or tolerated. Speaker Phelan and Lt.Gov. Patrick must get HB 1927 to Governor Abbott’s desk immediately. No stall tactics or procedural delays,” McNutt added.
McNutt and TX Gun Rights provided the Texas legislature with 118,000 petitions for Constitutional Carry to be passed in the state, jump starting the legislative process that led to the Texas House to pass its version of the bill. Patrick, who has reliably stopped pro-Second Amendment legislation during his political career in Texas, was instrumental in crafting the Senate’s version of the bill.
When you put a sportscaster in charge of your state legislature.
Dan Patrick happens.
Can someone calmly explain why Patrick would do this?
I don't know. The news said he applauded passage of the bill in the senate today.
This is why a lot of Texans oppose peerless carry. The article is wrong you do not need a permit to own a firearm in Texas nor to carry on you car, home or if you OWN a business carry at that business. Castle doctrine covers those places. Texas has one of the easiest permits to get, it is a shall issue so you take 6 hours total to get one. 4 hours of laws and common sense plus a written check quiz on that time. Then 1 to 2 hours of range instructions and testing to make sure you can handle a firearm and keep every round on a man sized target at 3 , 6 and 12 feet with the majority at 3 and 6 feet. If you are incapable of doing that I in no uncertain terms want you carrying anywhere near me and will support in ernest not allowing that person to carry in public. Veterans get the permits for $27 for 5 years. Active duty get them free and if you have a current as in less than a year old military pistol qualification you skip the shooting test. Same for National Guard and Reserve no test no fees if stationed in Texas. With a Texas LTC you can also open carry and skip the phone call to the BATF when buying a gun you just fill 4473 out put your LTC numbers on it and walk out the door. That benefit alone especially when buying multiple firearms at once is worth every penny of the LTC costs if there are any at all.
Or realize that you have a God given right that is Constitutionally protected and says nothing about asking permission from the state to carry concealed. Free men don't ask permission. I don't care what the state legislature says.
>>Law enforcement only need reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop, not probable cause. Terry v. Ohio has been the law since 1968.<<
Perhaps, but I listened to a discussion this morning and the hangup will be, officers being able to stop/detain a person on the grounds that the person is observed openly carrying.
Not sure if that constitutes reasonable suspicion or probable cause. Semantics really. If CC passes and is signed into law, it would be problematic for citizens that wish to open carry.
That depends upon the purpose of the so-called article.
If it was meant to inform the reader, then you are completely correct.
If it was meant to drive traffic to some useless blogger's site in order to mine FReepers for Google clicks and impressions ad revenue, then it's serving its purpose.
One way you can always tell the true purpose is if the OP responds to others' comments or if they drop a stinker, then run.
In this case, the OP has dropped a deuce, then ran off to polish his pennies.
“...and will likely shoot yourself or a bystander...”
And you say this based on what facts or statistics? Or you just spouting stupidity for the sake of it?
.. Shall not be infringed....
Just like speech, or religion, carry of arms requires responsibility, but not govt infringement.
Use your voice wrongfully, exercise hate ( oh, blm etc, never mind), wrongfully employ a weapin or any means of force, the laws are there.
option 3; the OP is a troublemaking PoS. I see many, many posts every day that can’t possibly have any other purpose than to make people’s heads explode.
“rino’s suck” threads, george bush threads, vaccine threads, fox news sucks threads, just to name a few — are almost invariably devoid of any useful information -— they exist for the inevitable 200 brainless “Me, too” replies, and to send the same 20 or 30 clinically angry people into orbit.
in fact, in general, FR is carrying zillions more information-free vanities or articles with links to sketchy sources than it did just a few years ago. if the FR of 15 years ago cold see the FR of today, old FR would drag new FR outside and kick it’s ass.
I am so completely sick and tired of the G*D-DAMNED “Republicant” Poseurs and Frauds and their non-stop pi$$ing on our boots while telling us that it’s raining! These worthless, low down and good for nothing sh*tbirds all need to be tarred, feathered and run out of town on a rail!! The GOP is loaded to the rafters with these scumbags and losers!!
Not so fast, Terry requires that reasonable articulate suspicion that a crime is was or will be committed, and that he made presence of a weapon did not meet that requirement.
I’ve had my CHL since the mid 90’s. Super easy to obtain one even more so now.
Actually, all your info is tied to your license plate in Texas now. Cop pulls you over...he knows you have a CHL. I kind like the fact the cop will deal with me on a different level knowing I’ve had training, background checks.
They’re people too. With exception to uber liberal urban departments, most cops are supportive of citizens carrying a firearm for protection.
So I say all that to say this...Yea, Constitutional Carry is fine with me, but at the end of the day, I kinda think property taxes, illegal immigration and or school choice is probably more important to focus on.
Reasonable articulable suspicion that “criminal activity is afoot.” There is NOT a requirement to articulate a “particular” crime.
The mere presence of a weapon is not enough. No one said that it was.
Texas has one of the easiest permits to get, it is a shall issue so you take 6 hours total to get one. 4 hours of laws and common sense plus a written check quiz on that time. Then 1 to 2 hours of range instructions and testing to make sure you can handle a firearm and keep every round on a man sized target at 3 , 6 and 12 feet with the majority at 3 and 6 feet.
You think that’s easy? That’s complete BS. I don’t care if YOU or anybody else wants me carrying around them. Not your call. “Shall not be infringed” means what it says. By the way, in Alabama you walk in, fill out an application, they run an NCIS check on you, and you walk out in about 20 minutes with your permit. And that’s still an infringement. Show me some stats where states with ridiculous requirements like yours, and no requirements like mine, differ in...whatever it is you’re afraid of.
He seemed like a good guy...I guess not. Perhaps he knows Kristi Noem?
Well, I didn't post an excerpt. It was the entire article. And there was a Facebook post and a Tweet that were both quoted in the body of the article.
So I didn't give any reason to drive traffic to their site.
And I've been trying to find what amendment that everybody was worried about, but haven't found which one is was yet.
It was one of the three that the Sheriff’s association requested.
I suspect it was the “ability to temporarily disarm a person who has been lawfully detained” amendment.
I called my Texas Senatecritter Jane Nelson and let her know that since she voted in support of amendments to this bill, as far as I’m concerned, she voted against it. I’m gonna rain money on any opponent she has next time she’s up.
I could care less what you think. Having to demonstrate basic skills to do an activity in public is well established law. Driver licences for one. No one says you can’t own a car you have to demonstrate proper skills to use it in public roads. It’s not up to you, if Texas passes this a lot of people will vote out those who do it’s political calculus do they think the majority of Texans want every Bubba and gang banger carrying without a background check or proficiency test. From my large group of professional and social cohorts who are all Veterans combat vets at that, current and former law enforcement myself included in both those categories, Leo’s of Federal and local, and business owners NONE of them want constitutional carry not a single one. The process in Texas is not onerous and keeps people who lack the skills or background to carry legally in public. We will just out vote you types and do on a regular basis.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.