ELB wrote:
Interesting. Although there is not yet a mechanism in the statutes for taking action against governmental entities for posting (or allowing to be posted) 30.06 signs, it does seem like there ought to be a cause of action if a peace officer enforces an illegally created no-go zone against CHL carriers by either preventing entry or arresting (or detaining, or ejecting etc etc). I really don't see how at this stage of the CHL game that law enforcement could claim that such enforcement was in good faith or that the law was not clear.
In order to get a LEO in trouble on it, you'll have to get him/her to say that he/she knew what they law says and chose to enforce it anyway. Good luck.
Do most people commonly know that this isn't enforceable? I'd say no, as most haven't had CHL training... As such, qualified immunity applies.
I just got back from the International Motorcycle Show here in Dallas. I looked and did not see any 30.06 signs an there were no metal detectors. You should be good to go if your heading down tomorrow.
It seems a shame to me that after all these years, municipal 30.06 signs still are a problem that has not been fixed. Why should lawfull chl holders be denied their right by any municipal entity under color of law? Why is open carry promoted at the legislature more energetically than the need to prevent disallowed 30.06 municipal postings? I have no problem with property owners executing their legal right per 30.06, but for any city to flaunt themselves as being above state pre-emption is a bad precident in my opinion.
DPS Received Forms- 1/18/11 Online Status - 1/27/11 My Mailbox - 2/12/11 NRA Life Member
sugar land dave wrote:It seems a shame to me that after all these years, municipal 30.06 signs still are a problem that has not been fixed. Why should lawfull chl holders be denied their right by any municipal entity under color of law? Why is open carry promoted at the legislature more energetically than the need to prevent disallowed 30.06 municipal postings? I have no problem with property owners executing their legal right per 30.06, but for any city to flaunt themselves as being above state pre-emption is a bad precident in my opinion.
Well that isn't exactly what we are talking about here IMHO. Say I have a store and don't want people to carry for what ever reason. I can post a 30.06 sign and we are done. If I lease the store front I can still post my store in every can except if the landlord just happens to be a govt agency. By doing business with a govt owned facility the people putting on the show loose the ability to control their business with regard to firearms. They hold an event in a private hall or hotel/convention center they have that ability. That there is some belief that such a business might still be able to regulate their event the same as they can on private property is hardly surprising. They have every other right but the ability to post 30.06 so I can see questioning what the law really is. And if it's really correct to remove the ability of someone to post 30.06 because they chose a govt owned venue.
sugar land dave wrote:It seems a shame to me that after all these years, municipal 30.06 signs still are a problem that has not been fixed. Why should lawfull chl holders be denied their right by any municipal entity under color of law? Why is open carry promoted at the legislature more energetically than the need to prevent disallowed 30.06 municipal postings? I have no problem with property owners executing their legal right per 30.06, but for any city to flaunt themselves as being above state pre-emption is a bad precident in my opinion.
Well that isn't exactly what we are talking about here IMHO. Say I have a store and don't want people to carry for what ever reason. I can post a 30.06 sign and we are done. If I lease the store front I can still post my store in every can except if the landlord just happens to be a govt agency. By doing business with a govt owned facility the people putting on the show loose the ability to control their business with regard to firearms. They hold an event in a private hall or hotel/convention center they have that ability. That there is some belief that such a business might still be able to regulate their event the same as they can on private property is hardly surprising. They have every other right but the ability to post 30.06 so I can see questioning what the law really is. And if it's really correct to remove the ability of someone to post 30.06 because they chose a govt owned venue.
In my world view, if someone wants to go with government, they should be ready to accept the requisites thereof. That means if you rent from someone, you take on the caveats and conditions imposed by the lessor. In the State's case, they feel that pre-emption makes them the ultimate lessor unless and until they are pre-empted by the federal governement.
DPS Received Forms- 1/18/11 Online Status - 1/27/11 My Mailbox - 2/12/11 NRA Life Member
sugar land dave wrote:It seems a shame to me that after all these years, municipal 30.06 signs still are a problem that has not been fixed. Why should lawfull chl holders be denied their right by any municipal entity under color of law? Why is open carry promoted at the legislature more energetically than the need to prevent disallowed 30.06 municipal postings? I have no problem with property owners executing their legal right per 30.06, but for any city to flaunt themselves as being above state pre-emption is a bad precident in my opinion.
Well that isn't exactly what we are talking about here IMHO. Say I have a store and don't want people to carry for what ever reason. I can post a 30.06 sign and we are done. If I lease the store front I can still post my store in every can except if the landlord just happens to be a govt agency. By doing business with a govt owned facility the people putting on the show loose the ability to control their business with regard to firearms. They hold an event in a private hall or hotel/convention center they have that ability. That there is some belief that such a business might still be able to regulate their event the same as they can on private property is hardly surprising. They have every other right but the ability to post 30.06 so I can see questioning what the law really is. And if it's really correct to remove the ability of someone to post 30.06 because they chose a govt owned venue.
Do you argue just for the sake of arguing? I'm just curious...
A man will fight harder for his interests than for his rights.
- Napoleon Bonaparte
PFC Paul E. Ison USMC 1916-2001
I open carried at the International Motorcycle Show today. Had a few guys approach and shake my hand as they lamented that they didn't open carry for fear of ridicule but they appreciated me exercising my "right". And one fellow from out of state who asked to take a picture with me so he could annoy his left leaning relatives.
I don't see the difference between this and gun shows at the Pasadena convention center, which no longer posts 30.06 signs.
Step one is to photograph the illegal sign. Step two is to write a letter to the mayor. Send it certified mail with return receipt. Next show that is posted gets sent to the AG.
Revolver - An elegant weapon... for a more civilized age.
NRA Endowment Life Member
TSRA Life Member
Bummer! I haven't been able to ride since September when I failed to negotiate a curve and launched my Triumph Rocket III off the side of one of those nlittle Ozark mountains in Arkasas. Still waiting to finish repairs non the bike and my torn ACL ;)
The International Motorcycle Show in Dallas today was kind of mundane. No real new innovation...Victory's gone to market with their electric bike, but it's not really ground breaking. Triumph, Moto Guzzi, and most of the European brands weren't there except for BMW and KTM.
Harley, Honda, Yamaha all had nothing new to speak of. Indian was really the only brand with exciting new product, namely the Scout 60.
So don't feel like you missed out on anything big this year.
There are no 30.xx signs posted, not even a gun buster sign. I didn't get a second glance at the door or from any LEOs the whole time I was limping around in there on my busted knee with a polished steel .45 on my hip.
Adding the three words in parentheses would take care of the problem.
"Sec. 411.209. WRONGFUL EXCLUSION OF CONCEALED HANDGUN LICENSE HOLDER. (a) A state agency or a political subdivision of the state (or their tenants) may not provide notice by a communication described by Section 30.06, Penal Code, or by any sign expressly referring to that law or to a concealed handgun license, that a license holder carrying a handgun under the authority of this subchapter is prohibited from entering or remaining on a premises or other place owned or leased by the governmental entity unless license holders are prohibited from carrying a handgun on the premises or other place by Section 46.03 or 46.035, Penal Code."
I believe the rest of 411.209 would hold the agency or subdivision responsible if signs were posted.
tfrazier wrote:Bummer! I haven't been able to ride since September when I failed to negotiate a curve and launched my Triumph Rocket III off the side of one of those nlittle Ozark mountains in Arkasas. Still waiting to finish repairs non the bike and my torn ACL ;)
The International Motorcycle Show in Dallas today was kind of mundane. No real new innovation...Victory's gone to market with their electric bike, but it's not really ground breaking. Triumph, Moto Guzzi, and most of the European brands weren't there except for BMW and KTM.
Harley, Honda, Yamaha all had nothing new to speak of. Indian was really the only brand with exciting new product, namely the Scout 60.
So don't feel like you missed out on anything big this year.
There are no 30.xx signs posted, not even a gun buster sign. I didn't get a second glance at the door or from any LEOs the whole time I was limping around in there on my busted knee with a polished steel .45 on my hip.
Sorry to hear that you're busted up. I had a 09 Rocket 3 Touring. It was a pretty awesome bike. HoweverI, I traded it, and a 08 Bonneville, for a new Indian Roadmaster. I really wish Triumph would make a full dress bagger out of the Rocket 3 or even the Thunderbird motor. Its a shame they weren't representing at the IMS; the 2016 Bonneville/Thruxton lineup is new and exciting!
