They can do this if they want to pay for a private facility instead of a public facility.bblhd672 wrote:I can see that it is just a lot easier and safer for the gun shows to not allow LTC's to roam the floor with weapons loaded. Probably cost less for their liability insurance as well.
However, by not wanding everyone to ensure that the rules are applied equally to both licensed and unlicensed attendees it is unfair to the LTC's.
At minimum, Premier Gun Shows and every other organization holding guns shows should have to clearly articulate on their website the policy on carrying firearms inside the show. In Premier's case saying on their website that guns are welcome and then posting .06 and .07 signs at the door sounds mutually exclusive.
Search found 4 matches
Return to “Question on 30.06 posting”
- Tue Aug 30, 2016 5:50 pm
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: Question on 30.06 posting
- Replies: 34
- Views: 5600
Re: Question on 30.06 posting
- Mon Aug 29, 2016 12:35 pm
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: Question on 30.06 posting
- Replies: 34
- Views: 5600
Re: Question on 30.06 posting
Do you think the government agency could be fined in the gun show example? My city manager did get the offending signs removed from our local gun show.ScottDLS wrote:I agree. In this opinion the lessee had exclusive use of the facility for its offices and business. It was not a multiple use venue like a convention center or stadium. I think we should continue to challenge Ft. Worth on this...as well as ignoring the invalid notice.rocinante wrote:Didn't the AG opinion refer to properties leased at "arms-length"? That is, the lessee has full control of the property? I'm not sure a gun show would count for that, unless there were no "city" staff present at all (e.g. management, security, janitorial), and the city did not impose any rules or control over the lessee activities beyond what would normally show up in a business property lease.
- Sun Aug 28, 2016 12:31 pm
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: Question on 30.06 posting
- Replies: 34
- Views: 5600
Re: Question on 30.06 posting
Thank you for that Pawpaw. So it appears that if the government agency leases the property to some one other than a government agency they can post 30.06-30.07 but those signs may not be valid. The government agency though could not be fined. IANAL but that's how I interpret that.Pawpaw wrote:Here's the AG opinion: https://texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinio ... kp0108.pdf
While the original question was about a non-profit organization, the AG states in his opinion "any private entity".
Basically, as my non-lawyer brain reads it, it can't be posted, but if they do, no one will be held accountable.
- Sun Aug 28, 2016 12:00 pm
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: Question on 30.06 posting
- Replies: 34
- Views: 5600
Re: Question on 30.06 posting
In my community the local gun show is on city owned property. In March for the first time ever the show was posted 30.06 and 30.07. I did not attend, I contacted the city manager and he subsequently contacted the gun show promoter and told him that he could not post 30.06 and 30.07. Documents by pictures were taken.The last show, in August, was NOT posted. I did remind the city manager just before the show to reinforce the no signage was allowed. He actually contacted me after the show to confirm that the show was not posted.
As far as I know even if it is rented and on city owned property it can not be posted. Don't know where the AG said different. Another way to fight these is to use Facebook and social media. Write a review of the show. LTC holders may hold back their dollars.
As far as I know even if it is rented and on city owned property it can not be posted. Don't know where the AG said different. Another way to fight these is to use Facebook and social media. Write a review of the show. LTC holders may hold back their dollars.