State Rep. Burnam Files Sensible Gun Bill

My favorite state legislator, Rep. Lon Burnam (D-Fort Worth), has introduced a new bill in the legislature for consideration in the upcoming session (which starts in a couple of days).   The bill makes a lot of sense, but it will probably be opposed by a lot of Republicans because it concerns guns and the right to carry a concealed weapon -- even though it does not restrict that right in any legitimate way.

Current Texas law says a person wishing to carry a concealed weapon must have a permit.   But the law doesn't specify that the permit must be a Texas permit.   Because of this lack of specificity, some Texas residents have been going to other states to get a concealed-carry permit.   They do this because in Texas you must take a course on gun laws and safety (and pass a test), and then show at least a minimum level of proficiency with a firearm on a shooting range.

Neither the written nor shooting tests are difficult, and anyone with a modicum of intelligence and ability would have no trouble passing them and getting a concealed-carry permit.   But any requirement, even one as easy as the Texas requirement, is too much for some people.   So these people have been going to other states and getting their concealed-carry permit -- states that don't make a person pass a test or even show they can safely shoot a firearm.

Because of the way the current law was written, Texas must accept those permits.   Burnam's bill would not change the fairly easy requirements to get a Texas permit.   It would simply require that a person who lives in Texas would have to get their concealed-carry permit in Texas.   This makes imminent sense, because it would assure that Texans carrying concealed weapons know the state's gun laws and have demonstrated a certain level of firearm proficiency.   Out-of-state permits would still be honored for visitors from other states.

Persons going out-of-state to get their permits are also costing the state quite a bit of money in lost permit fees.   Burnam estimates the state is losing about $425,000 in fees every year -- a serious consideration for a state with a deficit as large as the one in Texas.

The bill has already garnered some Republican opposition.   Texas' gun-loving Republican Land Commissioner, Jerry Patterson (who got his own permit in Pennsylvania), is opposed to Burnam's bill.   Patterson says,   "When you start precluding recognition of licenses from other states, you have to be careful you don't have other states saying they won't recognize Texas licenses."   He says he's worried about state reciprocity.  

That's as stupid and disingenuous an argument as I've ever heard.   The bill has nothing to do with state reciprocity.   The licenses issued by other states to their citizens would still be honored.   It would just require those residing in Texas to have a license issued in Texas -- and there is established precedent for that.

Consider the issue of driver's licenses.   Texas honors the driver's licenses of visitors from other states, but requires all residents of Texas to have a license issued in Texas.   A Texas resident cannot go to another state to get a driver's license (because the written or driving test is easier or the license fee is lower).   And anyone who moves to Texas from another state has only a short time to get a Texas issued driver's license.

No one thinks the requirement for residents to have a Texas driver's license violates the reciprocity agreement between states, so why should a requirement for residents of Texas who want a concealed-carry permit to get their permit in Texas be considered a violation of reciprocity?   It wouldn't.   This is just another false argument thrown up by Republicans who really don't have a legitimate argument against the bill.

The fact is that Burnam's bill is a good one.   It doesn't restrict gun rights in any way.   It assures that those carrying concealed weapons have been taught the laws and demonstrated a level of firearm proficiency.   And it puts some more money in the state treasury.   The bill should be passed.