Library Carry

[lonewolf]

Probably no proper form, but you have indicated an ability to write a well-formed and straightforward document with your letter. A request in writing in the same professional format, including copies of your original request, their response, and a copy of the applicable code regarding sign posting addressed to the city manager might do it.

Good luck, and keep us posted on the progress!

[Wisewr]

lonewolf, I wish I could take credit for that letter, but I am going to give credit where credit is due. Russell gave me that on page one of this thread and I just inserted the names and place. So we might say Russell has indicated his ability to write a well-formed and straightforward document. Thanks Russell and hats off to him. Maybe he'll give a well-formed and straightforward response to send.

[srothstein]

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.

[quoheleth]

Back to the original question about city library and a unenforcable 30-06 sign.

Is the same true of county library, i.e. Harris County Public Library? My local branch has the ghostbuster sign (unenforcable in the first place), but even if it were a legit sign, it is permissable to carry there?

A friend and I were discussing this today, and running across this thread, I'm curious as to who wins the 6-pak.

By the way...is DPS coming out with a new & improved CHL handbook anytime soon? The one I had for class and the last one I saw on-line is the 2008 (or was it even the 2007? Now, I forget & I'm not getting up to look...) edition.

Q

[wford]

I am curious as to the purpose of trying to force a city to remove a 30.06 sign from a library that does not apply anyway.
Poking a bear with a stick ? City managers are a pretty powerful lobby group. Personally I enjoy walking past a 30.06 posted
at a library as its a reminder of the win for our side.

Just as fyi back in 03 when I was trying to get the 30.06 signs removed from the Arlington Public Library I got this information.

email snippet
No. It was not Mr. Kiefer. The signs were posted in fiscal year 1995. According to the City Attorney's Office, George Campbell, the City Manager at that time, made the decision to post the signs, and he advised the City Council of his decision. The City Manager is the chief administrator of the City and has the authority to manage the City's property under the City Charter.

[Wisewr]

wford, I guess one of the reasons is because when I first got my license I thought the sign was actually valid and would not carry into the building. So, I would like to have it fixed that way there is no doubt in others minds about wheter or not they can carry. I am not enraged about the whole situation in general, it does irritate me quite a bit that they can't follow their own rules, but I am not fuming over it, does that make sense? It's kinda like a pebble in your shoe. It's not going to kill you, but it sure is annoying.

So where did you end up with the Arlington Public Library? From your snippet it looks like they pretty much told you that the City Charter overrides the State laws, did I read that right?

[Liberty]

B
By the way...is DPS coming out with a new & improved CHL handbook anytime soon? The one I had for class and the last one I saw on-line is the 2008 (or was it even the 2007? Now, I forget & I'm not getting up to look...) edition.

Q

The Changes take place in Sept. Last time they came out with the Handbook available on line in Oct. DPS has a reputation for taking their sweet time on CHL afairs, and they are dedicated to keeping this reputation. I suspect that the handbook should be out and available online sometime in October.

[Abraham]

If the police don't know the law then as far as they're concerned the 30.06 is enforceable.

If your gun is accidently exposed (it's happened to me) and you're reported - you'll take the ride.

Arrrgghhh!

[Wisewr]

Abraham, just out of curiosity if you don't mind me asking, how much did your "ride" cost you? And did it leave any dings on your record?

[bdickens]

I am curious as to the purpose of trying to force a city to remove a 30.06 sign from a library that does not apply anyway.
Poking a bear with a stick ? City managers are a pretty powerful lobby group. Personally I enjoy walking past a 30.06 posted
at a library as its a reminder of the win for our side.

How about the purpose being to make the city obey the law?

[wford]

I am curious as to the purpose of trying to force a city to remove a 30.06 sign from a library that does not apply anyway.
Poking a bear with a stick ? City managers are a pretty powerful lobby group. Personally I enjoy walking past a 30.06 posted
at a library as its a reminder of the win for our side.

How about the purpose being to make the city obey the law?

And what law would that be ? Why do you still think posting a 30.06 sign on a govt. building is illegal ? You do realize that there would not be a
30.06(e) if the signs were illegal dont you ?

[Mike1951]

email snippet
No. It was not Mr. Kiefer. The signs were posted in fiscal year 1995. According to the City Attorney's Office, George Campbell, the City Manager at that time, made the decision to post the signs, and he advised the City Council of his decision. The City Manager is the chief administrator of the City and has the authority to manage the City's property under the City Charter.

I would have had to point out to them that 30.06 didn't EXIST until 1997!

I frequent the Sterling library and carry past the sign every time.

As has been pointed out numerous times here, there is nothing illegal about posting these signs.

They are, however, unenforceable.

[bdickens]

I am curious as to the purpose of trying to force a city to remove a 30.06 sign from a library that does not apply anyway.
Poking a bear with a stick ? City managers are a pretty powerful lobby group. Personally I enjoy walking past a 30.06 posted
at a library as its a reminder of the win for our side.

How about the purpose being to make the city obey the law?

And what law would that be ? Why do you still think posting a 30.06 sign on a govt. building is illegal ? You do realize that there would not be a
30.06(e) if the signs were illegal dont you ?

Try PC 30.06

PC 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY
CONCEALED HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if
the license holder:
(1) carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter
411, Govemment Code, on property of another without effective
consent; and
(2) received notice that:
(A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed
handgun was forbidden; or
(B) remaining on the property with a concealed handgun was
forbidden and failed to depart.
(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the
owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the
owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.
(c) In this section:
(1) "Entry" has the meaning assigned by Section 30.05(b).
(2) "License holder has the meaning assigned by Section
46.035(9.
(3) "Written communication" means:
(A) a card or other document on which is written language
identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code
(trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person
licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Govemment Code (concealed
handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed
handgun"; or
(B) a sign posted on the property that:
(i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both
English and Spanish;
(ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least
one inch in height; and
(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to
the public.
(d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(e) It is an exception to the application of this section that the property
on which the license holder cames a handgun is owned or leased
by a governmental entity and is not a premises or other place on which
the license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under
Section 46.03 or 46.035.

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/ftp/forms/LS-16.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[wford]

Well I'm not sure what the fiscal year was back then and the fact was they were not going to take them down period. 30.06 was created to save us from 30.05 IIRC but I dont rember the legal forerunner of the 30.06 signs Actually I had forgotten that we have had CHL since 9/1/95 but the license was not valid until 1/1/96

email snippet
No. It was not Mr. Kiefer. The signs were posted in fiscal year 1995. According to the City Attorney's Office, George Campbell, the City Manager at that time, made the decision to post the signs, and he advised the City Council of his decision. The City Manager is the chief administrator of the City and has the authority to manage the City's property under the City Charter.

I would have had to point out to them that 30.06 didn't EXIST until 1997!

I frequent the Sterling library and carry past the sign every time.

As has been pointed out numerous times here, there is nothing illegal about posting these signs.

They are, however, unenforceable.

[Wisewr]

As has been pointed out numerous times here, there is nothing illegal about posting these signs.

They are, however, unenforceable.

I agree that these signs are unenforceable, but what I would be worried about is one of the officers on duty at the library being alert, for a change, and notice me carrying and not knowing the signs are unenforceable. To stay out of trouble you would have to argue that the sign is unenforceable, not that you didn't see it because there is no way your going to miss that sign. Trying to make that argument on the spot would probably still get you at least a court date which I wouldn't want to go through.

And I know, we always say, concealed is concealed, but if you were looking for a concealed gun on somone and knew what you were looking for, you can probably spot it.