• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

New Unlicensed "OC" Bill HB 1911 Filed in Texas House

TXOC16

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2016
Messages
111
Location
USA
Texas State Representative James White (R-Hillister), who I am sure is an otherwise well-meaning individual, has filed in the Texas House HB 1911 (how cute).

Having only briefly scanned through this bill, it clearly has a number of obvious Constitutional defects, not the least of which is the codification of the (non-existent) authority of a LEO to demand identification from anyone merely openly carrying a firearm (see Sec. 411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY IDENTIFICATION AND HANDGUN LICENSE), whereas current LTC law provides only for the requirement that licensees produce said ID, with no penalty for the failure to do so. This is, clearly, the exact opposite direction in which we should be heading.

As it stands right now, Jonathan Stickland's Bill, which has been referred to the Homeland Security & Public Safety Committee, appears to be a far better move towards the restoration of Second Amendment rights in Texas.

Carry on.
 

The Big Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,967
Location
Waco, TX
Demanding to see ID because a person is openly carrying, is the same as to demand that he/she pull over to check their ID, simply because they are driving in their car. It won't stand up.

TBG
 
Last edited:

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
Pathetic. Not only has legislation passed barring (how effectively, IDK) prosecution or penalty under 411.205 (I really don't know why it wasn't outright repealed, but I suspect it is some obscure technical reason rather than any attempt to leave 411.205 with any weight), but with these "updates" he's actually moving it even further into unconstitutional territory. A person would not even be required to HAVE a drivers license on him while OCing! Yet he can be obligated to show it? We've had this debate before... Alas...

And the analogy above is a good one to consider, it would be akin to checking drivers license based solely on the sight of someone driving, and that act has already been deemed unconstitutional. Interestingly, Texas still has law on the books supposedly giving LEOs the authority to do this. Supposedly veteran LEOs have been observed advising rookie LEOs to never make a stop based on this troublesome portion of Texas transportation code, lest they be put through the legal ringer and sued for their worth. Likewise, 411.205 was obviously unconstitutional, and was "broken", but remnants left on the books. Now he wants to not only somehow "revive" this dead and unenforceable piece of code, but he wants to make it even worse and more unconstitutional? What is wrong with him?
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,059
Location
here nc
Pathetic. Not only has legislation passed barring (how effectively, IDK) prosecution or penalty under 411.205 (I really don't know why it wasn't outright repealed, but I suspect it is some obscure technical reason rather than any attempt to leave 411.205 with any weight), but with these "updates" he's actually moving it even further into unconstitutional territory. A person would not even be required to HAVE a drivers license on him while OCing! Yet he can be obligated to show it? We've had this debate before... Alas...

And the analogy above is a good one to consider, it would be akin to checking drivers license based solely on the sight of someone driving, and that act has already been deemed unconstitutional. Interestingly, Texas still has law on the books supposedly giving LEOs the authority to do this. Supposedly veteran LEOs have been observed advising rookie LEOs to never make a stop based on this troublesome portion of Texas transportation code, lest they be put through the legal ringer and sued for their worth. Likewise, 411.205 was obviously unconstitutional, and was "broken", but remnants left on the books. Now he wants to not only somehow "revive" this dead and unenforceable piece of code, but he wants to make it even worse and more unconstitutional? What is wrong with him?


from afar...hummmm...

ipse
 

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
Umm... I didn't notice this as I hadn't read the bill thoroughly, but, does everyone realize that this bill would only apply to individuals who meet qualifications 1 thru 12 of the LTC qualifications under Government Code 411.172? This bill is a bad joke! I wonder if the gun-rights advocates who concocted this bill realize that they just spat in the face of all the others. And I doubt they'd care if they did realize it. (Egos and things.)

Go to www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/85R/billtext/html/HB01911I.htm and then do a text search for "meets the" to see the section of HB1911 to which I am referring.

Then see http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/GV/htm/GV.411.htm#411.172 to see the criteria to which the above is referring.
 
Top