#TXLEGE: It's time to sue Texas over Constitutional Carry (or lack thereof)

"Every one of the builders had his sword girded at his side as he built. And the one who sounded the trumpet was beside me."
Nehemiah 4:18

Rachel Malone has a piece about the state of play on #2A issues as we head into session.

Texas lags far behind other states in our right to carry. While 31 states recognize the right to open carry without a government permit—and 17 states recognize the right to conceal carry a handgun without a permit—Texas still generally requires a permit for handgun carry outside of our property, business, or vehicle.

....

In the name of liberty and justice for all, and in the spirit of the Alamo, the 87th Legislature must pass Constitutional Carry and end “gun-free” zones. Our right to carry a firearm for protection should not rely on government. Texas, it’s time to move forward with freedom.

O.K, sure. Nothing she says is wrong. But it's hard to miss that Texas' elected officials care about "the name of liberty and justice for all" or "the spirit of the Alamo."

Something that's never been tried is a lawsuit against the state of Texas over its permitting system. Doesn't take a genius to see how one could argue it's an unconstitutional infringement. Such a lawsuit might not be successful, but it's worth a shot. Especially in the newly Trumpified federal courts.

At a minimum, such a lawsuit would increase pressure on the legislature far more than vauge appeals to buzzwords and cliches.

Bottom Line: This is a ongoing headline the powers that be won't want, so it's not inconceivable they'd take steps to make it go away.

#TXLEGE: Constitutional Carry gets GUTTED in committee

"Every one of the builders had his sword girded at his side as he built. And the one who sounded the trumpet was beside me."
Nehemiah 4:18

Oh good grief:

A Texas House committee Tuesday approved legislation to allow handguns to be carried without a license, with two Democrats voting against and five Republicans voting in favor even though they believed the measure doesn’t go far enough.

The version of House Bill 1911 approved by the House Homeland Security and Public Safety Committee contained several substantial changes from the version that drew extensive public testimony three weeks ago, including:

• To carry without a permit, gun owners would have to meet the restrictions to obtain a license to carry, which is generally available to those who are 21 or older, have no felony convictions and are eligible to purchase a weapon under federal and state laws. The earlier version allowed guns to be carried by those 18 and older.

• Churches and places of worship would be removed as prohibited places to carry a gun, although signs banning guns would be allowed.

• Openly carried handguns would still be required to be kept in a holster, but HB 1911 would omit the requirement that it be a belt or shoulder holster.

The revised bill by Rep. James White, R-Hillister, would not change any laws related to campus carry, a statute passed in 2015 that allows licensed gun owners to carry concealed weapons into most areas of public universities, said Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherford.

In addition the bill, as it currently stands, prohibits anyone who's been CHARGED (note: not convicted, charged) with a class A or B misdemeanor over the past five years from carrying.

LoneStarVoice has behind the scenes details:

Chairman Phil King had been working with Reps. White and Stickland for the last couple weeks, discussing changes he wanted to see to both bills before he would allow them out of his committee.

According to activists, a deal had been reached last week between White, Stickland, King, and group leaders, but they say the deal was breached with Tuesday's vote.

They say White had agreed to strengthen his bill. They say that all parties had agreed to accept these changes and support White's bill. But in the days before the vote, King decided he would only allow White's bill to pass if White agreed to undo the agreed-upon changes.

Lone Star Gun Rights has even more:

There's a small chance the bill can be strengthened via floor amendment, but there's a long history of the lawless house leadership making up excuses to refuse to consider amendments.

Bottom Line: As it currently stands, HB 1911 is not a constitutional carry bill.  It's a fee reduction bill.  Don't get us wrong, a fee reduction bill would be an improvement on the status quo. It might be worth passing.  But it's not constitutional carry.  And you shouldn't believe anyone who attempts to tell you otherwise.

-----

Update: Open Carry Texas has more....

How to Testify at Thursday's #2A Hearing

"Every one of the builders had his sword girded at his side as he built. And the one who sounded the trumpet was beside me."
Nehemiah 4:18

Rachel Malone of Texas Firearms Freedom details how to testify effectively at this Thursday's second amendment hearing:



Highlights:

• 1st public hearing on Thursday.

• Only one chance at a hearing every two years.

• Expect to be there all day.

• Expect to pay for parking.

• Details about registering for the bill.