Denied Rigth To Vote...For Carrying Pocket Knife

[AlaskanInTexas]

My thoughts on the subjects at hand:

1. I see nothing offensive about having non-statutory rules in public buildings. You really want them to have to pass a law each and every time a local building sees a need to be addressed? If they don't want knives, fine. If they don't want you rolling in with a large pizza, fine. If they don't want you playing music from a boombox, fine.

2. I am pretty much on board with the any gun anywhere camp, but not in courts. BAD IDEA. You want some witness to a crime to be testifying knowing that the perps buddies are all sitting there armed? You want a judge to give out an impartial ruling knowing that it will incite powerful emotions in people that are armed? You want families of perps and victims to be sitted across the aisle armed? You want families of victims to be sitting there ready to take charge when the jury doesn't see things as they do. Courtrooms can be rendered relatively safe; I think disarming all is a good trade off here.

[anygunanywhere]

My thoughts on the subjects at hand:

1. I see nothing offensive about having non-statutory rules in public buildings. You really want them to have to pass a law each and every time a local building sees a need to be addressed? If they don't want knives, fine. If they don't want you rolling in with a large pizza, fine. If they don't want you playing music from a boombox, fine.

2. I am pretty much on board with the any gun anywhere camp, but not in courts. BAD IDEA. You want some witness to a crime to be testifying knowing that the perps buddies are all sitting there armed? You want a judge to give out an impartial ruling knowing that it will incite powerful emotions in people that are armed? You want families of perps and victims to be sitted across the aisle armed? You want families of victims to be sitting there ready to take charge when the jury doesn't see things as they do. Courtrooms can be rendered relatively safe; I think disarming all is a good trade off here.

Well, the judges, DAs, and LEOs on duty can protect us all then. Their right to defend themselves is much more important than ours.

We will never be able to control others. This is what makes gun free zones killing fields.


I understand your stances, I just don't agree.

Anygunanywhere

[AlaskanInTexas]

My thoughts on the subjects at hand:

1. I see nothing offensive about having non-statutory rules in public buildings. You really want them to have to pass a law each and every time a local building sees a need to be addressed? If they don't want knives, fine. If they don't want you rolling in with a large pizza, fine. If they don't want you playing music from a boombox, fine.

2. I am pretty much on board with the any gun anywhere camp, but not in courts. BAD IDEA. You want some witness to a crime to be testifying knowing that the perps buddies are all sitting there armed? You want a judge to give out an impartial ruling knowing that it will incite powerful emotions in people that are armed? You want families of perps and victims to be sitted across the aisle armed? You want families of victims to be sitting there ready to take charge when the jury doesn't see things as they do. Courtrooms can be rendered relatively safe; I think disarming all is a good trade off here.

Well, the judges, DAs, and LEOs on duty can protect us all then. Their right to defend themselves is much more important than ours.

We will never be able to control others. This is what makes gun free zones killing fields.


I understand your stances, I just don't agree.

Anygunanywhere

I agree on the gun free zones, mostly because most of them cannot offer adequate security and really have no need to remove guns in the first place. Courts are an entirely different animal: They can provide security (we can debate on whether they need to do a better job) and there are overwhelming reasons not to allow anyone to bring a gun into that environment. We can have gun rights and defend ourselves without being dogmatic.

Anygunjustabouteverywhere

[Cedar Park Dad]

My thoughts on the subjects at hand:

1. I see nothing offensive about having non-statutory rules in public buildings. You really want them to have to pass a law each and every time a local building sees a need to be addressed? If they don't want knives, fine. If they don't want you rolling in with a large pizza, fine. If they don't want you playing music from a boombox, fine.

2. I am pretty much on board with the any gun anywhere camp, but not in courts. BAD IDEA. You want some witness to a crime to be testifying knowing that the perps buddies are all sitting there armed? You want a judge to give out an impartial ruling knowing that it will incite powerful emotions in people that are armed? You want families of perps and victims to be sitted across the aisle armed? You want families of victims to be sitting there ready to take charge when the jury doesn't see things as they do. Courtrooms can be rendered relatively safe; I think disarming all is a good trade off here.

Well, the judges, DAs, and LEOs on duty can protect us all then. Their right to defend themselves is much more important than ours.

We will never be able to control others. This is what makes gun free zones killing fields.


I understand your stances, I just don't agree.

Anygunanywhere

Historically courts have been gun free zones, and full of cops. I'm ok with that.

[AlaskanInTexas]

Historically courts have been gun free zones, and full of cops. I'm ok with that.

And not just that, they actually check to make sure you don't have a gun, unlike other GFZs.

[anygunanywhere]

The state cannot guarantee your safety 100%.

We cannot guarantee our safety 100% either, but at least we can be 100% responsible for it.

Anygunanywhere

[Ameer]

If I can't even carry a pocket knife as a juror, I will trust the testimony of the side that disarmed me as much as they trusted me.

[mojo84]

My response here does not relate to your question, but what happened to you is just another reason why, in the future I will only vote by mail. When I went to vote the other day (early voting) I had to sign some affidavit or something like that because after all these years the name on my DL (same name for over 55 years) was different from the voter reg. card. Also, after all these years my wife had to sign the same kind of thing because her maiden name has suddenly appeared on her voter reg.

The answer is to take care of the discrepancies prior to showing up to vote. The other side is to continue to allow the dead voters and the vote early and often crowd to continue committing voter fraud. Hopefully you can get your records straight in time to vote in November. Your votes are important.

[texanjoker]

If I can't even carry a pocket knife as a juror, I will trust the testimony of the side that disarmed me as much as they trusted me.

So you would have a jaded opinion as a juror because of a rule prohibiting knives? I would hope you tell the attorneys that before being placed on the stand otherwise justice may not be served.

[txcharvel]

Response from County Sheriff's office

You are correct that the pocket Knife (2.75”) in question is not listed as a Prohibited Weapon under Texas Penal Code 46.05. Your definition of a Knife taken from the Texas Penal Code is also correct and that definition, “an instrument that is capable of inflicting serious bodily injury or death by cutting or stabbing a person with the instrument”, is precisely the reason we have “knifes” posted as not being allowed inside the courthouse. You did nothing illegal by possessing the knife upon entering the court premises, it is not an illegal weapon, it was just not allowed.

You were only denied entry while in possession of the Knife. Once removed, your entry was allowed. I am glad the officers in question were polite and they were following our policy. Thank you for your correspondence.

My response back

Thank you so much for your response. I do however have a follow up question. If the knife was not illegal, how can it not be allowed in a public building? In other words, how can local rules be put into place that contradict the rule of law? If there is a legal reference that allows the courthouse to make these local rules, please provide that reference. I understand that judges have much discretion on what is allowed in their courtroom, but I was not entering a court room, I was there to vote.

Also, the sign as you enter the courthouse references that weapons are banned according to Texas Penal Code. The deputies also said that my knife was banned according to Texas Penal Code. As you stated below, my pocket knife is not banned by Texas Penal Code.

I do appreciate your time in responding to my question.

Second Response

The rule of law deals with applicable law violators. It does not determine the threat/risk level given to a particular prohibited item for security purposes. In Travis County, we follow the guidelines set out by the Center For Judicial And Executive Security which prohibits any edged weapon.

Art. 102.017 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure gives the authority to the Commissioners Court to provide for court security plus assess a fee to fund it.

I understand that you were not entering a courtroom but architectural design and funding prohibits us from placing a screening station at each courtroom door. Therefore, we must secure the entire building plus this is the prudent way to spend taxpayer dollars.

My response

102.017 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure only covers various security funds and what they can pay for. It does not state how local courts can set levels of security that differ from the law.

Where can I find written in law that I can't bring my pocket knife to a courthouse?

I'll admit, I know where this is going...they have a rule for courtrooms and as a matter of convenience they apply it to the entire building. I understand this, but their deputies said I had violated the Texas Penal Code, which I did not. Second, how is an ordinary citizen who carries a pocket knife (as all good Americans should) supposed to know that he can't take it to the courthouse?

Awaiting next response...I'll admit, I do find this fun.

[srothstein]

The answer really is simple. The law gives a minimum level that must be obeyed. Any property owner, including the government, may make stricter rules than the law specifies, but they cannot make less strict rules. There may be certain exceptions, such as a law banning a local government from making rules about firearms.

This is very similar to the rules on discrimination. There are laws that forbid my discriminating against people for certain reasons, such as race or religion. But I may still discriminate against them for other reasons, such as clothing worn. (I am still working on getting the Church of John Moses Browning recognized by the federal courts, but not having much luck.)

And the answer to your other question is that the deputies were correct about you violating the Penal code, or being about to. Section 30.05 makes it illegal for you to enter a building after receiving notice that it was not allowed. If you saw a sign saying you could not enter with a knife and then did so anyway, you have committed a crime.

[bayouhazard]

It seems to be the same crime as carrying a cellphone where there is a sign prohibiting them. Regardless of whether the cellphone is turned on.

Why do I doubt they would get equal enforcement?

[talltex]

It seems to be the same crime as carrying a cellphone where there is a sign prohibiting them. Regardless of whether the cellphone is turned on.

Why do I doubt they would get equal enforcement?

maybe because you are aware that while the statutes and laws may be 100% objective, the way in which they are applied and enforced is almost 100% subjective...?

[jbarn]

Response from County Sheriff's office

SNIP



Awaiting next response...I'll admit, I do find this fun.

Be honest; you're the guy who argues with street signs..................

[RogueUSMC]

A few years back, I walked into the Smith Co. Courthouse with one of those little multi things that has the clippers, scissors and nailfile in it. They told me I needed to take it back to my vehicle...lol