Palin, Lubbock, and a Gun ban?

[Purplehood]

Unless I was able to confront her (cordially) about the issue that she may or may not have been aware of, I don't think I would consider it important. My guess is that she blasts through her celebrity-status life totally unaware of 90% of what goes on around her.
Of course I have also found that if one already has an inherent bias towards a particular individual of her status, than the mere fact that she is unaware of what goes on around her (not politically, but in her environment) is usually enough ammo to fuel her detractors.
My thoughts on the woman is that she is cute, erratic and slowly learning how to handle the public over the last year.

[troglodyte]

Heath,

I can pretty safely say you are wrong in your accusations. Whether you wish to believe this or not is up to you.

[sjfcontrol]

As to the government owned Civic Center it was leased by a private party, a private school in this case. Control of the facility belongs to the private party. They "own" the building for the duration of the contract. They may decide who may or may not come in. My understanding of the mentioned code is that governments cannot post publically owned and accessible properties when open to the public. The Civic Center is not posted when it is open to the public for public use or events. Private events are that, private and those private entities may do as they please within the terms of the contract. The mentioned code concerns Trespass. If a private party is leasing a public building they can Trespass anyone they would like to.

According to Mr. Cotton, this is not correct (by my recollection). An owner of a facility does not have the ability to give a leasee rights that it does not have itself. If the government does not have the right to post, then that right cannot be passed by contract to the leasee.

[RPB]

As to the government owned Civic Center it was leased by a private party, a private school in this case. Control of the facility belongs to the private party. They "own" the building for the duration of the contract. They may decide who may or may not come in. My understanding of the mentioned code is that governments cannot post publically owned and accessible properties when open to the public. The Civic Center is not posted when it is open to the public for public use or events. Private events are that, private and those private entities may do as they please within the terms of the contract. The mentioned code concerns Trespass. If a private party is leasing a public building they can Trespass anyone they would like to.

According to Mr. Cotton, this is not correct (by my recollection). An owner of a facility does not have the ability to give a leasee rights that it does not have itself. If the government does not have the right to post, then that right cannot be passed by contract to the leasee.

Can't give anyone something you don't have .... makes sense.

Like if I own SURFACE RIGHTS ONLY on a farm, and someone else owns the MINERAL RIGHTS, I guess I can't lease it to a third party and give them the right to drill for oil. It isn't mine to give.

[sjfcontrol]

Another example would be the Texas State Fair. The Fairgrounds are owned by the city, and leased to the people that run the fair. They cannot post 30.06.

[troglodyte]

If that is the case then the event was posted as an honest mistake. No agenda. No intent to step on the 2A toes. Far from it. Sometimes mitigation is the lesser of the two evils. If you will pardon the phrase.

If you want to go on a witch hunt. It's your time. It won't undo the past and this info has been passed on so it won't happen again, at least from one of the parties involved, whether it was their fault or not.

[sjfcontrol]

If that is the case then the event was posted as an honest mistake. No agenda. No intent to step on the 2A toes. Far from it. Sometimes mitigation is the lesser of the two evils. If you will pardon the phrase.

If you want to go on a witch hunt. It's your time. It won't undo the past and this info has been passed on so it won't happen again, at least from one of the parties involved, whether it was their fault or not.

Trog -- I don't understand your attitude. It seems you know something about who or why this event was posted. How else could you state as a fact that it was "an honest mistake", and by whom was that mistake made?

I don't intend this as a personal attack, and don't really care one way or the other, but you seem to be defending somebody.
What do you know? (And when did you know it?)

[troglodyte]

If that is the case then the event was posted as an honest mistake. No agenda. No intent to step on the 2A toes. Far from it. Sometimes mitigation is the lesser of the two evils. If you will pardon the phrase.

If you want to go on a witch hunt. It's your time. It won't undo the past and this info has been passed on so it won't happen again, at least from one of the parties involved, whether it was their fault or not.

Trog -- I don't understand your attitude. It seems you know something about who or why this event was posted. How else could you state as a fact that it was "an honest mistake", and by whom was that mistake made?

I don't intend this as a personal attack, and don't really care one way or the other, but you seem to be defending somebody.
What do you know? (And when did you know it?)

I would ask that you honor my decision to respectfully decline to answer. I do know some details but as stated earlier I don't know enough. If that is considered a defense then so be it.

I have no more to add. What each of you decide to do is your business and that is the way it should be.

[sjfcontrol]

OK -- guess I missed that part. Sorry.

[shootthesheet]

As to the government owned Civic Center it was leased by a private party, a private school in this case. Control of the facility belongs to the private party. They "own" the building for the duration of the contract. They may decide who may or may not come in. My understanding of the mentioned code is that governments cannot post publically owned and accessible properties when open to the public. The Civic Center is not posted when it is open to the public for public use or events. Private events are that, private and those private entities may do as they please within the terms of the contract. The mentioned code concerns Trespass. If a private party is leasing a public building they can Trespass anyone they would like to.

According to Mr. Cotton, this is not correct (by my recollection). An owner of a facility does not have the ability to give a leasee rights that it does not have itself. If the government does not have the right to post, then that right cannot be passed by contract to the leasee.

Those signs were not legally binding and if I was there I would have carried. I am not going to let a bluff rob me of my life or privilege to carry where it is legal. Palin is not an elected official and even if she was no law exists, that I am aware of, would keep me from legally carrying there. Keep it concealed.

[G.A. Heath]

What's all this about a witch hunt? My interest is in learning who decided posting would be a good idea, and why they would think it. After learning those facts I would like the opportunity to explain why that 30.06 sign would only keep out people intent on obeying the law and not those who intend to do harm. Besides that I feel that the person(s) who posted the event should be more aware of the laws they are trying to leverage. Thanks to the posts here I now know where to start looking.

troglodyte: Next time I'm in Lubbock how about we meet and eat somewhere?

[RPB]

"the person(s) who posted the event should be more aware of the laws they are trying to leverage"

If they didn't know before, they've been informed since.
The mayor, the promoters, the City Secretary, all know.
They also know they should inform all LEOs, if they haven't.
Their city ordinances all look fine too.

Well, by "fine" I mean in respect to firearms, I don't like having to put a "sticker" on my kayak though, "stickers" don't "stick "very well to poly plastics.

IANALBMCILI (I am not a lawyer, but my cousin in Lubbock is)

[cbr600]

If an organization held an event and the premises were posted with 30.06 signs (valid or not) that would almost certainly prevent me from giving them money or other support. Same for a political candidate.