1999 Texas Gun Bill
Summary 1999 Texas Gun Bill
Summary
This is a "complete" list of all gun related bills in
the 76th Texas Legislature (compiled on 4/22/99). Almost all
of these bills were defeated or never were reached for public
hearings and a vote. They are listed in Numerical Order, House
Bills First.
HB 186
Status: Referred to Criminal Jurisprudence
Type: - ANTI
Analysis: Outlaws minors' possession of long guns.
Author: John Longoria
HB 191
Status: Referred to Public Safety
Type: ~ not particularly threatening or objectionable
Bill Caption: Relating to commissions for certain retired peace officers and the authority of those officers to carry certain weapons.
Author: John Longoria
HB 199
Status: Referred to Criminal Jurisprudence
Type: - ANTI
Analysis: Outlaws minors' possession of long guns.
Author: Lon Burnam
HB 200
Status: Referred to Criminal Jurisprudence
Type: - ANTI
Analysis: This bill, with very sneaky--and overly lawyerly--language would make sales to minors of longguns illegal EVEN with parental consent. Texas law currently requires written parental consent. Looks like we should reclassify Burnam officially as ANTI.
Author: Lon Burnam
HB 242
Status: Referred to Criminal Jurisprudence
Type: - ANTI
Analysis: This bill attempts to criminalize negligence. Both for the shooter and the range owner. For example, it reads in part, "The owner or operator of a sport shooting range commits an offense if the owner or operator allows a person to discharge a firearm at the shooting range while the person is intoxicated." This is a useless bill that merely attempts to outlaw what everyone agrees is a poor idea. However, the bill's incorporation of the DWI law brings in all the enforcement techniques being used to enforce that law, subjecting all shooters to investigation at all times for intoxication, which means being questioned, field sobriety tests, and possibly a ride downtown for a breath test. This could really be used to harass gun owners if police wanted to. At a time when we are having proposals for roadblocks for sobriety checkpoints, and confiscations of autos, this proposal seems quite scary.
Author: Eliot Naishtat
HB 489
Status: Referred to Criminal Jurisprudence
Type: - ANTI
Analysis: This is another mandatory sell-a-trigger-lock-with-every-gun law. Totally useless for anyone without youngsters at home, but it will certainly drive up costs for consumers. Seeing as how most manufacturers will be voluntarily including trigger locks with their guns, it is also superfluous. Violation of the law is a crime. The fact that there is a companion bill in the Senate suggests a very real effort to try to pass this bill into law.
Author: Glenn Lewis, Eliot Naishtat
Companion: SB 316 by Rodney Ellis
HB 571 HB 571
Type: Not Gun Related--Just FYI
Status: Referred to Public Safety
Analysis: This bill would prohibit DPS from requiring a fingerprint to get a driver's license.
AUTHOR: Suzanna Hupp
HB 588
Status: Referred to County Affairs Committee
Type: - ANTI
Analysis: This is an attempt to give zoning powers to Counties! This is a major departure from traditional Texas law that makes unincorporated areas not subject to all the myriad of zoning regulations that cities can impose. Zoning laws have become a tool used by gun-haters in other states to close down or outright ban gun ranges and gun stores, to prohibit the discharge of firearms, and to revoke home-situated FFL's. Tell your legislator that we DO NOT want counties to have any zoning or regulatory powers more than they already have! It's time to downsize government, not regulate us more!
Author: George "Buddy" West
HB 592
Status: Passed out of Committee; Sent to House Local/Consent calendar
Type: ~ not particularly threatening or objectionable
Analysis: H.B 592 requires DPS to conduct a background check of all applicants for certification as a qualified handgun instructor in the same manner as conducted of an applicant for a license to carry a concealed handgun.
Author: Tony Goolsby
HB 699
Status: Referred to Transportation Committee
Type: + PRO
Analysis: This bill requires signs be posted at border crossing points to warn visitors to Mexico of Mexican laws prohibiting transportation of firearms and ammunition. There are even now many Americans sitting in filthy, dangerous Mexican prisons because they were unaware of Mexico's draconian anti-gun laws. Even ammunition can land one in prison there. These signs will help stop people from being victimized by the Mexican legal system.
Author: Ron Wilson
HB 730
Status: Referred to a subcommittee of the Ways & Means Committee (subcommittee members are: Jim Keffer, Chair; Dennis Bonnen; Tom Ramsay)
Type: + PRO
Analysis: A simple bill that would promote the use of gun safes by exempting them from the State sales tax.
Author: Senfronia Thompson
HB 742
Status: Referred to Criminal Jurisprudence
Type: ~ not particularly threatening or objectionable
Analysis: This bill creates a new felony with a flat 5 years in prison for "use, carry, or exhibition" of a firearm during the commission of a long list of crimes in chapters 19, 20, 21, and 22 of the Penal Code. The bill also specifies that the sentence is to be stacked on top of any other sentence received on the underlying, or "predicate," crime. Being hard on violent criminals is generally to be applauded; however, the breadth of this bill should give some pause. For example, the list of crimes includes several non-violent ones, like indecent exposure, leaving a child in a vehicle unattended, and even homosexual conduct. Mere possession of a gun could be considered "carrying" as carrying under the carry statute is defined as "on or about the person." So, conceivably, the possession of a gun at home by a homosexual could land him in prison for 5 years. And you CHL's better *never* leave your child unattended in a car while carrying at the grocery store!
Author: Craig Eiland
HB 815
Status: Referred to Public Safety
Type: - ANTI
Analysis: This bill would make it a crime for CHL's to carry at "established places of religious worship." It is an absolute ban, and leaves no discretion with a church to decide for itself whether to allow guns on its own premises. For this reason it is truly repugnant on property-rights grounds alone. Who is the State to tell all churches that their premises are off limits to firearms? Why can't church congregations decide for themselves? We are told that this bill is being pushed by the pacifist, liberal religious groups; and is opposed by conservative church goers. Once again, we have proof that even pacifists have no qualms about using government force to achieve their ends. So much for old-style tolerant, open-minded, unprejudiced liberalism!
Author: Jesse Jones
HB 816
Status: Referred to Juvenile Justice & Family Issues Committee
Type: ~ not particularly threatening or objectionable
Analysis: This bill would mandate the suspension of a juvenile's driver's license for possessing a firearm in an automobile while engaging in conduct that would get him in trouble for juvenile delinquency. This is another symbolic, feel good idea that will have no impact on the truly delinquent juveniles out there creating mayhem.
Author: Jesse Jones
HB 821
Status: Referred to Public Safety
Type: - ANTI
Analysis: This bill attempts to exploit the trendy notion of annihilating the gun rights of those subject to a "protective order." What this bill would do is order the suspension of a CHL in such cases. Under the new federal "Lautenberg Act"--which was passed in the 104th Congress without any hearings or deliberations of any kind--it is already a felony for anyone subject to a protective order to merely posses firearms or ammunition. The injustices and the problems created by this new federal law are legion; are largely unknown by the general public, and are only now coming home to roost, as more and more people are finding themselves ensnared in this trap. This bill merely attempts to add insult to injury by suspending a license to carry what federal law prohibits even possessing. Thus, if the federal law were repealed, (a top agenda item of the pro-rights movement after Clinton is replaced), this state law would still be in place. For this reason it should be opposed.
Author: Dale Tillery
HB 825
Status: Referred to Public Safety
Type: ~ not particularly threatening or objectionable
Analysis: This bill simply makes already retired peace officers automatically eligible for a CHL.
Author: Bill Carter
Companion: SB 404 by Sen. Ken Armbrister
HB 860
Status: Referred to Criminal Jurisprudence
Type: - ANTI
Analysis: This bill would make enlarge the definition of "premises" to include driveways, streets, sidewalks, parking lots, etc., so that many more of us can be made into felons for possessing any firearm in our cars while going to vote, going to the horse races, or going on "any grounds or building on which an activity sponsored by a school or educational institution is being conducted." That last one could be impossible to avoid. Is it any wonder why gunowners are so suspicious of the motives of "gun controllers" when they propose such malicious sorts of legislation as this? Even if the motives were pure, would this change in the law really reduce violent crime in any way?
Author: Dawanna Dukes
HB 905
Status: Referred to Criminal Jurisprudence
Type: - ANTI
Analysis: This bill would do the same thing that HB 860 would do, but with a twist. It would also create a defense to prosecution for CHL's who carried on educational grounds.
Author: Phil King, Geanie Morrison, Ray Allen, Juan Solis
HB 906
Status: Referred to Public Safety
Type: ~ not particularly threatening or objectionable
Analysis: This bill would expand the list of persons that may carry handguns without a license; in this case, reserve peace officers.
Author: Phil King
HB 915
Status: Referred to Public Safety
Type: ~ not particularly threatening or objectionable
Analysis: This bill would expand the list of persons that may carry handguns without a license, in this case, "conservators of the peace," whatever those are.
Author: Ron Wilson
HB 1000
Status: Referred to Criminal Jurisprudence
Type: - ANTI
Analysis: This bill makes it a crime to fail to report to your sheriff (city police will not do) a lost or stolen firearm. The Antis will try anything to increase the risks associated with gun ownership; and this bill does that by creating yet another trap for the unwary. Why is it necessary to criminalize this? Why single out firearms for this kind of treatment? Is the desire to recover one's stolen property insufficient? When, exactly, is a firearm "lost?" What if you cannot find a particular gun now, but you feel you simply misplaced it and it will turn up sooner or later? If this bill were coupled with a mandatory obligation on the part of police agencies to identify and return recovered guns to their rightful owners, this bill might be palatable.
Author: Jessica Farrar
HB 1020
Status: Passed out of House Public Safety Committee!
Type: + PRO
Analysis: To be eligible for a CHL, one must be 21. This bill would lower the age to 18 for certain persons, namely members of the "armed forces of the United States, including the reserves or national guard, or the state militia, as defined by Section 431.001, Government Code."
Author: Suzanna Hupp
HB 1021
Status: Passed out of House Public Safety Committee!
Type: ~ not particularly threatening or objectionable
Analysis: This bill simply removes the obligation of the DPS to give a list of CHL's to every Sheriff, even when not requested.
Author: Suzanna Hupp
HB 1035
Status: Passed out of House Public Safety Committee!
Type: + PRO
Analysis: This bill would make it legal for CHL's to carry on college campuses; an important step in the re-establishment of the right to bear arms.
Author: Suzanna Hupp
HB 1165
Status: Passed the House Public Safety Committee!
Type: + PRO.
Analysis: This bill would make DPS records of CHL's confidential and prevent the disclosure of such information to anyone but law enforcement agencies.
Author: Suzanna Hupp
HB 1199
Status: Killed in the House Public Safety Committee!
Type: - ANTI
Analysis: If you have not noticed, the latest whipping boy for the gun-haters is the "gun show." All anti-gun groups have taken their cue from President Clinton and are now preaching of the need to close "a loophole the Brady Law." What they are really trying to do is curtail your right to give, sell, or loan your guns to other people. The Brady Act only applies to federally licensed dealers. That is all whom was ever meant to apply to, and its proponents knew that. This is a loophole they created. But that fact does not mean they will not now complain about that very "loophole."
What these anti-gunshow laws would do is outlaw transfers between private individuals, but only at "gun shows." When, and if, this succeeds, we will shortly hear complaints of another "loophole" in the Brady Law, namely, transfers between individuals that are NOT made at gunshows. That will be the last step. Make no mistake, this is a fight to outlaw all exchanges of firearms between individuals. Their goal is to force everyone to use a middleman FFL to "transfer" a gun from one person to another. You would not even be able to give a gun to your spouse. This is already the law in a few states. This slow destruction of the "private transfer" in order to bring all transfers within the reach of Brady, is why we need to work to repeal Brady. The Brady Law's *claims to stop criminal acquisition of firearms are fraudulent. The Brady Law is nothing more than an expensive and troublesome method of ensuring that the criminal element acquires its guns on the black market. Some states have had waiting periods and background checks for over 40 years, yet there is absolutely NO statistical evidence that they had any impact on crime rates. For example, in 1992 the murder rate in Texas and California were the same, but Texas had absolutely no gun control laws, while California had a 15 day wait (among many, many other gun "control" laws)!
Author: Debra Danburg
HB 1561
Status: Referred to Civil Practices
Type: + PRO
Analysis: Another bill that would ban governmental litigation against gun makers (similar to HB 1716).
Author: Rick Green
HB 1621
Status: Referred to Public Safety
Type: + PRO
Analysis: The caption of this bill says it all: providing to honorably discharged veterans an exemption from the fee required for a license to carry a concealed handgun.
Author: Bob Turner, Suzanna Hupp, David Lengefeld
HB 1716
Status: Referred to Committee on Civil Practices
Type: + PRO
Analysis: The current spate of tobacco-litigation style of lawsuits against gun makers and sellers has spawned a legislative backlash to prevent them. This bill would prevent "governmental units" from initiating such lawsuits in Texas. We need this law at the federal level.
Author: Suzanna Hupp
Companion: SB 717 by Sen. Jon Lindsay
HB 1776
Status: Passed out of House Public Safety Committee!
Type: + PRO
Analysis: This is a good bill! It cleans up the CHL law quite a bit to limit the reasons one can be denied/revoked to only felonies and violent misdemeanors. It also allows a person to recover attorney fees for wrongful denials by the DPS!
Author: Tom Uher
HB 1933
Status: Referred to County Affairs Committee
Type: ~ not particularly threatening or objectionable
Analysis: As you may know, the CHL law gives the DPS carté blanche to investigate an applicant's medical, mental, residential, employment, criminal, etc., history. This bill simply allows the county clerks to charge a $5.00 fee to the DPS to conduct searches of probate court mental health cases.
Author: Glenn Lewis
HB 2169
Status: Filed, not yet referred to a committee (as of 3/5/99)
Type: - ANTI
Analysis: This is Naishtat's "Range Regulation" bill that he also attempted to pass last session. It is a nightmare bill that would subject shooting ranges to all sorts of expensive and nit picking regulations. What we need is the opposite, a "Range Protection" bill that will protect ranges from being sued by surrounding property owners who move in *after* a range has been in operation. Airports have such protection, gun ranges should too. We note that there are no shooting ranges in Naishtat's district.
Author Eliot Naishtat
Type: ~
Status: Passed by the House Public Safety Committee!
Analysis: Establishes a procedure for a person to renew the person's driver's license and the person's license to carry a concealed handgun at the same time.
Author: Suzanna Hupp
HB 2323 
Type: + PRO
Status: Passed the House Public Safety Committee!
Analysis: Would allow you to carry a gun in your automobile.
Author: Charles Jones
Type: +PRO
Status: Heard on 4/13/99 and left pending in the Criminal Jurisprudence Committee
Analysis: Would amend the statutory definition of "firearm" with the following text added (underlined):
"Firearm" means any device designed, made, or adapted to expel a projectile through a barrel by using the energy generated by an explosion or burning substance or any device readily convertible to that use. Firearm does not include antique or curio firearms that were manufactured prior to 1899 or a replica of an antique or curio firearm manufactured prior to 1899 and that may have, as an integral part, a folding knife blade or other1-15 characteristics of weapons made illegal by this chapter.
Author: Carl Isett
Type: +PRO
Status: Heard on 4/13/99 and left pending in the Criminal Jurisprudence Committee
Analysis: Finally, to fix the carry statute so that the State must prove someone was not traveling, instead of an individual proving he was. This was attempted, but done wrong, in the last session; having passed both houses and signed by Gov. Bush. This will stop the warrantless arrests when traveling for possession of a handgun that have been plaguing citizens for years. Successful assertion of the affirmative "defense" nowadays costs a few thousand dollars at the minimum in attorney fees. It is time to shift the burden of proof to the state, if we are going to be forced to keep this repugnant Jim Crow Statute on the lawbooks, (passed in 1871).
Author: Carl Isett
Companion bill in Senate: SB 1683
Type: +PRO
Status: Referred to the Criminal Jurisprudence Committee
Analysis: "Travel" or "traveling" means at least 30 miles 1-8 one-way per trip, along with incidental stops necessary to the 1-9 trip, or a trip made with intent to stay overnight at one's1-10 destination.
Author: Gary Walker
Type: +PRO
Status: Referred to the Criminal Jurisprudence Committee
Analysis: Makes it legal, once again, to give your child their own guns, and to let them loose in the woods to do their own shooting. Kids cannot now legally hunt or plink alone under this law; though few Texans are aware of that fact. The antis sneaked this one through under the guise of a "child access" law that makes any unsupervised access illegal. Notably, the law never defined "access." This renders the widest concepts of "access" imaginable. Such as, leaving a rifle over the fireplace or a self-defense gun any place where kids less than 17 could ever be. Given the proclivity of teenagers to disobey their parents, leaving guns just about anywhere kids could find them can be risky under this law. Remember, no one need be hurt; mere "access" is a crime in and of itself!
Author: Gary Walker
Companion Senate Bill: SB 1682
Type: +PRO
Status: Referred to Criminal Jurisprudence
Analysis: This is Vermont Style carry law at its finest: Simple repeal of the Jim Crow Law (1871) that banned gun toting in the first place. If only our forefathers had honored the ideals proclaimed in the Constitution, we would not be where we are today.
AUTHOR: Suzanna Hupp
SB 316
Status: Referred to Criminal Justice
Type: - ANTI
Analysis: See HB 489 Analysis.
Author: Rodney Ellis
Companion: HB 489 by Glenn Lewis
SB 404
Status: Referred to Criminal Justice
Type: ~ not particularly threatening or objectionable
Analysis: See HB 825 Analysis.
Author: Ken Armbrister
Companion: HB 825 by Bill Carter
SB 588
Status: Passed out of the Senate Criminal Jurisprudence Committee (without any organized opposition). We need to kill a similar bill (HB 821) in the House Public Safety Committee.
Type: - ANTI
Analysis: This is a similar bill to HB 821. This bill attempts to exploit the trendy notion of annihilating the gun rights of those subject to a "protective order." What this bill would do is order the suspension of a CHL in such cases. Under the new federal "Lautenberg Act"--which was passed in the 104th Congress without any hearings or deliberations of any kind--it is already a felony for anyone subject to a protective order to merely posses firearms or ammunition. The injustices and the problems created by this new federal law are legion; are largely unknown by the general public, and are only now coming home to roost, as more and more people are finding themselves ensnared in this trap. This bill merely attempts to add insult to injury by suspending a license to carry what federal law prohibits even possessing. Thus, this bill would not really accomplish anything. If the federal law were repealed, (a top agenda item of the pro-rights movement after Clinton is replaced), this state law would still be in place. For this reason it should be opposed.
Authors: Jane Nelson, Eddie Lucio, Mike Moncrief
SB 717
Status: Passed out of the State Affairs Committee!
Type: + PRO
Analysis: This is the companion bill to Hupp's HB 1716, to ban city lawsuits against gun makers.
Author: Jon Lindsay
SB 1322
Status: Heard on 4/21/99 but left pending in the Intergovernmental Affairs Committee
Type: - ANTI
Analysis: This bill would greatly expand the authority of Counties to ban discharge of firearms in unincorporated areas. It is helpful to understand current law to be able to understand how SB 1322 works.
In 1989 a new law was enacted that gave Counties the power to ban discharges of firearms on lots of 10 acres or less. This power was limited to only those lots that were the result of a subdivision for which a plat had to made and filed under Sec. 232.001 of the Local Gov't Code. That section, in turn, only required plats when a developer was subdividing land into smaller lots and dedicating parts of it for public streets, parks and the like. Thus, a landowner who subdivided a big lot into smaller lots of 10 acres or less for sale "as is" did not come within the requirement for platting, and thus, the buyers of those smaller lots could not be banned from shooting guns on their property.
SB 1322 uses three methods of amending the law to vastly expand
the authority of Counties to ban firearm discharges. First, it
adds "tracts and parcels" to the law; thus, any
lot, tract, or parcel of land could be banned from discharging
firearms. Second, it deletes the limitation of platted subdivisions.
Thus, it would not matter how or when your parcel of land was
created, the law would apply to your land too. Third, it doubles
the acreage limitation from 10 acres to 20. If this bill were
to pass, Counties would then have the power to ban many, many
rural Texans who own lots of 20 acres or less from shooting on
their own property! Liberal, anti-gun Counties like Travis, would
certainly jump at the chance to enact such a ban.
SB 1566
Type: - ANTI
Status: Referred to the Criminal Justice Committee
Analysis: See Analysis of its House Companion Bill by Debra Danburg.
Author: Royce West
Companion House Bill: HB 1199
SB 1681
Type: +PRO
Status: Referred to Criminal Justice Committee
Analysis: See Analysis of its House Companion Bill.
Author: David Bernsen
Companion Bill in House: HB 2825
SB 1682
Type: +PRO
Status: Referred to Criminal Justice Committee
Analysis: See analysis of it's House Companion Bill.
Author: David Bernsen
Companion Bill in House: HB 2929
SB 1683
Type: +PRO
Status: Referred to Criminal Justice Committee
Analysis: See Analysis of Companion bill.
Author: David Bersen
Companion House Bill: HB 2826