Well, me and a friend went to a bowling alley that had laser tag and an arcade, both of us had on a sleeveless shirt. One employee greeted us at the door and as were about to pay for bowling, a police officer approached us and asked us to leave and come back with shirts with sleeves. The officer stated that it was against the establishments policy and he was just enforcing it. At no time did any employee ask us to leave for wearing a sleeveless. Are you saying I could have told him to kick rocks and went on with my business?EEllis wrote:Well my understanding is that a laws intent only matters if there is something ambiguous in the language otherwise it should be legal as read. A example where I was schooled on this was the legality of carrying a otherwise illegal knife with a chl. Because of the language CHLers can carry otherwise illegal weapons but the intent was just to make it legal to carry handguns. I thought the intent should matter. It doesn't. Through a loophole CHLers can carry otherwise illegal weapons. In this case it isn't a government agency but a private promoter posting what seems a previously unconsidered policy. And please be aware law enforcement cannot enforce house rules. Using cop to secure the weapons is one thing, but if they are at the door checking and directing people to have the guns secured it's a clear violation. Cop can't kick you out of a theater for bringing in outside food. An employee must ask you to leave and then a cop can make you do so.puma guy wrote: What you are stating it's not the intent of laws allowing CHL for a weapon to be loaded. Thus any government entity can make you unload the weapon through enforcement by a LEO via this loophole.
Search found 1 match
Return to “Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?”
- Tue Oct 06, 2015 2:41 am
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?
- Replies: 1085
- Views: 367376