TexasCHLforum.com

Wisewr wrote:1) Documents indicating that the signs are enforceable.
2) Documents indicating that the signs are not enforceable.
3) Any deliberations by the officials responsible for the signs as to the motive and goals for posting the signs.

The City has researched its records and found that there are no records responsive to your request at this time.

So basically if I read that right, there is no doucumentation that they can show to prove the signs are enforceable. Does everyone else read it the same way? So now I need to send some type of request to remove the sign. Is there a proper form for that?

I think you might have misread their response to be what you wanted. They did not say that there was no record to show enforceability, or not just that. There is also no records of not being enforceable and no records of the decision to put htem up.

The last part is much more important now, IMO. Since there is no record of a decision to put up the signs, then you may assume it was not discussed at a city council or library governing board meeting. This indicates that the signs were installed by some employee making an executive decision.

I would send a second request for any documents concerning the posting of the signs. Specifically ask for any orders from any manger to the employees to post the signs. The reason i say this is that your first request asked for information concerning the goals and motives. You really want to know who made the decision and anything at all concerning the signs.

The reason for the second request is what I suggest as a third step. You really want to know who made the decision so you can ask for a review of the decision. It might be the city manager, the mayor, or the head librarian made the decision on their own. You need to know who will have a vested interest (and you can prevent them from pushing the decision off on some lower level employee). After you get this information you write a request to have the decision reviewed by the city council.

You request to have it placed on the agenda for a meeting and to be able to make a formal request to remove it. You then make a presentation to the city council on both the lack of legal authority to enforce the signs and on the general characteristics of CHL's as certified good guys. Following up on this will let you know who on city council is anti-gun and who is willing to consider facts. You should end up with a city council decision removing postings that cannot be enforced, as a bare minimum.

bdickens wrote:Therefore, the government entity does not have the authority to post the 30.06 sign in the first place. If they are acting outside the law, then they are breaking the law.

The problem with this statement is that our legal system is based on the concept of prohibitions. Anything not expressly forbidden is permitted. There is no law prohibiting them from posting anything they so desire. It may not be any more enforceable than a sign saying that we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, but it is legal to post both signs.

IMHO, they are not breaking the law and it is our responsibility to know if the sign is valid or not. They would be breaking the law if they tried to enforce the sign, such as requiring a metal detector and then saying you cannot come in with the firearm.