View Single Post
Old March 6, 2017, 03:40 PM   #14
carguychris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,527
Quote:
Originally Posted by rr2241tx
Texas chose to retain their contiguous state restriction, so C&R is not worthless here.
I'm a bit late to this party, but I believe you are incorrect.

From the TX Penal Code:
Quote:
Sec. 46.07. INTERSTATE PURCHASE. A resident of this state may, if not otherwise precluded by law, purchase firearms, ammunition, reloading components, or firearm accessories in another state. This authorization is enacted in conformance with 18 U.S.C. Section 922(b)(3)(A).

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Renumbered from Penal Code Sec. 46.08 by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.
Amended by:
Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 280 (S.B. 1188), Sec. 1, eff. May 30, 2009.
The previous version of Section 46.07 before the 2009 amendment said "contiguous states" in place of "another state." This referred to an obsolete contiguous-state restriction in the 68 GCA. After the contiguous-state provision was struck from federal law, Section 46.07 became ambiguous and arguably unenforceable because it didn't clearly address non-contiguous states; however, the post-amendment version makes it affirmatively clear that out-of-state long-gun purchases are allowed.

FWIW I allowed my C&R license to lapse several years ago simply because I wasn't using it very often and I didn't want to pay the renewal fee.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak
carguychris is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04066 seconds with 8 queries