They’re finally on their way. Go here www.iwear8.com and check out these virtually unbreakable sunglasses. Look at the colors, style, and watch the videos. Very cool.
I am cautiously optimistic that we will finally have an administration that will instruct the ATF to enforce the 2nd amendment rather than obstruct it. The following was posted on Texas Law Shield Facebook page…
Advocates of hearing protection are pursuing new legislation to make suppressors easier to buy, and a key backer is Donald Trump, Jr. Watch what he has to say in a video interview with SilencerCo, and click to read comments from an Independent Program Attorney about the measures.
So the Texas Legislature is back in session, and once again they will ponder firearm policy. the following is what was pre-filed by both parties of our state government. This is the good the bad and the ugly. Thank God that Texas has a great Governor, so we will most likely not have to be concerned about the bad…
On Tuesday, January 10, the Texas Legislature will convene in Austin for its 85th Regular Session. Pre-filing of legislation began in mid-November. Since then, dozens of pro-Second Amendment measures have already been introduced and received bill numbers, including but not limited to:
Senate Bill 16, by Sen. Robert Nichols (R-Jacksonville) & Sen. Joan Huffman (R-Houston) eliminates original and renewal application fees for a License to Carry (LTC). The fee for an original license is $140, and it is one of the highest in the country and has not changed since 1995, despite advances in technology and passage of laws streamlining the license application and issuing process.
Senate Bill 133 by Sen. Brandon Creighton (R-Conroe) establishes a Second Amendment sales tax holiday, exempting firearms and hunting supplies from the state sales tax during the last Saturday and Sunday in August before hunting season starts.
Senate Bill 263 by Rep. Charles Perry (R-Lubbock) removes the minimum caliber requirement for the License to Carry proficiency exam. Currently, individuals seeking a handgun license are required to test with a .32 handgun or larger caliber.
Senate Bill 349 by Sen. Creighton clarifies the definition of “school-sponsored activity” in the Penal Code to avoid the establishment of roving gun-free zones in buildings or areas that are not owned by or under the control of an educational institution.
House Bill 56 by Rep. Dan Flynn (R-Van) would allow first responders with LTCs to carry in prohibited and posted locations while engaged in official duties.
House Bill 339 by Rep. Dustin Burrows (R-Lubbock) eliminates original and renewal LTC application fees (similar to SB 16).
House Bill 375 by Rep. Jonathan Stickland (R-Bedford) would allow individuals who are not prohibited by law from possessing a firearm to carry without a license.
House Bill 403 by Rep. Drew Springer (R-Muenster) removes the minimum caliber requirement for the LTC proficiency exam (similar to SB 263).
House Bill 485 by Rep. Pat Fallon (R-Frisco) establishes a Second Amendment sales tax holiday (similar to SB 133).
House Bill 560 by Rep. Springer would eliminate “gun-free zones” for persons possessing valid LTCs.
House Bill 606 by Rep. Springer provides immunity to property or business owners who elect not to post their premises off-limits to LTCs with 30.06 and/or 30.07 signs.
On the other side of the coin, former New York City Mayor and billionaire Michael Bloomberg and his national gun control groups Everytown for Gun Safety/Moms Demand Action (along with their state partners at Texas Gun Sense), spent the interim plotting to bring misguided proposals to restrict your Second Amendment rights to Texas lawmakers. Don’t be fooled by attempts to package these bills as “sensible public safety measures” or “common-sense solutions to gun violence” – most, if not all of them are straight out of Bloomberg’s anti-gun playbook. Those measures include, but are not limited to, the following:
Senate Bill 221 by Sen. Jose Menendez (D-San Antonio) prohibits the transfer of a firearm to a person the transferor knows to be listed in the terrorist screening database maintained by the FBI – a secret government list that neither the state nor any individual has access to.
Senate Bill 222 by Sen. Menendez designates June as “Gun Violence Awareness Month.” New York – home of gun bans, magazine restrictions and Everytown’s billionaire financier Bloomberg – is the only state to have adopted similar legislation, which gun control groups have used as a platform to promote themselves and their positions.
House Bill 111 by Rep. Joe Moody (D-El Paso) requires the Department of Public Safety to create a “firearms safety educational program” involving the development and publishing of secure gun storage pamphlets to be distributed through federal firearm licensed dealers (paid for out of LTC program funds.) This is already required under federal law and the firearms industry offers free gun lock and safety information distribution to law enforcement departments across the country.
House Bill 191 by Rep. Diego Bernal (D-San Antonio) reduces the minimum size, lettering and possibly the language requirements for 30.06 signs that have been in effect for over 20 years, and require them to be made available for download on DPS’ website. The net effect would be less effective notice for LTCs and more locations being posted off-limits to license holders. (The same requirements would apply to 30.07 signs as well.)
House Bill 246 by Rep. Raphael Anchia (D-Dallas) returns “No Carry” signs to the days of the pictogram. The proliferation of such signs immediately after passage of Texas’ concealed carry law more than two decades ago was what lead to the creation of the more uniform, consistent and recognizable 30.06 signs in the first place.
House Bill 255 by Rep. Anchia expands prohibited locations in statute for LTCs to include recreational areas and venues such as indoor or outdoor arenas, stadiums, golf courses, automobile racetracks, amphitheaters, auditoriums, theaters, museums, zoos and civic or convention centers.
House Bill 259 by Rep. Anchia restricts the private transfer of firearms at gun shows – a favorite target of the gun control crowd – by requiring every transaction to be conducted through a licensed dealer involving extensive government paperwork and payment of an undetermined fee.
House Bill 282 by Rep. Anchia & House Bill 391 by Rep. Donna Howard (D-Austin) allow public institutions of higher education to “opt-out” of Texas’ campus carry statute, effectively gutting the law the Legislature adopted just last session.
House Bill 291 by Rep. Eric Johnson (D-Dallas) & House Bill 466 by Rep. Anchia, respectively, ban open carry by LTCs in the City of Dallas and allow municipalities with populations over 750,000 to “opt-out” of Texas’ open carry law.
The deadline for introduction of bills is March 10. Your NRA-ILA will keep you posted as more legislation affecting gun owners and sportsmen is filed and as the measures listed above receive committee referrals and hearing schedules. In the meantime, you can contact your state lawmakers and tell them where you stand on the aforementioned bills.
Find out who your State Representative and State Senator are by clicking here.
Contact information for House members can be found here.
Contact information for State Senators can be found here.
This is not exactly constitutional carry, but perhaps the best we will get for now.
Legislation As Introduced Would Eliminate License to Carry Fees
Your NRA-ILA applauds Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick and state Senator Robert Nichols (R-Jacksonville) for prioritizing and pre-filing legislation for the 85th regular session to address License To Carry (LTC) fees in Texas. Sen. Joan Huffman (R-Houston), chair of the Senate State Affairs Committee, will co-author the bill with Sen. Nichols.
This is important legislation for the 2017 Texas Legislative Session — License To Carry (LTC) fees in the Lone Star State are some of the highest in the nation. No hard-working, law-abiding Texan should be priced out of the ability to exercise his or her right to self-defense.
Sen. Nichols pre-filed the measure today and it has been assigned a coveted low bill number, Senate Bill 16, indicating its priority status for Lt. Gov. Patrick. An original License To Carry in Texas currently costs $140 — a fee which has not changed since the state’s Right To Carry law took effect 20 years ago, despite advances in technology and the passage of several laws streamlining the application process.
SB 16 will allow honest citizens at all income levels to have equal access to this vital personal protection option. Please thank Lt. Gov. Patrick for making this issue a priority for the upcoming session and Sen. Nichols and Sen. Huffman for working to pass it. Your NRA-ILA will keep you posted on the bill’s progress once the Texas Legislature convenes on January 10, 2017.
After going to the Round Rock TGI Friday’s on University Ave Wednesday 3/16/2016, I sent their corporate representative the following email letter:
I went to the Fridays on University Ave in Round Rock, Texas yesterday. I noticed that there is now a 30.06 sign posted, therefore I will not be back. As you may or may not know, a 30.06 sign prohibits licensed handgun owners from carrying concealed in an establishment;
1) Criminals will ignore the signage, the fact that they are criminals means that they break the law.
2) In recent history, every mass shooting happened in a gun free zone.
3) As criminals will ignore the signage, you are asking me, my family, friends, neighbors and guests to be victims, when criminals come to your establishment to do crime.
4) If you do not believe that criminals will come to do crime, what is the point of the sign, as law abiding licensed holders do not commit crimes with their handguns.
If you believe that criminals will follow your wishes on the sign, why not put up a sign that states “no criminals allowed”?
5) I have been vetted by the FBI, ATF and the State of Texas as a Licensed Instructor, NRA pistol instructor and Firearms dealer (all license holders have been vetted by the FBI and the State of Texas). I doubt that you can say that of many of your customers.
The response was rapid, explaining that this particular restaurant is a franchise, not a company establishment. However, they will gladly forward my concerns to the general manager of that restaurant immediately. This evening (3/17) I heard from Larry Fletcher, the restaurant’s general manager. He first stated that he is a license holder and the 30.06 sign decision was not his. I pointed out that as a license holder he should have known that the sign should have been conspicuously posted, facing the outside, instead of being on the inside, where a person would already be inside with their firearm before seeing it. However, a license holder should already be familiar with my points in the above letter and object to such a sign. He then stated that the reason for the sign is the bar. Again, a license holder should know that an establishment that serves alcohol gets a 51% sign when their revenues from alcohol served for consumption on premises exceeds 51% of all revenue. He concluded by thanking me for my concerns, but the business has made its decision.
So everyone should understand that Friday’s trusts a criminal to obey a sign posted instructing people to ender unarmed, but they do not trust law abiding License to Carry holders that have been vetted by the FBI and DPS. They should ask Panera’s in Abdingdon, Maryland how that worked out for them. I am recommending to all concerned people to avoid this restaurant until such time as they remove the 30.06 sign
Anti-gun Panera bread has asked its customers to leave their guns at home. Apparently the criminal in Maryland that just shot a police officer at the Abingdon location did not ask Panera their policy first, imagine that. Another shooting at a location with no armed citizens to protect themselves. Even the police are not safe in these locations. It’s time to do away with gun free zones, the criminals will never adhere to policies or laws about them…
The ex-wife of a man who fatally shot two Harford County deputies called police to alert them to his presence at a Panera Bread in Abingdon before they responded to the scene Wednesday, her sister said.
David Brian Evans’ ex-wife called police to report that she had spotted him at the restaurant just before lunch time Wednesday, said Patty Sullivan, whose sister, Elizabeth, is Evans’ ex-wife. Sullivan believes Evans had shot her sister in 1998 and had never been caught by authorities.
“He was on the run,” Sullivan said. “This was the first time she had seen him in the area.”
Sullivan said her sister feared for her family, who lived only walking distance away from the Panera.
Evans, the only suspect named by Harford County Sheriff Jeff Gahler in the fatal shooting of two deputies, died at the scene.
Police were familiar with Evans in Harford County, but Gahler did not go into detail Wednesday.
In April 2015, police in Maitland, Fla. encountered Evans sleeping in a Ford Taurus in a parking lot. It looked to the officer as though Evans had been living in the car — “trash everywhere, dirty clothes on the seats, and a strong odor of body sweat,” the officer wrote in a report.
As the office questioned Evans he began fumbling around for his keys and he sped off, according to the report. Evans fled at 70 mph and police broke of the pursuit. He was charged with several traffic offenses, but never showed up for court, according to online records.
So on Friday, 1/29/2016, I went to Half Price Books (HPB) with my daughter to peruse the selection. For many years HPB was a weekly destination for me and I have spent much money in their store. I have always carried while there and never had any issues. However, upon approaching the store this time, I spied not only a 30.07 sign, which doesn’t alarm me, as they are going up everywhere, but also a 30.06 sign as well. So I ponder this situation for a while wondering why HPB suddenly believes that they must stop all law abiding citizens from carrying in their store. Then it hits me. In the current economic state, there is little opportunity for criminals. So either because they are bored or just attempting to better themselves, they have turned to reading. The problem of course, is that they are criminals, and as such, they have no library card, therefore they must shoplift at Half Price Books in order to better their lives and join the ranks of the working.
While I do not object to them joining the work force, I find it odd that HPB would afford these criminals such opportunity at my personal expense. I did not see armed security guards or notice of insurance covering me should the unspeakable actually happen. How can they ask me, their loyal customer to become a potential unarmed victim? Does Half Price Books believe that they are making their store safer somehow? As they sell many books about guns and books with much gun violence, it seems a bit hypocritical to ban them from their store. After all, if the criminals are reading these books, isn’t HPB actually responsible for at least some of the violent crime perpetuated by these criminals? I realized that instead of posting 30.06 and 30.07 signs that HPB really should have posted a “No Criminals Allowed” sign. Seeing that criminals will always obey these posted signs about proprietors wishes, it seems that HPB could accomplish the same thing without offending legal License to carry Holders.
My belief is that what HPB has actually accomplished is to send loyal customers who wish to legally exercise their 2nd Amendment rights to shop at their competitors. I personally wish to shop locally and support the local community, however HPB has caused me to look to the internet for my future reading material, so their ridiculous liberal policy has done nothing but weaken their bottom line at the expense of my friends and neighbors, as I have already explained to HPB that I will not be back as long as those signs remain…
This winter, while global warming is making it extremely cold throughout the country, you should be pleased to know that your politicians are attempting to fight this phenomenon and take the chill out of the air by concentrating all their efforts on warm and fuzzy issues. The so called gun control issue that they are kicking around is a feel good issue, for them if not for you. As we know it is really gun rights control that they are trying to wrestle away from you, though if they could they’d take the gun as well. But all this talk of “gun control” begs the question, to what end? Assuming that laws and regulations are passed in order to accomplish something (for the good of the people), what pray-tell will any of these proposed new regulations accomplish? I offer that they will accomplish nothing good for the people. For instance, requiring background checks on private sales. Again, assuming that the goal would be to catch criminals attempting to purchase firearms, the futility becomes obvious that criminals will not subject themselves to background checks and either purchase firearms on the black market, or just steal them. After all, they are criminals with reputations to consider. So by adding more staff, this regulation will accomplish growing the government, at least that segment of the economy is doing well.
What about so called “assault rifles”? What makes this rifle more assaulting than a shotgun or lever action rifle? The deadliness of the firearm is directly proportional to the users skill. What would banning such ubiquitous firearms accomplish? It would serve in making sure that only the criminals in America possessed them.
How about adding 10 years to all sentences when a firearm was involved in the crime? Well, that is what the aggravated means in a criminal charge, for example aggravated assault. This is already on the books and we do not need any more redundancy in the law. Or perhaps one of my new favorites, the left has started to talk about training as a measure as to who should have a firearm. An individual should have police level training before they can carry in public. Most people take a driver training course once in their lifetime, but drive everyday. It is an activity that all Americans seem to be lacking the skill required to do well. And while more people get killed by vehicles every year than by guns, our politicians know it is not a feel good subject to require more driver training in order to maintain the public safety. In some states, such as Missouri (misery?) a person 18 years old in the military is deemed to young to have a license to carry a firearm. The soldier can go over seas, risk his or her life for country, but may not carry a firearm here. I wonder how many criminals go to the shooting range regularly to keep their skills sharp enough to carry a firearm. Whether a marksman or a novice, sometimes you have to just point and shoot to protect yourself from those that will ignore any law or regulation that our esteemed politicians will pass. But that’s not a warm and fuzzy conversation to have.
Our government and those on the left seem to ave forgotten why we have a 2nd amendment, it is to protect ourselves from them, a tyrannical government. The fact that today we need to protect ourselves from criminals as well, due to drugs and a poor economy, just underscores the need for all law abiding citizens to exercise their right to carry. Now the government could try to fix the economy, our inner cities, get people to work and out of gangs and crime, but that would not be warm or fuzzy, would take real work and not necessarily make them feel good, as they would be depended on less by the people.
So when the temperature drops and you get a chill,remember that your government working diligently to keep you warm by being all warm and fuzzy so you can wrap yourself up in them. I just hope they don’t research the carbon footprint of a spent bullet.
Open Carry PC 30.07 Sign Restrictions
Penal Code 30.07 restricts open carry on There is a new sign that restricts open carry on a posted premise.
Section 30.07 to read as follows:
Sec. 30.07. TRESPASS BY LICENSE HOLDER WITH AN OPENLY CARRIED HANDGUN.
(a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:
(1) openly carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and
(2) received notice that:
(A) entry on the property by a license holder openly carrying a handgun was forbidden; or
(B) remaining on the property while openly carrying a handgun was forbidden and failed to depart.
(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.
(c) In this section:
(1) “Entry” has the meaning assigned by Section 30.05(b).
(2) “License holder” has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035(f).
(3) “Written communication” means:
(A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: “Pursuant to Section 30.07, Penal Code (trespass by license holder with an openly carried handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (handgun licensing law), may not enter this property with a handgun that is carried openly”; or
(B) a sign posted on the property that:
(i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
(ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and
(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public at each entrance to the property.
(d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(e) It is an exception to the application of this section that the property on which the license holder openly carries the handgun is owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.
(f) It is not a defense to prosecution under this section that the handgun was carried in a shoulder or belt holster.
A 30.07 sign only restricts the open carrying in that premises, and a 30.06 sign only restricts concealed carrying in that premises. Both signs are required to restrict all carrying in that premises.
Okay, it’s about time to spout off regarding the latest nonsense about gun violence. It seems that all people wishing to talk about gun violence refer to gun control as the only possible answer to this violence. Well gun control is really the act of controlling your gun, to me it means using both hands and eyes whenever possible. Now, as the government cannot control my gun, while it is in my possession, do they really mean gun confiscation as a means to control it? Personally, I believe that those that are anti-gun, as mislead as they are, really mean gun rights control. There are 300 million-400million guns in the US. If we cannot deport 11 million illegal aliens, how can it be possible to confiscate that many firearms?
I heard Bill O’Reilly call for gun registration last night, his reasoning, we register cars don’t we? Hello Bill, the only reason to register a vehicle is so the government can collect taxes and hold that registration over your head to act the way they want you to. Obama wants all people that sell at least 2 guns in a year to register as dealers, in order to force background checks. Does registering vehicles stop DWI or curtail accidents somehow? The last time I checked, more people die in vehicles each year than by firearms. Must you become a dealer if you sell 2 vehicles in a calendar year? Or what about background checks when purchasing a vehicle, or perhaps renting one? If you’re a known substance abuser, then you are declined the purchase or rental. Not good for the industry or our economy, but great for safety on our roads. What crime would registering a firearm stop? All firearms purchased legally can be traced to the last purchaser today with the current rules irregardless of registration. Criminals will not register their guns, regardless of the law. Those for registration of firearms truly do not understand the rules as they exist.
The talking heads state that 80% of Americans favor background checks when purchasing a firearm, and while I do not oppose them, I wonder to what end. The government wants to import tens of thousands of Syrian refugees that we have absolutely no way of vetting. The FBI states that not only do the databases not exist, if they did, there’s no information to peruse in order to vet these people. However, somehow this Administration and those on the left think background checks will work, even when there is no negative information on the individual to date. And so far as I know, all the mass shootings recently were by firearms that were originally purchased legally. Are we going to allow others to report unsubstantiated opinions to the authorities, then the authorities will use that information to keep you from passing a background check?
It is time to stop talking about gun control and start talking about gun rights control. Every person should make this distinction when conversing or debating the issue. If safety were really at the core of this matter, then as in Switzerland everyone would have a gun. It is a fact that criminals do not obey the law, thus they are criminals, so any new legislation or regulation would be ignored by them. It is also true that most criminals are cowards and would not put themselves in a position of likely harm. If most of the population was armed, the criminals would not be so bold. The proof is to look at each and every mass shooting recently. What do they have in common? Every single one was in a gun free zone. Also true is that crime is of an economic nature. The worse the economy, the more crime and vise-versa. Therefore what the government can do is to pass legislation to help business grow the economy, such as tax cuts. I would like to see the study of violent crime in America after tax cuts and a growing economy.
The other source of recent gun violence is terrorism. Terrorism is political, not economical. Terrorists have a death wish that we will not arrest, they kill in name of their beliefs. We generally don’t get a warning before they attack, nor do they declare themselves terrorists when entering our country or purchasing a firearm. I believe that the best we can do grant them their death wish. something we cannot do if this government disarms us. Let us save our bacon fat, fill our hollow point bullet with it, then help these terrorists to leave our world. They have been at war with the entire world since the day that Mohammad proclaimed himself a prophet. We will not defeat them ourselves, therefore we at least have to keep ourselves safe in our own country.
Just some additional thoughts on this subject:
Those that want to disarm us, protect themselves with armed guards
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns
When seconds count, the police are only minutes away
And as Thomas Jefferson said “An armed society is a polite society”