Fort Worth Gun Show Posted?

[boomerang]

Best thing to do is comply with their wishes and disarm.

I think the best thing to do is comply with their wishes and shop somewhere else.

[frankie_the_yankee]

If such a sign existed, and I missed it, then it wouldn't fit the "displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public." stipulation, would it? Thereby making it null and void.

Not necessarily. Anybody can miss a sign, even if well posted. Just because any given person might happen to miss one doesn't automatically render it void.

Geez, semantics!
Perhaps a better choice of words (to untwist Fankie's girdle) would be "liberating".
I would feel liberated, as in, unbound by the tawdry confinements of unenforceable "No guns!" signs.

Is that better? Have I appeased you?

No. Washington types like to "revise and extend" their remarks as recorded in The Congressional Record. You can certainly do the same here as far as I am concerned. But people can also reserve the right to judge for themselves which version of your remarks, the original or the revised, is more accurate.

Believe me, I carry to protect myself, my wife, and my new little girl

OK. But given all of the gun handling, dry firing, etc. that occurs at gun shows, the crowded conditions, the relative dearth of "safe directions" for a muzzle to be pointed at, and considering the AD's we hear about once every few months, isn't it at least argueable that your family (assuming they accompanied you to the show) would be safer if CHL's were not carrying loaded guns at the show?

Look at it this way. We've all heard of instances where there have been AD's, and some even involved injury. In contrast, how many times have we heard of gun shows being raided by armed criminal gangs, or gun show patrons being mugged or robbed while going to or from their cars? Speaking for myself, I have not heard of such a thing in the last year or so. That kind of gives us some data points to estimate the relative risk.

And yes, I know that if you are CCing at a show or anywhere else, you are not supposed to be handling the gun for any reason. But people sometimes do things that they are not supposed to do, right?

(OH YEAH, BTW, I HAD A BABY GIRL WHILE ON SABBATICAL FROM THE FORUM )

Wooooo-hooooo! Babies are a blessing from God. Congratulations, man.

The idea that you would have me sacrifice my own, and their, security to bend to the wishes of a sign that in no way legally binds me from carrying my firearm, is appalling. If bad people can enter a church and do bad things, a gun show is by no means whatsoever a "safe haven".

Please note that I would have you do nothing of the kind.

My own position is that gun shows should provide lockers at the entrances so that people can unload/disarm as needed without forfeiting their means of protection while in the parking lot.

But if they don't, I think the hazards posed by AD's at gun shows are greater than those posed by bad people.

[kauboy]

Your AD point is valid and well taken.
However, the gang raiding scenario might be a bit flawed.
With all of the confusion over what is legal and right going on here, don't you think it would be even more so for those outside or our realm of understanding? As untrue as it is, the rest of the world is happy thinking we are deranged "gun nuts" who would "shoot first and ask questions later".
For all "they" know, everybody in there is armed to the teeth.
That'd sure keep me away, presuming I was John D. Badcritter.
(my apologies to anyone who may actually have that name, and my deepest sympathies... Need a hug?)

[aardwolf]

But if they don't, I think the hazards posed by AD's at gun shows are greater than those posed by bad people.

If we compare ADs with shots fired at bad people, we can make the same argument for disarming FFDOs.

Maybe disarm FAMs too because they haven't shot any bad people recently.

[frankie_the_yankee]

But if they don't, I think the hazards posed by AD's at gun shows are greater than those posed by bad people.

If we compare ADs with shots fired at bad people, we can make the same argument for disarming FFDOs.

Maybe disarm FAMs too because they haven't shot any bad people recently.

Except that those arguments would be utter nonsense, because they proceed from a false premise - actually several of them.

The map doesn't equal the territory. And trying to argue from false analogies is a sure way to arrive at false conclusions.

[frankie_the_yankee]

However, the gang raiding scenario might be a bit flawed.
With all of the confusion over what is legal and right going on here, don't you think it would be even more so for those outside or our realm of understanding? As untrue as it is, the rest of the world is happy thinking we are deranged "gun nuts" who would "shoot first and ask questions later".
For all "they" know, everybody in there is armed to the teeth.
That'd sure keep me away, presuming I was John D. Badcritter.

Actually, that makes my point. For whatever reason, one's chances of having to fend off an armed robbery gang, or even a mugger, at a gun show are miniscule. And we know that dangerous AD's, including those involving injurys, happen from time to time at gun shows right here in TX. So it is evident to me that restricting loaded guns at gun shows is a net plus. Especially if the shows followed the other part of my recommendation to have storage lockers where people can check their carry guns going in.

As I pointed out on a previous post, a gun show is a crowded place where there is a lot of handling and dry firing of firearms going on. Rules that might make sense there do not necessarily make sense everywhere.

For instance, on the street, we know that robberies and aggravated assaults occur several hundred thousand times nationwide each year (ref. FBI UCR), including many thousands of times right here in TX. And we also know that AD's and/or accidental injuries (on the street) involving firearms OVERALL are at a very low level, and have been declining for years. That, plus the research of Jon Lott and the philosophical writings of Jeffery Snyder, among others makes it plain that CHL is a good thing.

And people are not drawing and/or dry firing guns on the street.

So there is no need for anyone (not you kauboy) to bring up false analogies and/or far-fetched slippery slope scenarios in rebuttle.

[boomerang]

But if they don't, I think the hazards posed by AD's at gun shows are greater than those posed by bad people.

If we compare ADs with shots fired at bad people, we can make the same argument for disarming FFDOs.

Maybe disarm FAMs too because they haven't shot any bad people recently.

Except that those arguments would be utter nonsense, because they proceed from a false premise - actually several of them.

The map doesn't equal the territory. And trying to argue from false analogies is a sure way to arrive at false conclusions.

That's an interesting claim, considering that his argument and your argument follow the same line of reasoning.

I admit that doesn't necessarily mean his argument makes any sense.

[kauboy]

Actually, that makes my point. For whatever reason, one's chances of having to fend off an armed robbery gang, or even a mugger, at a gun show are miniscule.

I don't see a point made at all. The same chance exists that I will be confronted by a gunman this Sunday at church.
With such a "minuscule" chance, will I still carry?
You bet yer fanny!
If the chance exists, "Murphy" will show up eventually.
And as we all know:
"Chance favors the prepared mind."

[kman458]

Talking about ad and doing what it takes to try and stop them well there was a gun show here in Brownwood last weekend and there was an old man walking around with one of those snake charmer 410s with the muzzle pointed out behind him that was turning and looking at everything without any reguard as to where the muzzle was pointed. I am glad they had checked it but did not hang around the same area he was in and that was a really small show. I would hate to think what could happen in a big show if they did not do something. I would realy hate to be in the general area of a "hey y'all, watch this" moment if one was to occure at a show. We plan on going to the next show and while we can not carry yet we would not even if we could.

[kauboy]

Like I said back on page 3, they will now be posting at the Ft. Worth Gun Show, just as they do at the High Caliber Gun Show, at the same venue.

Again, sorry guys.

[The Annoyed Man]

This has been an instructive thread. It's funny, I started it by asking a simple question, not ever intending it to go to 4 pages (which is cool that it did). Being still pretty new to CHL, I thought that everything I either can or cannot do while carrying would be bounded by bright, easily recognizable lines. Instead, I am discovering that, like a lot of areas of the law, things can be murky and very much subject to individual interpretation. (This further reinforces my own belief that the more moral a people are, the less need they have for laws.) I am also (again) a relatively new resident of Texas, although I have lived here 35 years ago. As such, I still am not 100% familiar with goings on in the DFW region. So when I started this thread, I expected probably 2 or 3 quick "yes" or "no" answers from people who have been to the Fort Worth Gun Show before, and I certainly didn't realize that it would evolve into a 4 page philosophical discussion.

In reading through this discussion, the most obvious thing that jumps out at me is that people with tons of CHL experience and knowledge of the law can arrive at fundamentally differing conclusions about A) what their CHL permits them to do; B) how that informs their individual perspectives on their carry privileges/rights; and C) how much it informs or reflects their individual feelings about their relationship with government and law enforcement.

One thing that became readily apparent to me as I've read these pages is that I need to stop asking, and go back and do my homework. I have the current CHL book. I have read through it; but it is pretty dry reading, and I am guessing that my mental retention has been rather selective in the process. I need to go back and commit the entire thing to memory, and chalk it up to the discipline of character that is necessary to being a responsible CHL holder. Out of that effort will come my own individual understanding of such things, rather than simply relying on the understanding of others.

[kauboy]

Annoyed, as they say, repetition is the key.

The only reason most of us know this stuff like we do is because we talked about... a lot... ad nauseam.
Reading is great. Knowing the words helps, but asking about it helps a lot too. Reading, plus discussion, helps us learn it better. You ever wonder why they made you read the book, and THEN talk about what you just read, back in school? Repetition!

Please, continue to ask. You may come up with something we've never thought of.

[zeroskillz]

The idea that it's okay to carry there because the Government owns it, is like saying the Bank can put rules and restrictions on what you do in your home because they own it. I believe it's up to the renter of the space to set their own rules, and if you don't like them, go somewhere else. It's that simple.

While I don't agree with the posting, I at least can understand it, given that there was only one Frisco gun show ever. That venue was lost after someone brought a loaded gun in and ooopsy!

I'd be real curious to know if that guy had a CHL or not. I like to believe CHL'ers are a little more contentious and respectful...That a CHL holder would respect a 30.06 sign and the person who posted it, regardless of whether they agreed with it or not.

[aardwolf]

I believe it's up to the renter of the space to set their own rules, and if you don't like them, go somewhere else. It's that simple.

The new law is good. If the renter doesn't it like it, they can use their own property or rent a facility that's privately owned.

I like to believe CHL'ers are a little more contentious and respectful...That a CHL holder would respect a 30.06 sign and the person who posted it, regardless of whether they agreed with it or not.

I respect it enough spend my money with people who respect my civil rights.

[kauboy]

The idea that it's okay to carry there because the Government owns it, is like saying the Bank can put rules and restrictions on what you do in your home because they own it.

Last time I checked, I have to pay homeowners insurance.
Why??? Why do I have to pay it?
Simple. Because "they" own it, and told me to.
Also, the point is moot because a bank and a homeowner sign a contract that both agree to.
You can't equate the same thing to an individual and their government.
The law contains the restriction about government property because it is meant to protect the citizen from an overstepping government.
Private business can mostly do whatever it wants.