Warhammer wrote:C-dub wrote:I was with you up until this statement. Where else are governmental meetings held, but government property? However, I think the actual meeting room is the only thing off limits and not the entire building.Warhammer wrote: So even if they HAD gotten the 30.06 signs right, and even if it IS for a government meeting, the signs would be inapplicable because the property is owned or leased by the city.
My only question is what constitutes a "meeting?" Does two people getting together qualify as a meeting that cold prohibit a CHL from carrying? Supposing they would also properly post a 30.06 sign.
Section 30.06 explicitly states that the entire section is not applicable to buildings owned or leased by a goverment. It does not differentiate individual rooms within said buildings. Now, if the meeting was being held at the VFW, or at a church, or a convention center, or a hotel auditorium, or a performance hall, or a home... then a correct 30.06 sign would bar a CHL from carrying in the meeting.
I believe you have that backwards. PC30.06(e) states that it is an exception to this section (30.06) that the property is owned or leased by a govt. entity -- and is not otherwise prohibited under 46.03 or 46.035.
It is section 46.035(c) that state a license holder commits an offense by carrying a gun at a meeting of a govt. entity. So that restriction (not carrying at a govt. meeting) is still valid.
Then 46.035(i) further modified THAT by stating that (c) does not apply if 30.06 effective notice was not given.
So, ultimately, all this boils down to NOT being able to carry at a govt. meeting if proper 30.06 notice is given, EVEN ON GOVT. OWNED OR LEASED PROPERTY.
Also, the prohibition against carrying at a govt. meeting is for carrying "...at any meeting...", NOT carrying in the premises where the meeting is taking place. So, you can carry in the building where it's taking place, just not in the ROOM where it's taking place.