Kimber Gun Rights Bulletin: Texas Legislators File Wave of Bills in Push for More Gun Control

This last legislative session heralded a massive change in gun laws of the Lone Star State. The two biggest: permitted open carry (allowing those with a concealed handgun license to openly carry) and campus carry (allowing licensed concealed carry holders to carry on college campuses). While gun rights activists have been rejoicing, those on the other side of the political spectrum have been chomping at the bit to roll back and restrict these changes.

As the 2017 legislative session nears, KXAN reports that 37 gun control bills have already been filed, with predictable goals. Two of the proposals that most directly attack these latest changes to firearms laws come from State Rep. Rafael Anchia (D – Dallas). The first would allow individual publicly funded universities to opt-out of campus carry just as private universities can. That’s exactly what the gun control proponents with Gun Free UT have been demanding for the last two years.

The second Anchia-authored proposal would allow cities with populations greater than 750,000 people to pass ordinances prohibiting open carry within city limits. Pennsylvania uses a similar system, allowing “first class cities” (which only includes Philadelphia) to tailor some of the state-wide laws to suit their specific needs.

In Texas, this proposal would allow Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, and Austin to opt out of open carry. The concern, of course, is that this proposal would set the precedent that certain cities could be exempted from other state laws, allowing them to impose their own stricter gun control laws. That would create a patchwork of confusing and possibly contradictory laws such as exist in Illinois.

The good news for Texans who care about the RKBA is that with a 99 to 50 GOP advantage in the house (not to mention a 20 to 11 advantage in the senate), Anchia’s bills don’t figure to go anywhere anytime soon. Still, the fight to defend and extend Second Amendment rights is a constant one. The forces of civilian disarmament never sleep. Neither should those for whom gun rights is a priority.

comments

  1. avatar tjlarson2k says:

    They are welcome to remove themselves from office (or being forcibly removed) for going against their oath to uphold the Constitution and barred from any govt or political jobs as they have displayed their ineptness and lack of reading comprehension required for such jobs (in theory).

    1. avatar Locke_n_Load says:

      These bills have no chance of passing here in Texas, and many anti-gun bills are filed each year.

      Fellow Texans, we need to do everything we can in order to pass HB560, which to summarize, puts LTC(CHL) holders in the same category as police officers as far as carry locations and off-limits areas goes.

  2. avatar Chadwick says:

    To quote a favorite movie of mine… “Some stupid zombies riding piles of kleenex down the street? Rah rah.”

  3. avatar bLoving says:

    I almost wanted to give him props for trying…
    Nah. Watching this putz beat his head againt a wall is too much fun.

  4. avatar dh34 says:

    These will be DOA in committee. The insidious ones to watch for are changes to the 30.06/30.07 signage requirements.

    The other one to watch is the Constitutional Carry. Constitutional Carry bills have been filed as well as a couple with a number of sponsors reducing/eliminating fees for a LTC. This is a poorly veiled push to preempt the Constitutional Carry bill, by addressing the issue that purchasing an LTC is a financial burden on the poor.

  5. avatar TexTed says:

    “The first would allow individual publicly funded universities to opt-out of campus carry just as private universities can.”

    I have no problem with this, so long as they understand that it would also mean opting out of receiving public funds. Want to get treated like a private university? Be funded like a private university.

    1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

      Except, private universities receive public funds, too. Pell grants, Montgomery G.I. bill funds, federal backed student loans, etc. flow to private schools, too. They flow through individual students to the school, true, but that’s a technicality. The student never actually sees or possesses the cash before the school does.

      1. avatar anonymoose says:

        And then the student is left with the bill at the end. This is why we need to rein in all colleges in the US, cut this Social Justice crap, and force them to accept Campus Carry.

      2. avatar Arc says:

        I don’t consider USGI to be public money, its an earned benefit being held by the US gov.

    2. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      Public institutions that choose to remain “gun-free zones” in an open carry/concealed carry environment ought to also be held responsible for putting people within their confines in danger. If a spree-killer enters into a place of business or educational institution that doesn’t allow individuals to be armed then, in the event of a violent attack, the business or institution should be held legally responsible for creating a dangerous environment that could have mitigated by armed citizens.

  6. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    This is what legislators do. They file bills that have no hope of passage, so they can go back home and tell the huddled masses that they are “doing something about gun violence.”

    The huddled masses will take the bait and vote for such nonsense again.

  7. avatar Joe R. says:

    Ya, again, it’s a POS (D) problem. They are still attempting to do global communism. See UN’s 2030 Sustainability Agenda. They can’t do that with you having the RTKABA which is (also) meant to protect America from Manchurian Candidate other americans who want to destroy it.

    FIX YOUR SH_T TX. Don’t make us come and do it, because we’ll lump you in with them.

    1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

      What’s to fix? There are always some loudmouth busybodies out there who manage to get elected. This is going nowhere.

      You’re going to come “fix” something here? That’s rich. The rest of this failing country flees their dying states to get to Texas precisely because we do have our sh!t together. Sure, we can tweak a few firearms laws here and there, maybe drop license fees, maybe drop licenses altogether. Meh. I put those in the nice-to-have column, but hardly anything to characterize as needing to “fix our sh!t”, not when the standard for pure, imperious putridity is set by the likes of NY, MD, RI, HA, CT, et. al.

  8. avatar Defens says:

    The “first class cities” bill should be heaped up with poison pill amendments, that would allow the included cities to “opt out” of recognizing state driver’s licenses, following environmental regulations, disregarding insurance rates set by commissioners, etc. Heck, just declare them as independent city-states, and no longer accept state funds for street maintenance, etc.

    1. avatar anonymoose says:

      Or just get rid of Home-Rule crap altogether and tell these libby cities to go f— themselves. PA really needs get complete state preemption, and so would Cali if they ever managed to repeal the recent crap from Sacramento.

  9. avatar Ranger Rick says:

    Rafael Anchia is trying to score some Bloomberg & Soros funding.

    1. avatar matt in tx says:

      this, follow the money.

  10. avatar Ralph says:

    Who is this State Rep. Rafael Chinchilla guy and why is he smiling like he’s sitting on a vibrator?

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Pffffttttttttttt … snicker

  11. avatar NorincoJay says:

    Maybe they should ban abortion in those cities too. Stupid liberals.

  12. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    “… the gun control proponents with Gun Free UT have been demanding for the last two years.”

    For a moment there, I read “UT” as meaning Utah rather than the University of Texas. Since Utah came to mind, it is an excellent opportunity to point out the fact that campus carry in Utah is the law of the land and there have been ZERO instances of a licensed carrier accidentally/negligently harming someone or attacking someone.

    So, if real world experience tells us that no one suffers any harm (whether accidental, negligent, or on purpose), what is the rationale for banning the activity that has NEVER harmed anyone?

    Come on, everyone sing it with me! … Feeling, whoa whoa whoa feeling

  13. avatar LHW says:

    How about we ban idiots like this instead.

  14. avatar TexTed says:

    In an average session, Texas legislators will file over 10,000 bills and resolutions and motions. In the 2015/2016 session they filed a total of 11,356!

    Speaking strictly about House Bills (HB) and Senate Bills, last legislature they filed 6,276. Of those, 1,323 were passed. So only about 1 out of 5 stands a chance of even getting passed. Then they’ve got to get signed by Greg Abbott, a massive 2A supporter.

    There’s a long, long way to go.

  15. avatar Dan in CO says:

    “tailor some of the state-wide laws to suit their specific needs”

    They’re not needs. They’re wants or desires.

  16. avatar K Maiden says:

    As the Kalifornia infection spreads. Wake up folks. Stop this POO now.

  17. avatar dollup15 says:

    One correction on the point about Pennsylvania: state law does not permit Philadelphia to pass its own gun control ordinances, rather, it is state law itself that prohibits unlicensed open carry in “first class cities.” Everywhere else in Pennsylvania, it is legal to open carry without a license, but you need a license to carry concealed.

    1. avatar justaman says:

      You can carry openly in Philadelphia with a concealed carry permit.Don’t think though that the local police will treat you with kindness. I am not a proponent of open carry for myself but if another person chooses to I could not care less.

  18. avatar Smitty says:

    This is how the Democreeps allow crime to spread in a city and control the inhabitants with fear.

  19. avatar TyrannyOfEvilMen says:

    Texas needs to go to Constitutional carry of handguns. Period. And have a permit system for concealed carry as optional for people who want multi-state reciprocity.

    All free states should be doing this, regardless of what might eventually happen with the national reciprocity effort.

  20. avatar oldshooter says:

    If I understand HB560 correctly, it seems like “Lock ‘n Load” is on to something there. Since your statistical probability of being wrongfully shot by a police officer is many times higher (5-11 times higher, depending on where the study was done), than your probability of being wrongfully shot by an LTC licensee, it should actually be safer, at least statistically, for LTC licensees to carry in all those places, than it is for LEOs to do so!

    Of course, it is also statistically safer to drive through all intersections at the highest possible speed, since the probability of having an accident is greatest in intersections (that’s where most traffic accidents happen). So, obviously, if you drive though all intersections at 90 plus mph, you’ll minimize your time in the danger zones, and therefore be safer- LOL! You gotta love statistics!

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email