HOUSE COMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE

Hearing Date: April 19, 2021 1:00 PM - or upon final adjourn./recess or bill referral if permission granted Printed on: April 27, 2021 11:29 AM COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

Robert Sheldon self The Hills, TX

I support this legislation. Thank You for your service.

Klaudia Forgacova Self - Operations Manager , TX

My name is Klaudia Forgacova. I live in Dallas, TX and my zip code is 75204. I ask that this committee ensures that House Bill 670 gets passed and sent for a vote. A is a very serious thing and comes wih great responsibility. We need to enforce that responsibility by prohibiting reckless discharge. There is no good reason to be mishandling a firearm and certainly for firing it recklessly, and a criminal offense should be charged for putting others in grave danger.

While I acknowledge our state's desire for guns, we cannot ignore the stark gun violence we face. This bill does not remove any guns. It makes their use safer for everyone, even gun owners.

Please ensure HB 670 gets approved!

Sheri Jensen resident Euless, TX

Who's opinion of a reckless discharge? I'm against any law that will infringe on my 2nd amendment rights!

Sydney Zuiker` Crime Stoppers of Houston Houston, TX

Crime Stoppers of Houston supports enhanced penalties that HB670 would incorporate. We have had several incidents over the last several years regarding celebratory gunfire, striking, severely injuring, and even killing community members. A well respected registered nurse in Harris County was killed due to such an event in 2020. This bill will give discretion to prosecutors to upgrade charges for defendants who willingly choose to participate in such activity. Simply giving discretion is only a positive outcome. When someone willingly and knowingly shoots a firearm into the air indiscriminately there must be consequences. HB670 remedies the glitch in the statue and we are in full support. If you have any questions or wish to discuss our position on this bill, please feel free to reach out to us directly at 832-849-1588.

Doris Spraggins

Page 1 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

Self Fredericksburg, TX

I am AGAINST this bill

Leonard Dumire Midland County GOP Party MIDLAND, TX

My biggest concern for the bill is who decides what is reckless?? I understand that not every contingency can be codified, but some level of due process must be in place to keep this from being used as a gun grab.

Thank you for your consideration of my statements and for your service to the people of Texas.

Alan Rickertsen Self Corpus Christi, TX

Limiting the rights of law abiding citizens will not keep criminals from getting a gun and/or using it for an illegal act.

Christopher Butler Independent Bedford, TX

I oppose HB 670. If I am hunting on private rural land, shooting with buddies on private rural land, etc... that is not reckless, nor should the law treat it as such.

Yazan Al-Amin Self, Business Owner. Richardson, TX

I am in strong opposition of this bill. Responsible gun owners, which make up the majority of gun owners, will most likely never shoot a gun outside of a range. And if they do, it is because of self defense or defense of another. This bill seeks to find a workaround to castle doctrine and cases of self defense, where one perceives that their lives are endangered, while being under the guise of painting gun owners as reckless hooligans without forethought. Gun owners are more law abiding than normal citizens specifically because they own a huge responsibility that will be met with huge scrutiny if they are irresponsible. If one were to buy a gun and take a class, they would be immediately be privy to a litany of laws that they must pay the utmost heed towards. And they do. This bill is unconstitutional and shows the utmost distrust in our responsible, moral citizenry.

Roger Miller Myself Winnie, TX

Page 2 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

I oppose this bill, as I feel it will do more harm than good to my Rural living as well as infringe on my rights.

Mark Combs Self Frisco, TX

I as a law abiding citizen oppose this bill

Alejandro Labanzat Self The Woodlands, TX

The proposed penalties for an accidental discharge resulting in non-injuries or property damage is excessive and should be limited to a warning.

Kristin Browne Self Colorado City, TX

I oppose this bill because it potentially criminalizes harmless behavior.

Gabino Cortez Myself Houston, TX

This bill would criminalize plinking and skeet shooting on private property. Further test firing a firearm in a safe manner and direction would also be criminalized. Please oppose this bill.

Tony Chapman Self Jefferson, TX

I oppose this bill I believe that it would be unjust for our rights

Jordan Perry GOA Friendswood, TX

Sometimes people without the correct training can have an accidental discharge, this is not a criminal misdemeanor.

Page 3 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

Josh Rains Self Snyder, TX

I oppose this bill, I believe if there was an accidental discharge and no one was hurt then warnings should be given... only until there is a pattern created should there be criminal citations given.

George Martin Self Round rock, TX

This bill is unnecessarily punitive. Punishment and charges for actions in this bill ate covered elsewhere in the law and thus this bill is also redundant.

Joseph Murphy self - retired teacher Fredericksburg, TX

I believe that this bill over steps the bounds of rational thought. This seems to be seeking another way to penalize the people of Texas that are completely innocent gun owners. Many of the described offenses that it tries to penalize could easily be stretched to cover many harmless incidents. The overwhelming majority of gun owners know how to safely handle their and are even obsessive about safety. This bill should not be considered.

Londa Chandler self - retired Marble Falls, TX

I oppose this bill because it seems to be just one more attempt at restricting gun owners in Texas. There are already laws on the books prohibiting the reckless use of a firearm - this simply allows Rep. Martinez to brag that he helped pass more gun legislation. Please vote no.

Thomas Gordon Self Temple, TX

My name is Thomas Gordon I oppose HB 670 by Martinez Thank you, Thomas

DAVID HAMEL SELF TEMPLE, TX

Page 4 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

I oppose HB-670. The language is overly broad and has the potential to invite discord and gotchas responds between neighbors. This proposed legislation is a "spite fence" waiting to happen. The penalty is way too high.

Brent McCain Self - Paramedic Bruceville, TX

I OPPOSE this bill. This bill has great potential of criminalizing behavior that is harmless and, currently common, legal and safe. Examples of the unintended consequences of this bill include, but are not limited to, baseless complaints regarding home/land owners safely shooting their guns on their own property, commonly brought about by neighbors, individuals shooting their gun to scare away animals they don't desire to shoot., or how about the act of test firing one's gun in a know, safe direction where no one has posted a target? Then, creating a class A misdemeanor on violating this bill, when zero harm has been done. This is just all very wrong in so many ways.

Fred Lauckner, Mr Self Houston, TX

I oppose HB 670. This is sets up vague instances and turns them into criminal offensives. For instance, there are times a person may only want to scare away an animal away instead of injuring or killing it. Discharging a firearm in a safe direction to scare off an animal would be an offense under this bill.

This is enough to oppose the bill.

Gabriel Segoine GOA Texas Member Nevada, TX

I strongly oppose.

Tyler De La Cruz Self West Columbia, TX

Please oppose hb670. Accidents happen, no one deserves to be harshly punished for an accident especially if there is no victim. Victimless crime legislation should not be passed.

Doris Spraggins Self Fredericksburg, TX

I OPPOSE this bill.

Page 5 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

Donald Dahl Self Round Rock, TX

There is no point of increasing the penalty of an accidental/negligent discharge. It is very poor policy.

Omar Garza Self Peñitas, TX

I oppose this bill because there are many people who have there own private land who shoot safely with incident in texas. Plinking in texas has been a hobby for many texans for many years without incident. I oppose this bill because if someone calls the police on someone or police hear a shot and if person had a accidental discharge but since here was a shot that person getting a class A misdemeanor is high penalty for an honest mistake

Ian Kress Myself. Engineer. Nassau Bay, TX

I oppose this bill as it is not needed, and could be used maliciously. It is already a crime if you recklessly fire a gun and the bullet injuries someone. This bill would make it a Class A misdemeanor or firing a gun, if deemed to be reckless - a far too harsh of a penalty for what is a judgement call as to what is reckless. Furthermore, as it is only a Defense to Prosecution to do such legal activities as hunt or target shoot, persons engaging in those activities could be arrested, and have to go court to hopefully have the case dismissed.

This bill is not needed, complicates the sports of shooting and hunting, and should not be supported. Please vote against HB 670. Thank you.

Elizabeth Miller Libertarian Party of Texas, SD 10, self/attorney Bedford, TX

We live in the most criminalized and incarcerated society in history. Over half of those locked up are legally innocent. Disproportionate amounts of those incarcerated are brown people and poor people. Every criminal law is an opportunty for disparate enforcement and oppression The current law sufficiently covers recklessness with a fiream. Prosecutors have plenty of tools in the toolbox. Please don't create a new, unncessary, vague tool of disparate enforcement. Thank you.

Andrew Thompson Self, Attorney Harker Heights, TX

I oppose this bill and would ask the same from you. While there are some good intentions here, I believe that this is an excessive penalty for conduct that doesn't actually result in harm. Further, for conduct that does result in harm, there is already a similar and appropriate penalty. Lastly, this bill would make it too easy for a disgruntled neighbor to subject otherwise legal conduct to

Page 6 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670 criminal penalties. With as clogged as our justice system is, this bill's best case scenario would be to create further burden on the legal system, and worst case, make criminals out of otherwise law abiding citizens.

Dixie Pitcox Self retired educator/ rancher Brady, TX

I oppose this bill because “while aiming recklessly or without an intended target” is subject to another person’s perception. Someone could be firing a warning shot at an intruder or to stop a leathal situation without wanting to take a life, is that firing recklessly? A person could be firing at a vicious dog stalking a neighbor or child, miss the dog and the dog owner could accuse that person of shooting aimlessly. This bill would open a Pandora’s box of accusations that could not be proven by law officers or witnesses to the act.

Jonathan Findley JONATHAN FINDLEY PASADENA, TX

I oppose HB670 because it is a meaningless bill with objectives that are, to varying degrees, already codified in law. jeff chan self MCKINNEY, TX

I OPPOSE this bill. This bill could easily criminalize harmless behavior that is currently safe, common, and legal. For example: o Test firing a gun in a direction we know is safe, but where there is not a hung target o Shooting a gun to scare away an animal that one does not want to shoot o Neighbors making baseless complaints about gun owners shooting safely on their own property o Minorities plinking on private property – they’re worried about being unfairly targeted o Shooting into the air with a shotgun as in shooting skeet – but without clay pigeons in the air The bill gives a Class A misdemeanor even when no harm is done – that's an outrageously high penalty.

Gregory L. Culver One of many law abiding gun owners Hutto, TX

Hello,

I am contacting you about HB 670. I Don understand the need for it? There is already laws against reckless discharge of a firearm. Not too mention what why does it make a difference if someone fires a gun not at a range? Is this happening in large numbers in the state of Texas?! If there is no victim then what’s the problem? Only reason for this bill is to make gun owners criminals. I oppose arbitrarily making people criminals because you don’t like guns and the people who own them.

Thanks for your time. G.L.Culver

Page 7 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

Michelle Mostert Self-Therapist Dripping Springs, TX

I OPPOSE HB 670. Too many harmless instances could be deemed illegal with this bill. Laws are already in place for unlawful discharge of a firearm.

James Mabe GOA / Self North Richland Hills, TX

I oppose this poorly worded Bill. The language itself because largely meaningless due to the issues of the intended target. It also opens claims that may not be valid given the provision around shooting ranges, which fail what the intent of this Bill should be.

Kenneth Green Texas citizens Kirbyville, TX

I, like most Texans oppose this bill and HB3350 because they are unconstitutional and the Constitution is The Law of the Land. They would be void.

Allison Heyward Self Schertz, TX

I oppose this bill because I could be test firing a gun in a direction I know is safe when on my ranch. I could be shooting to scare a animal away and then my neighbors make a baseless complaint because I’m one my own acreage. As a minority I don’t want to be unfairly targeted because of a neighbor not knowing my rights on my private property. I also don’t like the fact that this bill provides only a defense to prosecution for hunting and shooting at ranges. Individuals could still get arrested, get charged, and then burden of proof is on them to show that they met the exception which is highly outrages. It’s also seem like a back door to a red flag law. Also this bill gives a Class A misdemeanor even when no harm is done with an outrageously high penalty. Stop trying to take away my constitutional 2nd Amendment right.

Patricia Manuel, Mrs Retired / self Grand Orairie, TX

I oppose this bill because it criminalizes innocent (ie - test fires)and necessary behaviors ( ie - running off a dangerous animal) on land where it is safe to do so.

Ferrando Heyward

Page 8 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

Self Schertz, TX

I oppose this bill because I could be test firing a gun in a direction I know is safe on my ranch. I could be shooting to scare a animal away and then my neighbors make a baseless complaint because I’m one my own acreage. As a minority I don’t want to be unfairly targeted because of a neighbor not knowing my rights on my private property. . It’s also seem like a back door to a red flag law. Also this bill give a Class A misdemeanor even when no harm is done with an outrageously high penalty. Stop trying to take away my constitutional 2nd Amendment right.

Jonathan Heyward Self Schertz, TX

I oppose this bill because I could be test firing a gun in a direction I know is safe on my grandfather’s ranch. I could be shooting to scare a animal away and then my neighbors make a baseless complaint because I’m one my own acreage. As a minority I don’t want to be unfairly targeted because his neighbor not knowing my rights on my private property. I also don’t like the fact that this bill provides only a defense to prosecution for hunting and shooting at ranges. Individuals could still get arrested, get charged, and then burden of proof is on them to show that they met the exception which is highly outrages. It’s also seem like a back door to a red flag law. Also this bill gives a Class A misdemeanor even when no harm is done with an outrageously high penalty. Stop trying to take away my constitutional 2nd Amendment right.

Craig Andress Self Houston, TX

I oppose this bill because I could be test firing a gun in a direction I know is safe on my ranch. I could be shooting to scare a animal away and then my neighbors make a baseless complaint because I’m one my own acreage. As a minority I don’t want to be unfairly targeted because of a neighbor not knowing my rights on my private property. I also don’t like the fact that this bill provides only a defense to prosecution for hunting and shooting at ranges. Individuals could still get arrested, get charged, and then burden of proof is on them to show that they met the exception which is highly outrages. It’s also seem like a back door to a red flag law. Also this bill gives a Class A misdemeanor even when no harm is done with an outrageously high penalty. Stop trying to take away my constitutional 2nd Amendment right. As Gun laws seem to target minorities as they always have.

Arianna Stenson Self San Antonio, TX

I oppose this bill because I could be test firing a gun in a direction I know is safe on my grandfather’s ranch. I could be shooting to scare a animal away and then my neighbors make a baseless complaint because I’m one my own acreage. As a minority I don’t want to be unfairly targeted because of his neighbor doesn’t know my rights on his private property. I also don’t like the fact that this bill provides only a defense to prosecution for hunting and shooting at ranges. Individuals could still get arrested, get charged, and then burden of proof is on them to show that they met the exception which is highly outrages. It’s also seem like a back door to a red flag law. Also this bill gives a Class A misdemeanor even when no harm is done with an outrageously high penalty. Stop trying to take away my constitutional 2nd Amendment right.

Page 9 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

Benji Campbell Self Anson, TX

I oppose this bill. Even though this bill sounds good on it's face, it's just another way of creating new "Criminal offense" to charge otherwise law abiding citizens with a new crime. For that reason and more, I oppose HB 670.

Teri Horne Self/ OCT:WOMEN Quitman, TX

My name is Teri Horne and I live in Wood County I Oppose This bill ,This bill, while well-intentioned, would easily criminalize harmless behavior that is currently safe, common, and legal. example: Test firing a gun in a direction we know is safe, but where there is not a hung target Shooting a gun to scare away an animal that one does not want to shoot Neighbors making baseless complaints about gun owners shooting safely on their own propertyMinorities plinking on private property – they’re worried about being unfairly targeted Shooting into the air with a shotgun as in shooting skeet – but without clay pigeons in the air The bill gives a Class A misdemeanor even when no harm is done – that's an outrageously high penalty As I have no problem with those who cause harm (including serious bodily injury or harm) being prosecuted for the harm that they caused – its already a crime. Deadly conduct remains a crime, too. This bill provides only a defense to prosecution for hunting and shooting at ranges. Individuals still get arrested, get charged, and then burden of proof is on them to show that they met the exception.

Nathan Fleer, Dr. Self PhD Chemist Katy, TX

I oppose this bill. It sounds good on paper, but some firearms, such as shotguns, are used for skeet shooting and other aerial targets where there is no stationary hung target. Someone may be shooting to scare away an animal they don't want to kill or they may be test firing in a safe direction where no target has been hung. This would likely be abused and used against people plinking on their own property.

Bryan Trice Self Bedford, TX

This is not a needed law. To recklessly fire and cause harm is already against the law. This logical result of this bill will be to unnecessarily criminalize Texans.

Daniel Blahuta, Mr Self, Retired

Page 10 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

Whitesboro, TX

I oppose this bill due to the possibility of someone being charged because of an accidental discharge of a firearm.

Karen Reeves Self Ben Wheeler, TX

I oppose this bill! To punch someone with a lifetime conviction for an accidental discharge and nobody is hurt is insanely unfair!

Arthur Webb Myself Garwood, TX

I oppose this bill, there is no reason to criminalize firing a firearm while not at a range if no harm is caused Many Texans currently own property which is perfectly safe to practice on, and for those who don't, discharges that harm persons or property are already illegal

Joshua Tyler Self Temple, TX

I am against this bill. What constitutes reckless? Who makes that decision? Someone who hates guns or an agent of the government. What if I'm just shooting some cans and another party says I'm fitting recklessly. All it takes is a person in a position of authority to say my targets aren't valid targets to prosecute me.

Shelby Feltner Self Huntsville, TX

This is a reckless bill aiming at criminalizing Texans. If we are on the legal amount of acreage on PRIVATE property, why is this necessary. It’s evident the person behind this bill has no idea about how guns work. How to sight in a gun on your land and target practice. If the neighbors complain? You’re on your private property not harming anybody. Stop trying to criminalize every gun owner in Texas.

Barry Bailey Self Henderson, TX

I am apposed to this bill.

William Miehe Self, project manager

Page 11 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

Argyle, TX

• This bill, while well-intentioned, could easily criminalize harmless behavior that is currently safe, common, and legal. For example: o Test firing a gun in a direction we know is safe, but where there is not a hung target o Shooting a gun to scare away an animal that one does not want to shoot o Neighbors making baseless complaints about gun owners shooting safely on their own property o Minorities plinking on private property – they’re worried about being unfairly targeted o Shooting into the air with a shotgun as in shooting skeet – but without clay pigeons in the air • The bill gives a Class A misdemeanor even when no harm is done – that's an outrageously high penalty • We have no problem with those who cause harm (including serious bodily injury or harm) being prosecuted for the harm that they caused – that's already a crime. Deadly conduct remains a crime, too. • The bill provides only a defense to prosecution for hunting and shooting at ranges. Individuals could still get arrested, get charged, and then burden of proof is on them to show that they met the exception.

Daniel Harris self voting citizen sugarland, TX

OPPOSE – HB 670 by Martinez: Why we oppose this bill: • This bill, while well-intentioned, could easily criminalize harmless behavior that is currently safe, common, and legal. For example: o Test firing a gun in a direction we know is safe, but where there is not a hung target o Shooting a gun to scare away an animal that one does not want to shoot o Neighbors making baseless complaints about gun owners shooting safely on their own property o Minorities plinking on private property – they’re worried about being unfairly targeted o Shooting into the air with a shotgun as in shooting skeet – but without clay pigeons in the air • The bill gives a Class A misdemeanor even when no harm is done – that's an outrageously high penalty • We have no problem with those who cause harm (including serious bodily injury or harm) being prosecuted for the harm that they caused – that's already a crime. Deadly conduct remains a crime, too. • The bill provides only a defense to prosecution for hunting and shooting at ranges. Individuals could still get arrested, get charged, and then burden of proof is on them to show that they met the exception

Eric Menn Self - Safety Fort Worth, TX

Vote NO

Michael Brown Self Thrall, TX

Please oppose this bill

Ramon Hernandez

Page 12 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

Constituent Edinburg, TX

I oppose this bill. This bill gives individuals a class A charge for firing a gun not a range. Penalizing and criminalizing individuals who live out in or on a ranch land. Government should mot dictate what individuals do on their private land. I oppose this bill. This bill gives individuals a class A charge for firing a gun not a range. Penalizing and criminalizing individuals who live out in or on a ranch land. Government should mot dictate what individuals do on their private land.

I oppose this bill. This bill gives individuals a class A charge for firing a gun not a range. Penalizing and criminalizing individuals who live out in or on a ranch land. Government should mot dictate what individuals do on their private land.

I oppose this bill. This bill gives individuals a class A charge for firing a gun not a range. Penalizing and criminalizing individuals who live out in or on a ranch land. Government should mot dictate what individuals do on their private land.

I oppose this bill. This bill gives individuals a class A charge for firing a gun not a range. Penalizing and criminalizing individuals who live out in or on a ranch land. Government should mot dictate what individuals do on their private land.

I oppose this bill. This bill gives individuals a class A charge for firing a gun not a range. Penalizing and criminalizing individuals who live out in or on a ranch land. Government should mot dictate what individuals do on their private land. I oppose this bill. This bill gives individuals a class A charge for firing a gun not a range. Penalizing and criminalizing individuals who live out in or on a ranch land. Government should mot dictate what individuals do on their private land.

I oppose this bill. This bill gives individuals a class A charge for firing a gun not a range. Penalizing and criminalizing individuals who live out in or on a ranch land. Government should mot dictate what individuals do on their private land. I oppose this bill I oppose this bill. I oppose this bill. I oppose this bill. I oppose this bill. I oppose this bill. I oppose this bill. I oppose this bill.

Derek Murph Self small business owner San antonio, TX

Oppose

Matt Lohr self / software tester Spring, TX

Page 13 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

As with most restrictions, this intends to incrementally deny the right to keep and bear arms. Specifically, it is subject to abuse and might criminalize innocent behavior.

Robert White Self Selma, TX

Good evening, There seems to be a trend to try and penalize individuals and criminalize their actions for mistakes. While serving in the military I was unfortunate enough to see two accidental discharges in my entire career. Such things mean that people need remedial training, perhaps some oversight while they obtain proficiency. But we would not criminalize a Soldier for a mistake, especially if no one or nothing was harmed. Giving a Class A misdemeanor for a negligent or accidental discharge when there is no damage to property and no harm to an individual is an excessive penalty. As an example, the firearm manufacturer Sig Sauer has come under scrutiny over the past few years because their P320 pistol has been shown to fire on its own! Meaning that the pistol fired when the owner of that pistol had it in a holster and did not pull the trigger. This was even seen on body Cam of a police officer as they were getting out of their vehicle. Their firearm discharged as they were getting out of the police car. They did not take the pistol out the holster and obviously did not pull the trigger, however the gun went off. Unfortunately these types of incidents happen whether is it is by user error or firearm malfunction. To hold an individual accountable and to a Class A misdemeanour doesn't take into account the situation. It would be unjust to provide such a penalty when you don't know the details of the situation, and especially of no one was injured and no property was damaged.

Respectfully,

Dr. Robert D White, D.C. Captain, U.S. Army Retired bradley hodges self austin, TX

Against HB 670. No more gun control. Thanks.

Robert Ferguson Self and sales rep Frisco, TX

• This bill, while well-intentioned, could easily criminalize harmless behavior that is currently safe, common, and legal. For example: o Test firing a gun in a direction we know is safe, but where there is not a hung target o Shooting a gun to scare away an animal that one does not want to shoot o Neighbors making baseless complaints about gun owners shooting safely on their own property o Minorities plinking on private property – they’re worried about being unfairly targeted o Shooting into the air with a shotgun as in shooting skeet – but without clay pigeons in the air • The bill gives a Class A misdemeanor even when no harm is done – that's an outrageously high penalty

Page 14 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

• We have no problem with those who cause harm (including serious bodily injury or harm) being prosecuted for the harm that they caused – that's already a crime. Deadly conduct remains a crime, too. • The bill provides only a defense to prosecution for hunting and shooting at ranges. Individuals could still get arrested, get charged, and then burden of proof is on them to show that they met the exception.

Marianne Paulsen self - retired BELLVILLE, TX

I oppose this bill because, while well-intentioned, could easily criminalize harmless behavior that is currently safe, common, and legal. For example: o Test firing a gun in a direction we know is safe, but where there is not a hung target o Shooting a gun to scare away an animal that one does not want to shoot o Neighbors making baseless complaints about gun owners shooting safely on their own property o Minorities plinking on private property – they’re worried about being unfairly targeted o Shooting into the air with a shotgun as in shooting skeet – but without clay pigeons in the air • The bill gives a Class A misdemeanor even when no harm is done – that's an outrageously high penalty • We have no problem with those who cause harm (including serious bodily injury or harm) being prosecuted for the harm that they caused – that's already a crime. Deadly conduct remains a crime, too. • The bill provides only a defense to prosecution for hunting and shooting at ranges. Individuals could still get arrested, get charged, and then burden of proof is on them to show that they met the exception.

Melvin Zetino GOA Houston, TX

I oppose this bill because people should not be criminalized over doing something safe and harmless like scaring away animals or test firing guns in their private property in a safe direction.

Vincent Bonacquisti self Copperas Cove, TX this is not a good bill if you fire a warning shot you are going to get in trouble, opposed

Matthew Brocker self Fort Worth, TX

I oppose this bill.

This bill would allow far too broad powers to the police over the exercise of the ones right on their own property. Gun owners are already responsible for the discharge of their firearms under existing law, and should not be held to any standard where no damage has been done.

Page 15 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

Don Parker Self Carrollton, TX

I oppose this bill for numerous reasons including the fact that discharging a firearm to scare away versus shooting to kill is beneficial to an animal that wanders into an inhabited area yet there is NO reason to deliberately shoot to kill. Such may be an animal that’s good for the environment, needs to be discouraged from attacking domesticated animals and the humans responsible for such animals. The proposed law makes no sense in the real world!

Marco Aleman Self - entrepreneur San Antonio, TX

I oppose this bill. This bill criminalizes simple tasks such as test firing a weapon in a safe direction with no target in an otherwise safe and legal environment. Texas is a big place, and we don’t all live within city limits. This is yet another example of a well intentioned bill that creates opportunity to needlessly penalize minorities and people of lower socioeconomic status. There are already laws on the books to address harm caused to others either through negligence or malice. Thank you for your service.

Ryan Lovchik self - sales Houston, TX

I oppose this bill. It will criminalize Texans.

Venus Wilder Self Retired Dripping Springs, TX

I oppose HB 670, as it is ridiculous on its face. If someone discharges a weapon, and it causes no harm, why should that be a Class A Misdemeanor? There are already laws in place if a discharged weapon actually does harm. All this bill does is overreach and punish responsible gun owners. Texans are tired of their God-given rights and freedoms being eroded every time the legislature meets. There is strong opposition to this bill, and we don’t want or need it.

Johnny Nail Self Splendora, TX

Bill is subjective! Who determines aimless. People often go out and shoot their weapons in a direction that they feel is safe but without a designated target in order to get use to shooting that weapon. Laws can’t be left to a OPINION!

Page 16 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

Karen Lane None Hewitt, TX

I oppose this bill. If someone recklessly discharges a firearm and someone gets hurt, that's one thing, but if there's no harm done, it should not be classified as a crime. This could limit anyone from self-protection based on any accusation.

Aaron James Self White Settlement, TX

I oppose this bill as it will criminalize someone trying to scare away an animal that they do not wish to shoot and could easily be misused.

Richard Kirchhof, III Llano Tea Party Llano, TX

I oppose this bill. Legal use and discharge of weapons is protected by the US Constitution as a basic right. This bill is counter to any historic use of weapons on Texas and restricts practice on private land, personal defense, predator eradication where needed, and all tradition and expectations of any Texan to use weapons when and where called for. Reckless is purely subjective and grants unwarranted rights to harass or prosecute lawful use of weapons by non-criminal owners. darrin rousse self/engineer sugar land, TX

This bill, while well-intentioned, could easily criminalize harmless behavior that is currently safe, common, and legal. For example: o Test firing a gun in a direction we know is safe, but where there is not a hung target o Shooting a gun to scare away an animal that one does not want to shoot o Neighbors making baseless complaints about gun owners shooting safely on their own property o Minorities plinking on private property – they’re worried about being unfairly targeted o Shooting into the air with a shotgun as in shooting skeet – but without clay pigeons in the air • The bill gives a Class A misdemeanor even when no harm is done – that's an outrageously high penalty

Autumn Brown Self / substitute teacher Friendswood, TX

This bill, while well-intentioned, could easily criminalize harmless behavior that is currently safe, common, and legal. For example: o Test firing a gun in a direction we know is safe, but where there is not a hung target o Shooting a gun to scare away an animal that one does not want to shoot

Page 17 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670 o Neighbors making baseless complaints about gun owners shooting safely on their own property o Minorities plinking on private property – they’re worried about being unfairly targeted o Shooting into the air with a shotgun as in shooting skeet – but without clay pigeons in the air • The bill gives a Class A misdemeanor even when no harm is done – that's an outrageously high penalty • We have no problem with those who cause harm (including serious bodily injury or harm) being prosecuted for the harm that they caused – that's already a crime. Deadly conduct remains a crime, too. • The bill provides only a defense to prosecution for hunting and shooting at ranges. Individuals could still get arrested, get charged, and then burden of proof is on them to show that they met the exception. darrin rousse self/engineer sugae land, TX

Why I oppose this bill: • This bill, while well-intentioned, could easily criminalize harmless behavior that is currently safe, common, and legal. For example: o Test firing a gun in a direction we know is safe, but where there is not a hung target o Shooting a gun to scare away an animal that one does not want to shoot o Neighbors making baseless complaints about gun owners shooting safely on their own property o Minorities plinking on private property – they’re worried about being unfairly targeted o Shooting into the air with a shotgun as in shooting skeet – but without clay pigeons in the air • The bill gives a Class A misdemeanor even when no harm is done – that's an outrageously high penalty • We have no problem with those who cause harm (including serious bodily injury or harm) being prosecuted for the harm that they caused – that's already a crime. Deadly conduct remains a crime, too. • The bill provides only a defense to prosecution for hunting and shooting at ranges. Individuals could still get arrested, get charged, and then burden of proof is on them to show that they met the exception.

Andrew Austin, Mr. self Livingston, TX

OPPOSE THIS BILL.

This bill, while well-intentioned, could easily criminalize harmless behavior that is currently safe, common, and legal. For example: o Test firing a gun in a direction we know is safe, but where there is not a hung target o Shooting a gun to scare away an animal that one does not want to shoot o Neighbors making baseless complaints about gun owners shooting safely on their own property o Minorities plinking on private property – they’re worried about being unfairly targeted o Shooting into the air with a shotgun as in shooting skeet – but without clay pigeons in the air

• The bill gives a Class A misdemeanor even when no harm is done – that's an outrageously high penalty • We have no problem with those who cause harm (including serious bodily injury or harm) being prosecuted for the harm that they caused – that's already a crime. Deadly conduct remains a crime, too. • The bill provides only a defense to prosecution for hunting and shooting at ranges. Individuals could still get arrested, get charged, and then burden of proof is on them to show that they met the exception.

Gabriel Gaitan, Mr. SHSU graduate student, self

Page 18 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

Huntsville, TX

Greetings Representative Martinez,

I am Gabriel Gaitan, I am a current graduate student specializing in Homeland Security Studies at Sam Houston State University. I am speaking IN OPPOSITION to bill HB 670. This bill would criminalize current and common practices of firearm safety. For example, Test firing a gun in a direction we know is safe, but where there is not a hung target. If we want to make sure that the firearm is operating normally we must “dry fire”, or the practice of shooting a firearm without ammunition in the chamber. The user pulls the trigger, the hammer drops, but nothing happens. Or when Minorities plinking on private property – they’re worried about being unfairly targeted. Firing ranges have become more expensive and low-income citizens do not have enough money to get into the range to practice, so plink shooting is an alternative to pay for expensive range costs. The bill provides only a defense to prosecution for hunting and shooting at ranges. Individuals could still get arrested, get charged, and then burden of proof is on them to show that they met the exception. That is a outrageous penalty because law abiding gun owners would be unfairly targeted with the threat of a Class A misdemeanor just for practicing a harmless tactic to practice their gun.

Thanks for your time.

Sincerely,

Gabriel Gaitan

John Garza GOA Needville, TX

Ladies and Gentlemen, representatives of Texas. As your constituent I urge you to oppose HB670. This Bill leaves no room for a non lethal accidental discharge of a firearm caused by human error. No law abiding citizen intentionally conducts themselves in such a manner other than an unintended accident. Sincerely John Garza

Harry Josten self Grapevine, TX

Please oppose this bill. It is vague and would affect a person discharging a firearm on their own property when no harm was done. Examples: scaring off a coyote, shooting at a squirrel, or just plinking.

William Junkins Self/Retired Amarillo, TX

I oppose this bill. While well intended, it criminalizes harmless behavior that is currently considered safe, common, and legal.The bill gives a Class A misdemeanor even when no harm is done. Examples of common and legal actions that would now be considered a criminal activity: Test firing a gun in a known safe direction without a target, shooting a gun to scare away an animal, neighbors making baseless complaints about gunners shooting safely on their own property.I have no problem with arresting and prosecuting those who cause harm. This is already a law.

Page 19 of 20 COMMENTS FOR: HB 670

Thank you

Lee Kuhn Self Tomball, TX

I oppose this bill because if you own your own property regardless of size in acres it should not be illegal to shoot on your property as long as you are doing it in a safe manner (ensuring that there is no way the round can go through the target and backstop to avoid hurting anyone).

Phillip SMITH Self San Antonio, TX

“I oppose this bill.” Due to the fact that this will take law enforcement away from there duties. To investigate weather the discharge was reckless. When there is no harm the is no foul. There are enough laws in the books that are not enforced as it is. This is silly.

Page 20 of 20