TexasCHLforum.com

chasfm11 wrote:

MasterOfNone wrote: I would venture to say this is not ignorance of the law (not knowing better) but rather outright defiance of the law. Much, much worse.

Sorry but as TAM suggests, I don't think it is defiance at all. Let me suggest some examples:

An unnamed town near Ft. Worth has a bar which is the sole source of all of the town's calls for LEOs a couple of nights per week. It is a known hangout for drug deals even though there are uniformed LEOs stationed there on those evenings. One would think that the place would get shut down. Nope. The revenue it generates is important to the town so things like drunk patrons shooting guns in the air in the parking lot occasionally are simply overlooked.

In our town, the vast majority of traffic citations are for speeding. I can drive down the main road and personally see dozens of other types of violations but our LEOs apparently cannot see those same things. In fact, our town is notorious for its over enforcement of speeding as compared to surrounding towns. The practice was so bad that the mayor published an article in the town's newsletter denying it. Obviously, I'm not the only one who has noticed.

It's called selective enforcement. If the PD is told to go easy on a place of business, they do it. If the town wants the revenue, enforcement goes way up. If a place has an invalid 30.06 but the revenue is important to the town, the sign gets enforced - or at least the threat of enforcement is made. Like I keep saying, there are times when the laws are more like guidelines.

To be clear, all of this has nothing to do with the rank and file LEOs who are just trying to do the jobs that have been given to them. Behind the excesses or bending of the law are the politicians pulling the strings. I'm certainly not surprised by that.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

johnson0317 wrote:That is old language, and not a valid posting. However! As you may read, time after time, on this forum...you may be able to beat the rap, but not the ride. If the cop who responds is mostly familiar with the code, then those words seem pretty close to right. I keep reading that you will be alright as long as you do not remain after being told you can not carry; however, you do not have to be verbally told if the signage is correct. In the case of the sign you are talking about, I think you could go on in and be safe until told to leave. The problem, once again, is that the responding LEO may not know that the sign is not correct, and therefore not valid. Maybe you could save a picture of a valid sign, or the link to the DPS website page with the correct wording.

Just don't know if it is worth it or not.

The real problem in this case is that the Grapevine Police Department's official policy, per the Chief of the Grapevine PD, is that they will arrest you for trespass by a holder of a license to carry a concealed handgun on the basis of that signage if you are caught with a gun in that mall. Again, you may beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride per the department's official policy. The attitude of the corporation which led to the posting of the signs is based on ignorance of CHL. The police department's policy to enforce the signage is based on ignorance of the law. Ignorance has no place in my life; therefore, I don't go there. Because of that, I don't understand anybody's fascination with that mall.