Is constitutional carry the biggest priority for 2017, or is it removal of prohibited places? In a perfect world we would do both, but as everyone saw this session, even with super majorities of Republicans in both chambers there is only so much that will get done.
I can see arguments for either of these being the priority for 2017. On the side of CC, it's a valid argument that Texans should not have to ask permission from the state to excersize a constitutionally guaranteed right. A pay to play system discriminates against the poor and creates a privledged class.
Arguing that some Texans do not qualify for a CHL, but still should have the right to carry is a BAD idea. The left would jump all over that argument.
On the side of removal of prohibited places is the argument that we are considered responsible citizens 99% of the time, but not when we go to a sporting event, or go vote? It makes no sense to allow me to be armed in a cafe in the small suburb where I live, but I must be disarmed walking back to my car after attending an Astros game in downtown Houston. Common sense would tell you which situation carries the greatest possibility for needing protection.
Again, if we lived in a perfect world, both of these measures would be well received by the legislature. But, in the world we live in we may have to choose which of these has a better chance of passage and is worth the political capital. I know there are those who are going to jump all over me because both of these issues are wrongly prohibiting people from excersizing their 2A right. Many will argue that we should DEMAND that the legislature restore all of our rights, but the reality is that we will not get everything we demand, regardless of it being the right thing to do.