Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Open Carry, HB 910 Substitute, in Texas Senate now

  1. #1
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    923

    Open Carry, HB 910 Substitute, in Texas Senate now

    HB 910, the Texas licensed open carry bill, passed the House by 2/3 margins. The bill went through the Senate State Affairs Committee, where the Dutton amendment was stripped from it. Now, being debated on the floor of the full Senate, the debate is whether to put the Dutton amendment back in. The Dutton amendment specifies that peace officers may not detain open carriers simply to ask if they have a license, but must have probable cause to suspect criminal activity, just like they need for any Terry stop. The amendment is designed to protect open carriers from police harassment. Here is the text of the amendment:

    CERTAIN INVESTIGATORY STOPS AND INQUIRIES PROHIBITED. A peace officer may not make an investigatory stop or other temporary detention to inquire as to whether a person possesses a handgun license solely because the person is carrying a partially or wholly visible handgun carried in a shoulder or belt holster.

    The second amendment supporters of open carry, represented by C.J. Grisham, have said that the amendment is not important, because of precedent that guards against this type of stop in any case. Others say that it is useful, because it will prevent the flood of lawsuits that will be required to enforce the judicial rulings in Texas.

    A potential advantage for bringing the Dutton amendment back, is that the bill can be restored to a duplicate of the House Bill 910. Then it does not have to go back to the House for a vote. It can be engrossed after the Senate third vote and sent to Governor Abbott for signature. The progress of the bill is being followed closely, with knowledgeable debate on procedure and fine points, on Texasguntalk.com.

    The Senate has now postponed debate until 6pm, an hour and a half from now.


    http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2015/05...-in-texas.html

  2. #2
    Lone Star Veteran Ian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    712
    The Senate stream is now up and they will start shortly. If you haven't called any senators, now is the time to do so! Make sure to voice your support of Amendment 9 for HB 910.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    796
    Done, passed with identical language and official site shows it now next stop to the Governor!
    NRA Life Member

    "The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Big D
    Posts
    1,059
    See the other HB 910 thread for details


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Pearland, TX
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by Glockster View Post
    Done, passed with identical language and official site shows it now next stop to the Governor!
    awesome!

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Big D
    Posts
    1,059
    Quote Originally Posted by jordanmills View Post
    awesome!
    Not quite yet.
    A three word discrepancy sends it back to the House.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509
    Quote Originally Posted by nonameisgood View Post
    Not quite yet.
    A three word discrepancy sends it back to the House.
    It goes back to the conference committee before the house.

    I've been told that there's a quirk that allows the author to agree to the changes, so it can skip the conference altogether and go straight to the governor. I don't know if that will happen, because... Texas.

    It's a bizarre state for gun rights.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    northern wis
    Posts
    3,195
    Quote Originally Posted by nonameisgood View Post
    Not quite yet.
    A three word discrepancy sends it back to the House.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    So you know it is a three word discrepancy

    What are the 3 words

    Please enlighten us.
    Personal Defensive Solutions professional personal firearms, edge weapons and hands on defensive training and tactics pdsolutions@hotmail.com

    Any and all spelling errors are just to give the spelling Nazis something to do

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    796
    FYI -- I posted a link to the official comparative analysis of HB 910 as submitted to the Senate vs. after the Senate amended and it is available in this thread: http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...33#post2144033
    NRA Life Member

    "The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson

  10. #10
    Newbie
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1

    Sorry Wish it was True

    Quote Originally Posted by Glockster View Post
    Done, passed with identical language and official site shows it now next stop to the Governor!
    There is a three word different between Huffines amendment and the Dutton amendment so it does have to go back to the house. If the house concurs on the amendment than it can go to the governor. Here is the difference. Dutton amendment said a Police Officer can not stop someone because they are carrying. Huffines amendment said A Police Officer can't stop someone solely because they are carrying.

    I see them easily concurring they are just about the same amendment . If Senator Joan Huffman would have not strip the language from the bill only to have it put back It would have gone to the Governor. Her only purpose was to gut the Bill. I volunteer with the NRA I have followed this bill very closely. The Police officers played her like a drum and she fell for it. We all know if a Officer wants to stop someone he will find away.

    Senator Burton observed and state out loud you are trying to kill our bill. Senator Huffman is a RHINO. She never really wanted the Bill. She fell for the chiefs of Police observation. In every hearing they got to her as a Judge which she is she should have known A Police Officer can always find away to stop you and their hands are not tied. She should have known a criminal would never wear his gun where a Officer could observe it. Criminals are not allowed guns. Joan showed no respect for Senator West even though he is a Democrat he is ten times smarter than her.

    Even one of the Democrats who said he will vote for it on third reading said he will filibuster it if it comes back. He went on to state your killing your own bill. If you live in the Houston area remember when election time comes around she will say she is for gun rights but she doesn't mean it.

    I'm a EVC for the NRA. I work with candidates and we go to meetings we work with the press and I work eight gun shows a year. I have my own forum. I will answer any questions you have. Time is getting short this legislative session will be over June 1st for two years. Governor Abbott can can call another session I think if I remember correctly Perry called three in a row. There allot of good bills left out there He can term like that and call another session. Start calling your senators and house members in the TX state house. It will pass along party lines Democrats will not vote for it .

    I will call my contact in senator Phillips office. I'll let you know what he tells me but I can't reveal his name. He is busy and has been nice enough to answer my questions so I can get honest answers to people.
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 05-26-2015 at 05:57 AM. Reason: formatting

  11. #11
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2

    The Specific Differences in Section 411.2049

    Quote Originally Posted by glock_221 View Post
    There is a three word different between Huffines amendment and the Dutton amendment so it does have to go back to the house. If the house concurs on the amendment than it can go to the governor. Here is the difference. Dutton amendment said a Police Officer can not stop someone because they are carrying. Huffines amendment said A Police Officer can't stop someone solely because they are carrying.

    Here's the official analysis document as posted on the Texas Legislative website. Scroll to page 19, the only differences found.



    The two variances between the House (H) and Senate (S) versions are in Section 29, adding section 411.2049:

    1. First Discrepancy:
    H: "...as to whether a person possesses a handgun license..."
    S: "...as to a person's possession of a handgun license..."

    2. Second Discrepancy:
    H: "...is carrying a partially or wholly visible handgun carried in a shoulder or belt holster."
    S: "...is carrying in a shoulder or belt holster a partially or wholly visible handgun."

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •