We had an excellent legislative session this year for gun bills. I can think of some possibilities for bills next session. For starters, how about:
1) Licensed carry for all 18-20 year-olds, not just active-duty and veterans.
2) Unlicensed carry for all 18-20 year-olds. It might be too much of a stretch to go for unlicensed carry for them right away, so maybe licensed first in 2023 and then unlicensed in 2025?
3) Create a separate license for 18-20 year-olds to fix to fix a reciprocity problem. CA, OR, IL, DC, MD, HI, NJ, NY, MA, CT, and RI have no reciprocity provision in their carry laws, so there's nothing we can do about them at the state level. NH and ME don't recognize a Texas LTC but have unlicensed carry, so they're not really a concern. Every other state recognizes a Texas LTC, except for WA and MN. The reason WA and MN don't recognize a Texas LTC is that WA and MN law restrict recognition to licenses which can only be issued to licensees over 21. Apparently it's too difficult for them to look at the birthdate on a license and do the math to determine if an individual licensee is over 21 years old and therefore valid to carry in their state. If another state's license
could be issued to someone under 21 then that totally prevents them from recognizing a state's license at all.
However, ID and KS have found a way around this problem. Both states issue two legally-distinct types of carry licenses, only one of which is issuable to 18-20 year-olds. This means that WA and MN both recognize the ID and KS licenses for >21 year-olds, and don't recognize the license for 18-20 year-olds. If Texas goes to licensed carry for 18-20 year-olds then it would be a good opportunity to implement a separate license for them (call it a "class 1" LTC or something), and then a license for those over 21 (call it a "class 2" LTC). Then WA and MN would be able to recognize our class 2 LTC, since 18-20 year-olds wouldn't be eligible for it. We'd gain reciprocity with two more states for class 2 licensees by just rewording our laws a little bit.
4) Remove more banned locations: sports venues, elementary/junior/senior high schools, voting locations, etc. Technically I guess a HS senior might be 18 (or even 19) for part of their senior year, so if you don't want them to be able to legally carry at school where they could be a student, but still allow most other licensees to do so, then having a separate carry license for 18-20 year-olds as I proposed in #3 makes it a relatively simple law to write.
5) Raise the 51% percentage to a higher percentage, or remove it as a banned location. If bars don't want people carrying they always have 30.05/30.06/30.07.
6) Fix the issue with 51% areas where an alcohol vendor is not the only business at a location. It's a relatively uncommon issue right now where if multiple businesses have the same address, and if
any one of those businesses makes >51% of their revenue at that location, then carry is banned at the location. For example, let's say business #1 and business #2 both have the same premises. Business #1 makes $1,000,000 in revenue every year, and none of it from alcohol. Business #2 makes $50,000 in revenue every year, with >51% of it from alcohol. Because business #2 makes >51% of revenue from alcohol, its premises (which are the same as business #1) make it a banned location, even though alcohol sales only make at most just under 5% of revenue of both businesses. I'm not sure how to fix this though, as I don't think TABC has the power to look at the books of any business which isn't licensed for alcohol sales, to determine revenue percentages.
So why do we need to fix this problem? Because it's a loophole the anti-gunners are using to ban carry where they shouldn't be able to ban carry. Someone else posted recently in another thread that either the Ft. Worth or Dallas Zoo is using this as a pretext to ban carry, by getting vendors licensed for alcohol sales, which bans carry for the whole of the licensed premises, even though the revenue from the zoo itself dwarfs the alcohol vendor's revenue. Also, if the law is ever changed to remove sporting venues as banned locations, not fixing this problem will mean that carry at many/most sporting venues would still be banned because of alcohol sales.
7) A constitutional amendment to rewrite
Article 1 Section 23 of the Texas Constitution so that it reads "Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defense of himself or the State.
; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime." Make it harder to ever make carry illegal again.
I'm sure there's some other possible changes I'm not thinking of. Any suggestions, or objections to mine?