Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

Permitless carry passes

It was nice to dream for a minute that the Republicans would fumble the ball short of the goal line on this, but it was never realistic.

A bill to allow the permitless carrying of handguns in Texas is on the brink of reaching Gov. Greg Abbott’s desk after the state House and Senate reached a compromise on the bill.

The author of the legislation, Rep. Matt Schaefer, R-Tyler, announced the deal in a statement Friday afternoon, and the Senate sponsor, Sen. Charles Schwertner, R-Georgetown, issued a subsequent statement also acknowledging an agreement. Just before midnight on Sunday, the House approved the deal in an 82-62 vote. The Senate is expected to approve the new version soon.

“By working together, the House and Senate will send Gov. Abbott the strongest Second Amendment legislation in Texas history, and protect the right of law-abiding Texans to carry a handgun as they exercise their God-given right to self-defense and the defense of their families,” Schaefer said.


The text of the compromise was released Sunday. It keeps intact a number of changes that the Senate made to the House bill to assuage concerns from the law enforcement community, including striking a provision that would have barred cops from questioning someone based only on their possession of a handgun. The compromise version also preserves a Senate amendment beefing up the criminal penalty for a felon caught carrying to a second-degree felony with a minimum of five years in prison. Other Senate changes that survived was a requirement that the Texas Department of Public Safety offer a free online course on gun safety.

Once the Senate approves the agreed-upon version, it will head to Abbott’s desk. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said in a statement that the HB 1927 compromise “will become eligible for a final vote early next week.” Abbott has said he will sign the bill.

See here for the previous entry. The main hope was that the hardliners in the House would refuse to budge on any of those amendments, preferring to torpedo the whole thing on stubborn principle than give an inch. In the end, I suspect it wasn’t that hard to pressure them into knuckling under, or even if pressure was needed. The Republicans got some protection against the ravening hordes of their primary voters, and the Democrats got an issue that polls a lot better for them than it does for the Rs. They also get to talk about broken promises, as Rep. Joe Moody did:

Give that a listen and share it with your friends. And remember this all next year. The Chron has more.

Related Posts:


  1. policywonqueria says:


    Re: “Democrats got an issue that polls a lot better for them than it does for the Rs.”

    Overall, the poll findings may favor the Dems, but that doesn’t necessarily make “open carry” into a viable campaign issue, especially when it’s already “the law”. – Fait accompli.

    Additionally, it is likely that the amount of support or opposition in surveys is affected by question wording. Survey results should be interpreted with caution because questionnaire items can be awkward and confounding, and don’t necessarily match up neatly with the policy (or proposed policy) at issue.

    Consider, for example, the following proposition:

    “Allowing legal gun owners over the age of 21 to carry handguns in most public places in Texas without licenses or training.”

    1. “Allowing legal gun owners …” – If they are already legal, they are presumably “allowed” in some sense of the concept, so the opening phrase already invites agreement. Then come two limiting factors at the end of the sentence, but the group of “legal gun owners” surely includes those who already have licenses. Better wording would be “even if they do not have a license” because that would direct the focus to the substance of the contemplated policy change: getting rid of the licensing requirement. And that could be highlighted by putting it at the beginning of the question: “Should owners of handguns who are not currently licensed …”. Then there is also the question of concealed vs. open-carry. These are different policy options, and it would therefore be warranted to gauge public opinion with separate questionnaire items.

    2. Why include age 21 in the question? – Polls typically include the 18-21 segment, so this subgroup is being asked about whether their age group should be discriminated against/treated differently, which changes the nature of the policy question for them. At the minimum, their responses should be reported separately, and compared to the other age groups, with appropriate caveats. If the overall sample size is small, this age group may not be adequately represented, however, which would affect the margin of error. You might was well exclude them from the analysis.

    3. “Most public places” – Vague formulation. You couldn’t write that into law because such a law wouldn’t provide notice to the public as when the same act is legal/illegal. In the poll, it’s entirely up to the respondent to interpret “most” and the same goes for “public” places. Not a good way to ascertain how much support there is for which particular variant (of several options) of an open-carry regime. For example, should shop owners, employers, still be able to prohibit guns on their premises?

    4. “without licenses or training”. These two conditions are here stated in the disjunctive (‘or’ rather than ‘and’), which is confounding. Would completion of training substitute for a license, such as an optional on-line instructional video? As for eliciting policy views, there are really two separate issues here: (a) Should a license be required (which can be combined with required gun-safety training or not, and currently is)? (b) Should hand gun owners be able to open-carry without training? And if training is required, how could it be implemented without a process that resembles licensing?

  2. Manny says:

    Policy wonk – the poll may be flawed to favor Democrats; therefore, the fascist/racist/republican party can do no wrong.

    What exactly is the point you are trying to make, Policy Wonk? Is there a point in your argument, or are you like the guy that likes to smell his own fart? You could certainly make that point about me if you choose to parrot.

  3. Bill Daniels says:

    “We believe in freedom:

    From government interference in our private lives and personal decisions where they do not harm another;
    From discrimination based on race, ethnicity, national origin, disability, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity/expression, or any other improper grounds;
    To exercise civil and human rights; and
    Of religion and individual conscience.”

    Constitutional carry honors both the spirit and the letter of the Texas Democrat Party platform.

    ~eliminates government interference in the private lives of law abiding Texans to defend themselves

    ~ends the need for discriminatory ID requirements for CCW permits, because blacks and Mexicans have a hard time getting driver’s licenses

    ~the right to self defense is a civil and human right

    ~the right to self defense is one of individual conscience…..Texans can choose for themselves whether to avail that right

  4. Jason Hochman says:

    With the police de-funded and violent crime soaring and our leaders unable to fix it, everyone will need to have various means of self preservation readily at hand. Locally, the clearance rate for HPD remains woefully low.

  5. Manny says:

    The fascists/racists/republicans are looney as heck—more guns, more safety. Never underestimate the stupidity of the republicans. Jason, the crime clearance is low throughout the state. But your hate of blacks seems to cloud your ability to see clearly.

    So, Bill, if the police unjustly attack a person, said person should have the right to shoot them?

    If the legislature passes a law that infringes on my rights, I have the right to shoot them?

    Is there a line somewhere in the sand that you have in mind, Bill?

    I hate having to wear seat belts, have my car inspected, pay the state for the right to drive my car, register a vehicle, pay property taxes, income taxes, etc…

    Mexicans in Mexico have no problem getting a driver’s license. Nor do Blacks have a problem obtaining a driver’s license. That is your racist, hateful stupidity coming forward to properly identify you to the other racist idiots that may read your stupidity.

  6. Jason Hochman says:

    Manny, it sounds like you are the one who is a racist. Why do you constantly mention Black people in regards to the rise in crime.

    One of the big problems in the county is that Ogg, who is clearly a racist. I see how fast Minneapolis convicted Chauvin in less than one year , for murder no less, a hard case to make in that circumstance. He will probably be executed before the end of summer. Meanwhile Ogg sat ossified like the Allied generals when France fell, doing nothing while the cops who killed the Tuttles were still running loose on the street. It took federal prosecutors to finally charge them, and they are still getting pensions from us, because Reformer Turner never did fire them.

    We should impeach Turner-Ogg and send them on a fact finding mission to Minneapolis to learn about reform.

  7. Lobo says:


    Apparently the Texas Democratic Party can’t even bring itself to say that they are against discrimination on the basis of sex.


    Federal ERA, Section 1. “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.”

    Texas ERA as embedded in Art 1, Section 3a, of Texas Constitution: “Equality under the law shall not be denied or abridged because of sex, race, color, creed, or national origin. This amendment is self-operative.”

  8. Jason Hochman says:

    You can’t discriminate based on sex because it is a figmentary category concocted by the Patriarchs.

    Speaking of gun control and police reform and racism, they are having a big thing today for the first George Floyd anniversary.

    I was sad that there was not any national recognition just last month for Officer Breann Leath, (who looks like she is Black) and was gunned down (by a Black man) and died at age 24 while responding to a domestic violence call in April of 2020.

    Of course the rising domestic violence was caused by the Fauci Virus. If they can determine his connection to the virus, I believe he should be tried and sent to the federal death row in Terre Haute. I’m against the death penalty, but sometimes there is nothing else to be done. President Juarez was loath to send a firing squad to take out Maximilian, but what else can you do sometimes.

  9. Bill Daniels says:


    People of color have a difficult time getting driver’s licenses here in the US because of unconscionable systemic racism. You don’t get to just spout hateful and racist talking points like “blacks and Mexicans can get an ID just like everyone else.” And just so we’re clear on terms, I’m using Mexican just like people use Coke. What kind of Coke do you mean? Dr Pepper, Pepsi, 7Up, etc.? The fact that that offends you shows you are the xenophobe, shows your hatred of being lumped in with Guatemalans, Hondurans, Salvadorians, etc. You hate it because you are a racist, and think you’re better than the people who come from those countries. Admit it to yourself. That’s exactly why I use the term with you….your reaction shows exactly who and what you are.

    “Texas Democrats will not ignore the unconscionable systemic disparities that ultimately leave us all behind. We stand together and amplify each other’s voices for a more equitable, just, and free Texas.”

    Did you read that, Manny? Blacks and Mexicans are suffering from unconscionable systemic disparities that ultimately leave us all behind. Shame on you for pretending that’s not true.

  10. policywonqueria says:


    Here is substance-free fart-quality political news for you:

    On Monday, Bush tweeted a picture of himself on the phone in the car, saying: “Great to speak with President Trump to discuss the future of Texas and how we are keeping up the fight to put America first.”

    Hoping this will meet or exceed your and Joel’s standards. – Enjoy.

    In addition to the breaking Trump-endorsement-coming-soon teaser pre-announcement, windscreen screen shot imagery provided for the visually-eager

  11. Manny says:

    Bill, you are a racist, but your stupidity made me laugh trying to justify using the word Mexican to describe Americans.

    Bill, you did not answer as to the right to defend oneself if a police officer is touching a gun and one fears for their lives and shoots them.
    ~the right to self defense is a civil and human right.”

    I don’t see blacks and crime tied together; I see Jason and hate of blacks tied together. You can’t help yourself; racists will be racists.

    Bill, I don’t read the Democratic Party platform. But whatever is in there is a hell of a lot better than kneeling before the orange buffoon, the god you people worship.

    Policy Wonk – You missed the point of the question, but long-winded people tend to have nothing to say.

    Jason, how do more guns make for more safety or fewer killings? By the way, carrying a gun does not make one less likely to be robbed or mugged. Criminals don’t tend to tell you, and I am going to rob you, defend yourself. In fact, if I was a criminal and I wanted a gun to use in a crime, and I saw you with one, I would walk behind you and do whatever I wanted to do to get your gun. That is how criminals operate.

  12. policywonqueria says:


    This just in from THE HILL:

    “It is unclear when Trump will announce his endorsement.”

    The point: Example of annoying hype passing for news (and continuing Trump obsession on the part of the media)

    Manny: There is at least one valid point in what you say: The person with gun plus criminal intent has the advantage by being able to pick the place, time, and victim to attack. So, carrying your own gun doesn’t do much. But more guns around will predictably increase the incidence of accidental and otherwise improper usage, especially under unclear circumstance of threat perception, with resulting increase in casualties and deaths.


    One constructive response would be to improve the organ-harvesting infrastructure.

    At least the additional wasted human lives will benefit those on the transplant lists (demand typically exceeds supply) if the half-dead shooting victims are retrieved and processed more promptly.

    You can do something good for surviving humanity: Declare yourself an organ donor next time you renew your driver’s license.

  13. Manny says:

    did good wolf,