Texas: Contact Your State Senators, Urge Them to Support Senate Bill 19

Opinion

Texas Capital
Texas: Contact Your State Senators, Urge Them to Support Senate Bill 19

Fairfax, VA – -(Ammoland.com)- Senate Bill 19, an NRA-backed measure sponsored by State Sen. Bryan Hughes (R-Mineola), protects the rights of tenants of residential units or commercial spaces to lawfully possess firearms and ammunition in those locations, and to transport them directly en route between their personal vehicles and those residential units or commercial spaces.

Please contact your State Senator and urge him or her to support SB 19!

Take Action Button

Landlords and building owners can currently disenfranchise gun owners and effectively deny them the ability to protect themselves through contractual provisions prohibiting the possession or storage of firearms in apartment leases, condominium rules or commercial leases.  Additionally, posting notice in common areas under Penal Code Section 30.05, 30.06 or 30.07 that prohibits firearms from being carried between personal vehicles and residential dwelling units or commercial offices forces gun owners to consider leaving their firearms in their cars or trucks, making them susceptible to theft.  This method of restricting the carrying of handguns also conflicts with Penal Code Section 46.02, under which a person can lawfully carry a handgun directly en route to a motor vehicle owned or controlled by the person.

Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick announced that this is one of his 30 priority bills for the 2019 legislative session.  We appreciate the Lieutenant Governor’s strong show of support for this important legislation!


National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)

About:
Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org

20 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
tomcat
tomcat
2 years ago

I use to own rental property and it is not the most desirable thing. Tenants quit paying their rent when they park in the street and their car gets broken into, they let their kid play with a lighter and burn the inside of the apartment out, or when a kid drops something in the toilet and breaks the bottom out of it. Of course, you hear from them every time something is not perfect. that is some of the reasons landlords have ridged leases. If you have never been a landlord, don’t bitch until you’ve tried it. It could… Read more »

m.
m.
2 years ago

re bills “somewhere?” in TX house of rep’s:

straus-clone originators/sponsors/supporters of these “hb’s” know where to stick them:

38, 131, 172, 195, 316, 349, 497, 526, 544, 545, 734, 930, 1078, 1085, 1163, 1165, 1166, 1167, 1168, 1169, 1171, 1173, 1207, 1236, 1445, 1844, 1945, 2046, 2051, 2137, 2146

Craig
Craig
2 years ago

ENOUGH SAID ABOVE…….DO NOT SUPPORT THIS BILL…..KILL IT….ITS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Jack Mac
Jack Mac
2 years ago
Reply to  Craig

Not supporting the bill is ant-gun rights. Oppression is oppression whether by government or individuals.

m.
m.
2 years ago

like obama & obama-care?

m.
m.
2 years ago

I did, plus voice-mailed Gov. Abbot. Passage depends on whether the straus-clones are still in charge of TX legislature or not.

Austin
Austin
2 years ago

This is a tyrannical, authoritarian bill. In the interest of liberty, DO NOT support it. Property rights are the most foundational freedom and anyone ought to be at liberty to dictate who and what enters their property. Not only that, but this also follows the dangerous road to mega government we see everywhere else legislative state law is preempting contract law.
It’s no business of the government to what individuals consently agree in private contract. Butt out!

m.
m.
2 years ago
Reply to  Austin

contract law supercedes the right to self-defense, is that it?

m.
m.
2 years ago
Reply to  m.

when “contract” law supercedes self-defense, then the “controlling” entity should be liable for the death of a defenseless/disarmed individual on the entity property? of course gub-ment bureaucracy gets to exempt itself from liability every chance.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
2 years ago
Reply to  m.

@m. One can “contract away” ones Constitutional Rights temporarily. It is not a matter of superseding. It is a matter of contractual agreement. I, myself, will not contract away my Right to Keep and BEAR arms even for the length of time that it takes to eat a meal or shop for groceries. The assumption of the risk for a customer’s safety from armed assault by a merchant would only have merit in a situation where the customer had no choice but to enter the vendor’s self imposed gun free business. A merchant may have the “right to have a… Read more »

Ton E
Ton E
2 years ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

EXACTLY! I’m amazed people who supposedly believe in freedom don’t grasp that concept the gun free business isn’t forcing you to shop there if you choose to enter said business the individual is the one assuming the risk.

Austin
Austin
2 years ago
Reply to  m.

Your argument that “right to self defense” means property owners owe some allowance to whoever whishes to occupy their property is just as ridiculous as the healthcare socialists demanding that sick people have a right to demand that we all pay for their medicine. You’re allowed to engage in commerce to secure weapons and to secure medicine for yourself. But you’re a communist if you want to use force rather than negotiation to make other people in the market to accommodate your demands. No difference in this and forcing landlords to rent to drug owners where legal, smokers, and alcoholics,… Read more »

m.
m.
2 years ago
Reply to  Austin

appreciate your take, sir. i don’t set foot in or do business with commie/gun-free zone places of business.

Austin
Austin
2 years ago
Reply to  m.

I agree. I don’t either. I think voting with our wallets is the best thing we can do. That’s what the free market is all about.

Jim Mackey
Jim Mackey
2 years ago
Reply to  m.

I do, because the 1 good thing about NY is those “gun free zone” signs on places of business do not carry the weight of law. The most that can occur is they ask you to leave, after which you can be charged with trespassing if you do not.

Wish more states utilized this line of thinking.

Raymond Hudson
Raymond Hudson
2 years ago
Reply to  Austin

If you Rent it,, you control it….When do you say,, “NO Lamps in my apartments,, they use too much electricity” !! Legal is Legal, get out of their lives! Anyone trying to take away your ability to defend yourself, will probably be bothering you about every thing under the sun! I would rent elsewhere!

Gregory Romeu
Gregory Romeu
2 years ago
Reply to  Austin

Yeah? Who OWNS rental properties like Apartments and homes? NOBODY tells me I cannot carry in a place that I am renting! NOBODY! Once I hand you the money, your property is MINE until I turn it back over to you.

m.
m.
2 years ago
Reply to  Gregory Romeu

correct

Alfonso Bedoya
Alfonso Bedoya
2 years ago
Reply to  Gregory Romeu

As a rental property owner, I hate to say it, but you are wrong! The property owner OWNS the property, not you, and if you don’t like the rules put forth in the lease, don’t rent the property. I am also a life member of the NRA and would have no problem if you decided to carry. As a matter of fact, my leases contain no rules pro or con as to ownership or carrying of guns to or from the rental properties. To get back to the argument you presented where you stated that you own the property you… Read more »

Jack Mac
Jack Mac
2 years ago
Reply to  Alfonso Bedoya

Owner’s house or building. Renter’s home or business. Any body that owns real estate could be held liable for actions of others if invited or not on the property. Unacceptable reason to dictate against peoples’ exercising their rights. This bill deals only with legal possession of firearms involving in peoples homes and businesses. Any landlord attempting to restrain the rights to arms is anti-gun rights. Anyone complying with such restraints is empowering anti-gun rights. If people do what the anti-gun rights groups like they are supporting the anti-rights agendas. There often not enough suitable rental spaces to chose among in… Read more »