Open carry bill for 2015

For your reading pleasure, attached is an open carry bill to support. You can also help by sending a copy to your representatives asking them to support this bill.

Edit: Attachment has been updated with new bill

Don't cross out the first statement. Just last last word or two and most of what follows in the subsections. Make it read: A person commits an offence if...knowingly, recklessly....handgun...if the person is committing a class....member of a gang...

Just remove all the mumbo jumbo about licenses and be done with it.

Good luck Texans !

What are the odds on passage anticipated to be?

All gubernatorial candidates have spoken in support of passing open carry, numerous candidates for a wide array of state offices have made a point to declare their support for open or constitutional carry, and I've heard through the grape vine, so to speak, that a current representative expressed that OC passing was all but guaranteed.

The odds of this specific bill passing? No idea. The odds of an open carry bill passing? I anticipate them being incredibly high. I'm not fortune teller, though.

stealthyeliminator said:

All gubernatorial candidates have spoken in support of passing open carry, numerous candidates for a wide array of state offices have made a point to declare their support for open or constitutional carry, and I've heard through the grape vine, so to speak, that a current representative expressed that OC passing was all but guaranteed.

The odds of this specific bill passing? No idea. The odds of an open carry bill passing? I anticipate them being incredibly high. I'm not fortune teller, though.

Click to expand...

Good to hear - long past the time this should have occurred.

"I'm not fortune teller, though." -- stealthyeliminator

That's easily remedied: Hold your next "OC Walkabout" @ a Psychic's place. She could use her crystal ball while at the same time, you all are bringing OC-awareness to the area. Mission Accomplished: 2 birds with one stone! ;-)

Sorry though, can't give you specific "Psychic Store" recommendations (some can see the future better than others), as I do not know in which city/town you are in. "Texas" covers a lot of territory...

Grapeshot said:

What are the odds on passage anticipated to be?

Click to expand...

The odds of this proposed language passing are somewhere between 0% and 1%--the language isn't very well written, and it's not very realistic in its goals.

The odds of any form of open carry passing are probably about 20%. Having the support of both gubernatorial candidates doesn't mean much if you can't get a bill to the governor's desk. For each bill filed in the Texas Legislature, there are five individuals other than the governor who can single-handedly kill it. On top of that, a handful of opponents in the right committee can be enough to take down a bill, and one opponent on the House Calendars Committee can delay a bill long enough to keep it from receiving a floor vote. Finally, without the support of 21 Senators (all 20 Republicans and at least one Democrat), the bill will never overcome the "two-thirds" rule to reach the Senate floor.

In both 2009 and 2011, more than 60% of the Texas Legislature signed on as coauthors of the NRA's much-publicized campus carry bills. In 2009, both the House and Senate versions of the bill made it out of committee. The Senate version received a floor vote and was passed by the Senate, but in the end, the House Calendars committee killed both versions. In 2011, both versions again passed out of committee. This time, however, the Senate version didn't have enough votes to get past the "two-thirds" rule. The bill's language was eventually attached as an amendment to another Senate bill, but that bill was killed in the House, on the point of order that the addition of the campus carry language violated the constitutional single-subject rule. The House version of the bill was again killed by the House Calendars Committee. In 2013, the House Calendars Committee finally allowed a floor vote on the House version of the bill but only because the chairman of the Senate committee had already killed the Senate version and was expected to do the same with the House version. The chairman of the Senate committee did finally allow the House version to be passed out of committee but only because everyone knew that the bill's sponsor didn't have the 21 votes (the "two-thirds" rule) necessary to get a floor vote in the Senate.

That's three sessions in a row that both the House and Senate versions of a popular NRA-backed bill were killed via parliamentary procedure. And that's not an unusual story. The Texas Legislature is designed to kill bills, and open carry is a long, long way from being a sure thing. When the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Rural Affairs, and Homeland Security held an interim hearing on open carry last April, the issue seemed to have strong momentum; however, four months of controversy and bad press have significantly slowed that momentum and significantly eroded both public and legislative support. Considering that the 2013 open carry bill never made it out of committee (much less got past the dreaded Calendars Committee), the fight for open carry in 2015 will be a very steep uphill battle.

Bladed said:

When the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Rural Affairs, and Homeland Security held an interim hearing on open carry last April, the issue seemed to have strong momentum; however, four months of controversy and bad press have significantly slowed that momentum and significantly eroded both public and legislative support.

Click to expand...

Could you please back this up with some fact? Gracias.

stealthyeliminator said:

Could you please back this up with some fact? Gracias.

Click to expand...

You want me to provide facts about how people feel?

Those of us who have been in this neighborhood before know how to read the street signs. If you don't believe me now, talk to me again in ten months.

Bladed said:

You want me to provide facts about how people feel?

Those of us who have been in this neighborhood before know how to read the street signs. If you don't believe me now, talk to me again in ten months.

Click to expand...

Show evidence, or state that it's nothing more than how you feel. One or the other. For instance, stating "I've heard through the grape vine, so to speak, that a current representative expressed that OC passing was all but guaranteed" instead of "OC passing is all but guaranteed" or even "a current representative feels that OC passing is all but guaranteed"

Don't play ignorant. You should be able to explain your reasoning behind your conclusions and show evidence to support them. If not, you're all wet. Your "gut feeling" means nothing to me, and it certainly isn't translatable into percentage points on odds of a bill passing.

stealthyeliminator said:

Show evidence, or state that it's nothing more than how you feel. One or the other. For instance, stating "I've heard through the grape vine, so to speak, that a current representative expressed that OC passing was all but guaranteed" instead of "OC passing is all but guaranteed" or even "a current representative feels that OC passing is all but guaranteed"

Don't play ignorant. You should be able to explain your reasoning behind your conclusions and show evidence to support them. If not, you're all wet. Your "gut feeling" means nothing to me, and it certainly isn't translatable into percentage points on odds of a bill passing.

Click to expand...

I've spoken to representatives from small gun rights groups who have decided to distance their groups from the issue (e.g., backtracking on plans to incorporate open carry language into the legislation they'll be pushing in 2015) and lobbyists from large gun rights organizations who claim to have heard from numerous legislators who are now afraid to associate with the issue. I have seen the backlash on pro-gun message boards and in online comment sections and have noticed the condescension creeping into the coverage from even those media outlets that are typically supportive of gun rights. The taint on this issue is palpable and undeniable to everyone but the handful of diehards who have insulated themselves from outside input/influence.

You can claim that this is conjecture or conspiracy or whatever; it makes no difference to me. I have no need to convince you of my rightness--history will do that for me.

Bladed said:

I've spoken to representatives from small gun rights groups who have decided to distance their groups from the issue (e.g., backtracking on plans to incorporate open carry language into the legislation they'll be pushing in 2015) and lobbyists from large gun rights organizations who claim to have heard from numerous legislators who are now afraid to associate with the issue. I have seen the backlash on pro-gun message boards and in online comment sections and have noticed the condescension creeping into the coverage from even those media outlets that are typically supportive of gun rights. The taint on this issue is palpable and undeniable to everyone but the handful of diehards who have insulated themselves from outside input/influence.

You can claim that this is conjecture or conspiracy or whatever; it makes no difference to me. I have no need to convince you of my rightness--history will do that for me.

Click to expand...

That's what I thought --- the same groups have probably said the exact same things about open carry in the past --- "lobbyists from large gun rights organizations" such as Charles Cotton associated with the NRA who has touted killing an OC bill as an accomplishment. "Pro-gun message boards," probably plenty of CHL and concealed carry oriented sites full of "die hards" as you might put it who are absorbed with the privilege mentality.

The support for open carry is there. If the circles you associate with and listen to refuse to acknowledge that, well that is on you bud. At least you've mostly corrected your statements, which is what I was hoping for. Hopefully you can see the important difference between "however, four months of controversy and bad press have significantly slowed that momentum and significantly eroded both public and legislative support." and "I've spoken to ... lobbyists from large gun rights organizations who claim to have heard from numerous legislators who are now afraid to associate with the issue."

stealthyeliminator said:

That's what I thought --- the same groups have probably said the exact same things about open carry in the past --- "lobbyists from large gun rights organizations" such as Charles Cotton associated with the NRA who has touted killing an OC bill as an accomplishment. "Pro-gun message boards," probably plenty of CHL and concealed carry oriented sites full of "die hards" as you might put it who are absorbed with the privilege mentality.

The support for open carry is there. If the circles you associate with and listen to refuse to acknowledge that, well that is on you bud. At least you've mostly corrected your statements, which is what I was hoping for. Hopefully you can see the important difference between "however, four months of controversy and bad press have significantly slowed that momentum and significantly eroded both public and legislative support." and "I've spoken to ... lobbyists from large gun rights organizations who claim to have heard from numerous legislators who are now afraid to associate with the issue."

Click to expand...

If you want to delude yourself that the echo chamber in which you've isolated yourself is representative of the state as a whole, that's your problem. In five months, this will no longer be theoretical, and we'll see just how much support is actually there. You keep harping on one line from my original post, but that one line was only a very small part of my original statement. Even if it's not true that recent publicity has harmed the open carry movement (the only people who think it hasn't are the people hiding in that echo chamber with you), the climb is still going to be extremely steep. If the bad publicity has hurt the movement even a little (and most of us think the movement has been significantly damaged), that may very well be enough to tip the scales against open carry.

To expand upon what I said before, you can dismiss all of this as conjecture by or a conspiracy of the concealed carry community, but history will be the final judge.

I just want to say good luck Texas. If all else fails you can move to Oklahoma.

Bladed said:

If you want to delude yourself that the echo chamber in which you've isolated yourself is representative of the state as a whole, that's your problem. In five months, this will no longer be theoretical, and we'll see just how much support is actually there. You keep harping on one line from my original post, but that one line was only a very small part of my original statement. Even if it's not true that recent publicity has harmed the open carry movement (the only people who think it hasn't are the people hiding in that echo chamber with you), the climb is still going to be extremely steep. If the bad publicity has hurt the movement even a little (and most of us think the movement has been significantly damaged), that may very well be enough to tip the scales against open carry.

To expand upon what I said before, you can dismiss all of this as conjecture by or a conspiracy of the concealed carry community, but history will be the final judge.

Click to expand...

That one line was only used as an example.

Glad you opened me eyes to this "echo chamber" I've been isolated in. Whatever that means. Now you're just being an ass - surely you don't think there's any substance to that accusation.

Edit: And certainly we will see in 2015 whether or not OC passes... But whether it passes or not does not prove one of us right and one of us wrong in this discussion... And I for one am not going to wait for the results just to come back to this thread and try to rub them in someone's face... Whether it passes or not I'm going to continue my rights and advocating that the state recognize and respect more of them...

Here's the question at the root of the present dispute: "Have the actions of some individuals participating in Open Carry Texas rallies damaged the cause of gun rights?" (I know some people are asking a rather different question, which is "Have the actions of Open Carry Texas damaged the cause of gun rights?") It would appear that Bladed is arguing that the answer is "yes" and that StealthyEliminator is saying "no."

Let me ask the both of you a hypothetical:

What (hypothetical) event would convince you that you are wrong?

I can guess what would convince Bladed: the bill actually passing. If something short of that would convince you, sir, please chime in.

Stealthy Eliminator has stated right here that even if open carry goes down in flames this year, he won't believe that the long rifle demonstrations hurt the cause. Well, given the way the legislature is structured, that's valid. But what hypothetical event would it take to convince you, sir? Perhaps enough otherwise pro-gun legislators saying "this issue is now poison thanks to those clowns?" Would that do it, or would you then take the easy way out (easier than questioning one's own beliefs) and just decide that they're really not pro 2A and just looking for the excuse they need to stab us in the back? Maybe you wouldn't, since you seem to be one of the more rational people here, but I wouldn't put that sort of "reasoning" beyond some of the others. On the other hand, you've already declared some of the pro-gun lobbies to not really be pro-gun, because they are saying similar things. That may or may not be valid depending on their history but that in itself is dicey, you can't even get "people of the gun" to agree about whether the NRA is truly pro-gun, and the NRA has a much more visible past record people can point to to support their arguments.

We should all ask ourselves this question. And if the answer is that there's nothing at all that could happen that would convince you that you are wrong, you are not being objective about the issue. (And no, I am not talking about the question of principle, the "right"ness of open carry, here, I am talking about the narrower question of fact, whether some of the actions of some of the individuals in OCT have damaged the cause of gun rights.)

I've seen the sort of behavior Bladed is alluding to, before. I was on a forum once that was packed full of Ron Paul fans (this was in 2008, not 2012, BTW). These people were so busy talking amongst themselves they couldn't imagine him not winning the primaries; everyone they knew was in favor of him. When he started losing--as anyone outside their group could have predicted--the accusations of vote stealing started flying. Now that was an echo chamber much like Bladed is trying to describe. Okay, so that's a bunch of dufuses on a small internet forum. But it can happen elsewhere. One other case of this is the liberal journalists in 1968 who simply could not believe Nixon had won the election because they knew no one who had supported him. (I guess they didn't even interview a good cross section of people as part of their fricking jobs, either.)

Everyone here is for Open Carry and most have no issue with that moment of behavior, captured forever by camera, by those two people in Chipotle. But this board is not a representative cross section of society, not even in Texas, and certainly not the corporate boardrooms where "please don't bring your guns here" statements are emanating from. What would such a representative cross section say? I don't know. I am pretty sure the answer would be different in DC than it is in Texas, but I could well imagine a significant number of Texans thinking "those OC whack jobs..." based on the photos that have gotten a lot of hostile publicity.

Bladed's accusations of living in an echo chamber may or may not be true, but (and I am addressing everyone here, including people who are on Bladed's side of this question) you'd be an utter fool not to step back for a moment and really consider whether or not you are doing that to yourself. And not to be satisfied with the first easy answer you get. Talk to people you have never spoken to about this issue, in venues that aren't clearly "gun oriented" as well as those that are. Because if your evidence consists of all the people you are seeing on line in the open carry community, or at OCT rallies, you haven't really answered the question.

steve, remember even the leaders of the folk who initially promoting OC of LG acknowledged their efforts backfired and they were regrouping.

those in the texas legislators as in the majority of the state's general assemblies are fickle, blowing in the wind, against the even fickler general public's opinion. Legislators across the nation also saw what happened in your state when the populace rose up and threw out of office those they felt were infringing on their perceived rights.

that stated, it means when you ask legislators this far out about how they perceived how the OCLG group did to sway them, or how they feel about changing OC legality, or which side of the fence they are sitting on regarding the subject, or let alone how are they going to vote about such hot potato will probably get conversation from the legislator aimed at the particular person asking the question at the time. if the person asking appears is for OC ~ oh, its a good thing; if the person appears it is against ~ oh no it is a bad thing.

until they sit their silly arses in the chamber and vote nobody knows which way the tide will flow.

as for stealth, i hope it is echoing really loud now!!

ipse

solus said:

steve, remember even the leaders of the folk who initially promoting OC of LG acknowledged their efforts backfired and they were regrouping.

Click to expand...

Yes, precisely. Even THEY are willing to consider the possibility of it having backfired. They succeeded in breaking out of their own echo chamber. So many here, aren't, and haven't.

A bill passing is obviously a strong indicator of support, but a bill failing is not necessarily indicative of lack of support. As I explained in my first post, the Texas Legislature is designed to kill bills, and popular bills die every session.

A more accurate indicator of support (or lack thereof) will be the number of legislators who sign on as coauthors in the early weeks of the session. This isn't a perfect indicator--NRA-sponsored bills get a lot of coauthors by default, and fence sitters sometimes pad their NRA ratings by putting their names on doomed bills they actually oppose (particularly near the end of the session)--but it's probably the best indicator we have. You can also look at the number of legislators speaking out publicly on the issue, the number of similar bills filed, and the speed with which the bills work their way through the committee process. If we see several open carry bills, each with a lot (dozens) of coauthors who are more than willing to speak publicly about their support of open carry, I'll have to admit that I was wrong in claiming that the spate of bad publicity significantly eroded support. But that still won't mean the bad publicity didn't doom the bills. Remember, even a minor erosion of support could be enough to kill open carry--if the bad publicity turns off the Speaker (a real possibility), the chair of the House committee to which the bill is assigned, the chair of the House Calendars Committee, the lieutenant governor (unlikely), the chair of the Senate committee to which the bill is assigned, the governor (unlikely), or just eleven Senators (there will most likely be twelve Democrats), the bill is unlikely to pass. People without experience in these matters tend to focus on getting more than 50% support in both chambers (at least 76 votes in the House and at least 16 votes in the Senate), but that's actually a very small part of it. Even a bill with 60% support in both chambers is far from a sure thing.

I've spoken with representatives of four or five gun-rights organizations who are worried that the bad publicity is going to damage not only open carry legislation but ALL gun-rights legislation. These groups range in size/stature from large and well-funded to small and volunteer-based. These are experienced, engaged gun-rights lobbyists/activists who, unlike most of the people inside the open carry echo chamber, actually know where the restrooms are located in the Capitol. They not only understand the legislative process; they understand public relations. Unlike the open carry activists who keep blaming media bias for the glut of bad publicity, they understand that media bias and media incompetence are an ever-present part of the equation. A media savvy organization plans for media bias and incompetence at every step of the way. A media savvy organization doesn't complain that the media didn't accurately report the group's motivation for visiting a fast food restaurant with rifles slung at the low ready; a media savvy organization recognizes up-front that such actions could be misconstrued and steers clear of those types of questionable tactics. These lobbyists/activists understand that a group's public image is the only image most legislators care about when it comes time to support or oppose the group's bill. Legislators aren't going to cut a group slack because its members meant well. If supporting the group is going to cost a legislator votes on election day, he or she is going to find a way to, at the very least, avoid dealing with the group's issue (this is where the dreaded Calendars Committee comes into play--a lot of legislators rely on their friends on the Calendars Committee to help them avoid voting on bills they'd rather not support or oppose).

If open carry activists want legislators to take them seriously and want established gun-rights groups to quit treating them as pariahs, they need to stop making dumb PR moves and quit finding ways to publicly demonstrate their ignorance and naivety. Seeking out controversy is NOT the way to get legislators to align themselves with your cause (an armed march through Houston's Fifth Ward would neither win over fence sitters nor discredit opponents; it would be a meaningless publicity stunt). Allowing members to pursue/confront opponents is NOT the way to get legislators to align themselves with your cause (when I was in a leadership position with a gun-rights group, a supporter who followed an opponent to his/her car or posted an opponent's contact information online would have been barred from future participation with our group; if the story had gone public, we would have immediately put out a press release denouncing the supporter's actions and explaining what steps had been taken to prevent a repeat occurrence). Asking members to demand that their legislators support legislation that is objectively unpassable is NOT the way to get legislators to align themselves with your cause (nothing screams, "Amateurs!" like promoting legislation that reads as if it were written by someone who has never even read, much less written, a filed bill). These aren't arbitrary rules just waiting to be broken by a group of rebels; these are laws of nature that are only denied by lunatics. Right now, it's as if a certain faction of the open carry movement has decided that gravity doesn't apply to them.