texas capitol building republic
Previous Post
Next Post

The Texas Senate has passed HB 1927 a permitless carry bill that was passed overwhelmingly by the House and Governor Greg Abbott has promised to sign into law. The bill needed the votes of all 18 Senate Republicans to pass and was cleared by a vote of 18-13.

That constitutional carry has finally gotten as far as it has is a result of intense pressure from Texas conservatives as well as gun rights orgs and supporters who have leaned on Senators to support the bill and Lt. Governor Dan Patrick to twist arms and get Republicans on board.

From the Texas Tribune . . .

Patrick has expressed reservations about permitless carry in the past. Ahead of the 2015 session, he said he did not think there was enough support among lawmakers or the public, a sentiment he reiterated in 2017 while citing law enforcement concerns with “anyone being able to walk down the street with a gun and they don’t know if they have a permit or not.”

With constitutional carry already the law in 20 other states (and progressing in Louisiana), Texas has been a gun rights laggard. So the pressure on Patrick and Senate Republicans to finally get something done this legislative session has been significant.

Getting all 18 GOP votes required some changes from the House bill.

The Sheriffs’ Association of Texas signaled tepid support on Wednesday when they sent a letter to Schwertner that outlined three key areas of the bill that required “critical, must-have clarifications and amendments.” Those tweaks, offered by Schwertner on the floor, strike from the bill a provision that would’ve expunged certain weapons-related charges on Texans’ criminal records, allow law enforcement officers to temporarily disarm a person who is detained and temporarily strip the permitless carry rights of people accused of certain violent crimes.

“With this language in the final version of the bill that protects law enforcement officers and the rights of law-abiding citizens, SAT supports HB 1927,” the sheriffs wrote.

We’re hearing, however, that changes the Senate made could be problematic in terms of passage in the House, but details are still emerging.

The changes the Senate made to the bill mean it will have to go back to the House. If the House accepts the changes and votes to pass the Senate version, it goes to Abbott for his signature. If the House objects to some or all of the changes, that will require a conference committee to reconcile the bills with new votes on the final product on both sides of the legislature.


As GOA Texas cautions, don’t celebrate yet. This from HB 1927’s author . . .

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Accept the amendments and get this bill signed. We can go back to get revisions in the future to strip anything that becomes a problem.
    Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the very good. This is a solid win and the closest Texas has gotten to Constitutional Carry for our almost purple state. Make Constitutional Carry will cause leftists to LEAVE TEXAS! (we can hope…)

    • I’ll second that motion, “Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the very good.”

      • None of the amendments are controversial. The question is whether one of the last two will be ruled “not germane” by the House parliamentarian (per House rules, you can’t add something to a passed bill that is a wholly different subject). If that is the ruling, the House can’t simply “accept” them. (The amendment deleting a section of the bill is plainly germane.). Given the lateness of the hour in the session, it likely means the bill is dead. (It could still go through conference, but very unlikely it will have enough time to be debated and passed again by both houses.)
        If this turns out to be the case, then the Texas 2A community has been had — the Senate will have added a “poison pill” amendment that allows them say say “see, we all voted for Constitutional Carry, but the House wouldn’t accept it,” and the House can say, “we passed CC, but the Senate added a poison pill that effectively killed the bill.” Ergo, the bill dies, everyone can claim it was somebody else’s fault, and nobody’s fingerprints are on the murder weapon and so nobody gets primaried.
        If the House rules an amendment non-germane, then whichever senator offered the non germane amendment is the traitor. These folks know what they are doing, and adding a non germane amendment would have been the coward’s way out.

        • Very true. Unfortunately we’ve elected several of these “cowards” through the years. Regardless I hope somehow it still passes.

        • How is giving police carte blanche to disarm anyone they detain, and stripping carry rights on the basis of mere accusation not controversial? Does 2A truly disappear that quickly without even so much as probable cause for a crime?

        • Dave:
          I’ve looked through the text of the floor amendments, and I don’t see the “carte blanche” authorizations you are apparently seeing.
          What *specific* floor amendments are you taking about, and what in them grants police the “carte blanche” authority you criticize? (As far as being disarmed if/while detained by police, i’m pretty sure that’s currently the law anyway.)

        • Being “detained”, unless I’m mistaken, is part of a progression from loose to arrested, I would expect to be disarmed if I were detained. Only time I have been disarmed was after being stopped because my vehicle’s inspection sticker was expired by one week, and when I declared that I was licensed and armed (as required by TX law) the dimbulb cop acted as though I had threatened to shoot him, reached into my pants pocket to take my gun and then continuously muzzled me with it while fooling around trying to unload it, while I SCREAMED at him to stop, afraid he was going to kill me. One of only a handful of times in my life I have crossed paths with someone who should have any job in the world except a cop, totally incompetent and absolutely arrogant about it.

      • Perfect. But…you know there was going to be a BUT right?

        I’m perplexed about the absolutism that many gun rightists who, seemingly, resist taking measures to inform an LE officer of their carry status if they come into contact with LE for any reason.

        I always inform an officer that I carry, tell him precisely where my weapon is and offer to cooperate in any fashion required or even preferred by him such that our interaction is without friction. I HAVE BEEN THANKED EVERY TIME BY THE OFFICER AND THE INTERACTION WENT WITHOUT ANY PROBLEM WHATSOEVER.

        Trust me when I say that every Marine’s formidable. That said, throughout my entire career as a Marine officer I did precisely that and was never harmed or even alarmed by the MPs or stateside LE.

        How about adopting a different attitude other than absolutism and help reassure an officer that he’s safe in your presence? It should be considered a common courtesy to LE!

        And, if you’ve not noticed they’re sensitive to disrespect and are leaving their profession in droves, just the opposite of what we should want.

        • How about respecting 5A?
          “Informing” and “forcible compulsion to inform” are very different things.
          And exercising a fundamental right, or “being formidable” by any other means, isn’t some sort of barely-acceptable sin that one must shamefacedly alert one’s betters to.

        • I understand your point but it’s got very little if anything to do with Constitutional Carry. LEO(s) are, or should be, trained to always initially consider a person armed. Yes advising them positively that you are is always appreciated. This also has very little if anything to do with most of the amendments cowardly mandated by the Senate to be accepted if the bill is to pass. In essence they’re sliding in red flag laws (thus reducing due process) in order for this to pass. This is cowardly, to say the least.

        • “isn’t some sort of barely-acceptable sin that one must shamefacedly alert one’s betters to.”

          I keep searching for the “why” in these discussions about disclosing being armed to an officer and I believe you, Sir, may have helped me understand a bit of the “why”. I appreciate your comment, as a consequence.

          Please feel free to correct me if I’m misinterpreting your post, but, the bit about “one’s betters” to me, at least, seems to suggest that you may feel that LE acts as if it was superior to you in some way. Simply stated, I don’t share that view of LE.

          Again, I’m grateful for this exchange of views. I value your opinion and I don’t intend to diminish your point of view with my response. I just view LE as one of us…and…that they have a very hard job which I don’t need to make even harder when in the rare instance I find myself interfacing with them.

        • GRA,

          I appreciate what appears to be you very much informed knowledge of the legislative process underway for constitutional carry legislation.

          However, my fellow armed citizen, my comments had almost nothing to do with legislation and had everything to do with how we interact with LE.

          That said, I learned some things from your comment that helped me better understand another topic and I appreciate that you posted.



        • We have many instances in PA, where informing an officer is not required, of people being mistreated after informing, having their gun dangerously mishandled during disarming, and even having their gun disassembled and returned to them in pieces.

    • Indeed, this is good news to hear that Constitutional Carry is close to being a reality in Texas, I figured it wasn’t even entertained here so it’s news to me.

    • The “shall issue” law has been modified to be better nearly every session since it was passed 25 years ago, first it had to be PASSED! Get this passed, make it better every year after.

      • Good point and I agree. I’ll also point out the better our 2nd. Amendment rights have improved the dirtier and more radical left the left has become towards those rights. The amendments added are some of the most cowardly yet aside from absolutely ignoring WE THE PEOPLE like they’ve done the last two sessions.

        I say pass it and get it signed but damn sure let them ALL know that we have not acquiesced to foregoing ANY of our constitutional rights in exchange. This is not a session of patriots selling their souls to secure full use of their rights.

  2. Well I certainly hope Texas gets constitutional carry.
    Constitutional carry? Some states have it , some states don’t. ? ? ?
    According to the constitution every state should be a constitutional carry state.
    I guess some states are not part of the The United States of America

    What a mess.

    • “I guess some states are not part of the The United States of America”

      Some states don’t act like they are part of my country, and some states don’t deserve to be.

  3. Can someone explain to me the following scenario. If a business only wants to allow people with a LTC to carry in their place and not allow people without a LTC; will they be able to do this? How? There are some people comfortable with letting only those who have been vetted by the state to carry. If there will not be an option to differentiate between LTC holders and non LTC holders then this law is going to have a negative impact on all of us who have a LTC.

    My goal is to be able to LEGALLY carry in as many places as possible. We’ve fought hard to be able to carry where we can now, I don’t want to be further restricted.

    • In Texas, property owners have the option of banning concealed carry, open carry or both by posting the required signs. I’m not aware of any provision in the current bill to ban only non-permitted carriers (though I could be wrong).

      As a practical matter, there’s no way to distinguish between permit holders and non-permit holders short of stopping everyone who walks into a store or restaurant and no one is going to do that.

      • I just don’t want to see a bunch of 30.06 & 30.07 signs pop up everywhere because property owners don’t want people who are not vetted carrying there.

        Currently I frequently carry where 30.06 signs are posted but would never un-holster there, no matter what. What good is it to be alive if I’m going to spend the rest of my life in jail.

        I carry in 30.06 places because of the walk between my truck and the building, which is where I’ll probably need it if I need it.

        • I do the same thing. To date I have never open carried but I have absolutely nothing against it if a person wishes to pursue this option. Exceptions to this are courts and medical facilities. It is not unheard of to find myself in a restaurant and realize only when leaving there was a 51% sign posted that I honestly missed. Upon realization I avoid such places in the future or leave my weapon in the vehicle secured while I go inside.

        • Violating a 30.06 is only a misdemeanor now. So if you need to use it , use it. In fact unless it is a special location ( hospital, school, etc ) violating a 30.06 is a class C misdemeanor with a max fine of 200 dollars and CAN NOT cause your permit to be revoked.

          So you would rather get shot than get a 200 dollar ticket ? Not me.

          Carrying past a sign in a hospital or school is also NOT a felony. It is a class a misdemeanor and will get you a serous fine and you can lose your permit for a few years.

        • UPDATE:

          There will now be 30.05 signs. Property owners will need to post three signs if they want to keep non-LTC and LTC people from carrying . 30.06 & 30.07 signs are only for license holders. 👍 🙂

        • Dan, the best fun available from that “$200 fine” you mentioned is the concept of setting aside $200, then carrying into every such establishment you find, waiting to see how long it takes to actually pay that fine. I have ignored 30.06 signs for over a decade, never the slightest problem, and before the $200 fine is applicable, I have to refuse to leave when discovered. Mind you, I carry *concealed*, and any business which strip searches all who wish to enter, will not be in business for long. As I say about many things, vis-a-vis 30.06 signs, just IGNORE them! I am still hoping that SOMEDAY I will be discovered after the main course and ordered to leave, which I will do immediately, not even stopping at the cash register, and laughing in the street about my free dinner.

      • The current bill makes some places ( college campuses for example ) permitted carry only. There is no “30.08” sign.

      • We had a flood of No Guns signs on businesses in MS for about a year after we passed permitless carry in 2016. Now it’s rare to see one on private business property. State owned/managed property is a different matter, but even there we’ve made progress after suing several Judges/mayors/police chiefs, etc. who thought they were omnipotent. Texas will likely see the same evolution, and they’ll get over the initial panic.

    • “If there will not be an option to differentiate between LTC holders and non LTC holders then this law is going to have a negative impact on all of us who have a LTC.”

      It will be no different than it is now – you already have the non-permitted carrying *today*, and the streets aren’t running rivers of blood.

      *Relax*. Plenty of states have gone through this already, and the sky hasn’t fallen. LE will (hopefully) deal with the legally prohibited caught carrying…

      • Difference SR is concerned with is that more businesses, duped by the propaganda about the unwashed masses now carrying, wild west shootouts, blood in the streets, etc., will be motivated to put up signs that the didn’t feel it necessary when only permitted people were [legally] carrying concealed. Seems likely a very small group that would be OK with licensees but not the general public, but even a small loss is a loss.

      • I have an LTC; Bring it the hell ON!!! I don’t see a disadvantage or a disrespect, CC is the ONLY Constitutional answer, what are we arguing about? By the time we get to 30 CC states, the Feds will be FORCED to begin considering whether states can ban anything.

    • This is wrong and a blatant LIE. The LTC option is purposely being left in place in the event we get national reciprocity, but still an ongoing option. To say the LTC holders in Texas will be made to look bad is a most wrong and ridiculous statement.

      That said, I’ll gladly sacrifice YOUR permit (and mine) for more freedom to be enjoyed by WE THE PROPLE any day.

  4. We have had permit less carry in Missouri for several years.
    Honest citizens are not a problem, criminals have always been a problem.
    Take it and move on.

  5. I was able to watch about 20 minutes worth of this today. The opposition seemed to genuinely not understand that criminals have been carrying guns for a very long time already. This would not change that.

    • It never ceases to amaze me how many people — many of them elected officials — actually think a permit requirement stops criminals from carrying guns.

      • I saw a version of this first hand when Florida was one of the first states passing ‘shall-issue’ in 1987 (? Or about then).

        The local mullet-wrapper ‘Letters To The Editor’ literally predicted gun battles for parking spot disputes and the streets turning into rivers running with blood.

        …and as we POTG knew already, none of that happened. (any more so than it already was happening, anyways.)

        Let ’em get their knickers in knot… 😉

      • Indeed, Sir. Restricting everyone as though they’re criminals is wrong. Restrictions that put criminals on the honor system are just hilarious.

      • Any restriction on a natural right is by definition NOT reasonable.

        “If violent crime is to be curbed, it is only the intended victim who can do it. The felon does not fear the police, and he fears neither judge nor jury. Therefore what he must be taught to fear is his victim.” Jeff Cooper

    • Opposition to permitless carry always invokes this bizarre class of people who are too irresponsible to be trusted carrying a gun, yet are responsible enough that they follow the current law.

  6. You have to fill out a form 4473 and your FFL contacts some stranger to determine whether you can purchase or not. Added to those hoops is paying hard earned money for the firearm and the taxes on it and associated accessories. And after all of that you have to get a special permission slip from Big Brother just to wear a coat over the aforementioned firearm.

    Should you not have your extra special permit you must leave your firearm locked in your vehicle while you go into a store where you can bet the farm at least one or more of the “shoppers” is a felon who can do very bad things to your defenseless behind all while one of their pals breaks into your vehicle and takes off with your firearm. With that said, Pass it now Texas.

  7. “temporarily strip the permitless carry rights of people accused of certain violent crimes“

    Feels like red flag.

      • I guess some red-staters are fine with “Stop and Disarm” in the fashion of “Stop and Frisk”. It’s not like detainment’s ever been misused, abused, or wrongfully claimed…

        • I’m not OK with that. There’s already case law that affords that to an extents it’s Constitutional. IMHO the NY stop and frisk implemented under Giuliani is unconstitutional.

  8. Get in touch with your reps and lets tell them to pass the dang bill. Weve come to far to lose it now.


    • Fine then keep it for you but don’t get in the way of changing it for others that don’t share your paranoid and narrow-minded view of the same.

  10. Kill it. Kill it with fire. I am all for constitutional carry but the extra provisions to stop the LEO organizations from wettring and soiling themselves are unacceptable.

    To those saying pass it now and fix it later, you guys got rid of the bullshit prohibitions on carrying in schools hospitals later, right? Yeah, exactly.

    We had a technically similar situation here in PA many years ago where FOAC (may they rest in peace) pulled out all the stops to get castle doctrine passed. They got it but not quite what they and we all wanted. Well, that’s OK, we’ll come back and fix it later. Guess what? Never got fixed later. The Republican governor got replaced by a democrat, largely due to a scandal at Penn State and a ridiculous gas tax. Any hope of doing anything more than stopping new gun control ceased for the foreseeable future.

    So kill this fucking thing, let the republicans know how you feel about it and them, and come back to the drawing board later. Or put pressure on them to fix it in conference and get it done. It is exactly as LKB said; the politicians know what they are doing. What they are doing is setting up a scenario where they can kill this and everyone can point the finger at everyone else, or they can pass it with absolutely revolting anti rights provisions in it.

    Another course may be to pass as is and then challenge the offending provisions in court, but you would a lawyer to look at that and tell you if it is a viable strategy.

    • I have to say I fully agree with you and equally understand your points. It’s sad that those with the most power seemingly are always the most devious and deceiving.

  11. All a ruse. Will stay “in conference” for the next 25 days and then die. Everyone can claim they “supported” CC without actually passing it. Texas will NEVER have constitutional carry.

    • Rawther defeatist, are we not? We just need to have a continuous read on who is voting for what, then if our wishes are in the majority it will happen, if not it should not.

  12. Incrementalism is how we lost our rights. And incrementalism is how we are going to get our rights back. We lost our rights over a long. And we will get our rights back, and it will take a long time for that to happen. An all or nothing approach only makes you a “proud loser”.

    Constitutional carry at the state level is a big win. And each state, internally, is going to have to fight that battle on their own.

    Don’t be like the worthless Libertarians. Politicians are afraid of losing an election. You need to attend meetings and vote. It let’s them know they need to vote your way. If they want to keep their job.

    Why It’s OK Not To Vote – Katherine Mangu-Ward, video 1 hour long

Comments are closed.