Houston Zoo

[Glockster]

Actually, in the long run, this may be a good thing for us. I do not believe that any zoo would meet the definition of an educational institution as intended int he law BUT it is a term that needs a definition. And this case is just about the perfect argument for us (through TSRA) to get some legislators to look at the law and clarify exactly what they intended.

Is a truck driving school an educational institution? What about a real estate school? How would these differ from University of Phoenix in the eyes of the law? All of them are privately owned, for profit, and lead to some type of certificate or licensing. UofP is accredited for college but the law does not require that. The zoo does teach people but does not lead to a certificate or license. Is it an educational institution? How can you say no? What criterion define "educational institution"?

It is time to clarify exactly what the law is meant to say. Maybe if we get a few legislators upset enough, we can fix this problem in the law for all of these situations.

Fantasy land to me then would be that we have access to an ability to take things like this and to be able to quickly and easily turn them into responsive calls to action. An online form that we could go to, plug in your address and it picks the legislative members who need to receive it, creates and populates an email that takes the call to action message and then sends it. VCDL uses that kind of a system to get the attention of the legislature and it is quite effective. I think that if we had that and folks used it, it would make it significantly easier to get points like that across to the legislature. The added bonus is that even if your particular legislative member is...not in our camp...it would make it easier to make it known that their constituents do care about things like this. Fire and forget, until a day when it can be shown through system stats just how many messages did go to an unresponsive legislative member (which addresses the point that Chas. made regarding doctors asking about guns and then the antis use that lack of response as claim that gun ownership is on decline).

[doncb]

The garbage we're seeing from zoos, libraries and multi-use government buildings exemplify the need to repeal all off-limits for CHLs. The continuing intellectual dishonesty of local officials should be, and I believe will be, insulting to legislators. Perhaps CHLs United will be relaunched in a different format. It's time for this crap to end!!
Chas.

These places will use any excuse, twisting of meaning, etc. Daycare? Amusement park? Educational facility? Really? Why just now? Why didn't these places call themselves these things years ago? The Fort Worth Zoo is a prime example. Suddenly in July, they get themselves licensed as a "daycare provider". The city needs to tell the Zoo that since it is city owned property, they can't restrict a license holder. I will say that if a place like the Zoo wanted to restrict OC because Mommy or Daddy might wet themselves by seeing a gun, let them post a 30.07. But the law should allow CC everywhere with VERY few exceptions of where you should be able to carry. Stupid to walk across a parking lot (the dangerous part of the walk) only to find that you have to walk back to your car to disarm and then walk back.

Someone in the legislature needs to lean on these people and straighten this out. And not wait another 2 years for it to happen. Filing a complaint with the AG is all fine and dandy, but the Zoo and other places can drag things out for years, And don't think they won't.

[ScottDLS]

The garbage we're seeing from zoos, libraries and multi-use government buildings exemplify the need to repeal all off-limits for CHLs. The continuing intellectual dishonesty of local officials should be, and I believe will be, insulting to legislators. Perhaps CHLs United will be relaunched in a different format. It's time for this crap to end!!
Chas.

These places will use any excuse, twisting of meaning, etc. Daycare? Amusement park? Educational facility? Really? Why just now? Why didn't these places call themselves these things years ago? The Fort Worth Zoo is a prime example. Suddenly in July, they get themselves licensed as a "daycare provider". The city needs to tell the Zoo that since it is city owned property, they can't restrict a license holder. I will say that if a place like the Zoo wanted to restrict OC because Mommy or Daddy might wet themselves by seeing a gun, let them post a 30.07. But the law should allow CC everywhere with VERY few exceptions of where you should be able to carry. Stupid to walk across a parking lot (the dangerous part of the walk) only to find that you have to walk back to your car to disarm and then walk back.

Someone in the legislature needs to lean on these people and straighten this out. And not wait another 2 years for it to happen. Filing a complaint with the AG is all fine and dandy, but the Zoo and other places can drag things out for years, And don't think they won't.

While they may technically be able to post 30.07 signs without getting fined, they will not be enforceable as a matter of criminal law. I'm not a fan of "in your face" tactics like open carrying rifles, but I am really tempted to open carry a full size 9mm at the Ft. Worth zoo after 1/1. The fact that they claim to be a daycare center is completely irrelevant. There's no law prohibiting "daycare" carry.

[gljjt]

The garbage we're seeing from zoos, libraries and multi-use government buildings exemplify the need to repeal all off-limits for CHLs. The continuing intellectual dishonesty of local officials should be, and I believe will be, insulting to legislators. Perhaps CHLs United will be relaunched in a different format. It's time for this crap to end!!
Chas.

These places will use any excuse, twisting of meaning, etc. Daycare? Amusement park? Educational facility? Really? Why just now? Why didn't these places call themselves these things years ago? The Fort Worth Zoo is a prime example. Suddenly in July, they get themselves licensed as a "daycare provider". The city needs to tell the Zoo that since it is city owned property, they can't restrict a license holder. I will say that if a place like the Zoo wanted to restrict OC because Mommy or Daddy might wet themselves by seeing a gun, let them post a 30.07. But the law should allow CC everywhere with VERY few exceptions of where you should be able to carry. Stupid to walk across a parking lot (the dangerous part of the walk) only to find that you have to walk back to your car to disarm and then walk back.

Someone in the legislature needs to lean on these people and straighten this out. And not wait another 2 years for it to happen. Filing a complaint with the AG is all fine and dandy, but the Zoo and other places can drag things out for years, And don't think they won't.

Sounds like they have been running an unlicensed daycare all these years. Criminals.

[ScottDLS]

OK. I just thought of something. If a Zoo is a school (we all know it's not), then CHL/LTC holders are only banned from carrying on the PREMISES, not the property. With the exception of the enclosed structures/buildings (snake house, indoor exhibits, etc), seems like you could walk around the park all day outside, on the sidewalks, etc. just like you can at a school.

[amaly23]

Easiest fix: In 2017 repeal ALL banned locations for CC. Do it just like Utah has it. Repeal the ban on carrying on schools, colleges (get rid of the college ability to post 30.06 in locations), and I mean both public and private colleges, repeal the bar carry ban that results in a FELONY and a ban on possessing guns for life, and repeal all the other banned places.
The only places that carry should be banned is in areas where it is banned by federal law, secure areas that have at least 5 armed guards stationed at all times and a secure place that we can store our guns when we walk in, and jails/mental institutions. Also it should be a class B misdemeanor violation at least on the first offense, not a felony violation so we avoid losing our civil rights. And get rid of the 30.06 signs altogether. If someone walks in with a gun in a store just tell them to leave or face trespassing charges (Class A misdemeanor in Texas, in Utah its a civil infraction.) Works great in Utah why not Texas? Let's try it in 2017. We need something to prevent this crap like Charles said.
What are your thoughts on this?
Edited to keep 30.07 signs up just for business

[twomillenium]

I agree with much of the repeal of places where licensed is not allowed. I also agree that private property rights are supreme to the owner/agent of that property including private schools and private colleges. As a private property owner, one should have a right to allow or not allow firearms on their premises or business. Those who don't like it can choose to go elsewhere, just like those who don't like firearms allowed on private property can go elsewhere.

[amaly23]

Yeah private property rights should still exist. I'm just proposing to get rid of the 30.06 sign and keep the 30.07 sign available. That way we can still conceal anywhere and the owner won't even know and if he somehow does find out he can just tell us to leave and the owner of private property can still prevent open carriers from entering or tell them to leave. Since open carry could prevent business but it is hard to argue how concealed carry hurts your business when its concealed. Just my thoughts.

[Vol Texan]

Yeah private property rights should still exist. I'm just proposing to get rid of the 30.06 sign and keep the 30.07 sign available. That way we can still conceal anywhere and the owner won't even know and if he somehow does find out he can just tell us to leave and the owner of private property can still prevent open carriers from entering or tell them to leave. Since open carry could prevent business but it is hard to argue how concealed carry hurts your business when its concealed. Just my thoughts.

[ScottDLS]

Yeah private property rights should still exist. I'm just proposing to get rid of the 30.06 sign and keep the 30.07 sign available. That way we can still conceal anywhere and the owner won't even know and if he somehow does find out he can just tell us to leave and the owner of private property can still prevent open carriers from entering or tell them to leave. Since open carry could prevent business but it is hard to argue how concealed carry hurts your business when its concealed. Just my thoughts.

This is exactly how it is in most states with regard to their trespass law. No reason Texas has to be different. There are already exceptions for LEO's that allow them to carry on private property posted or otherwise and technically don't have to leave if the owner says its because they are carrying a gun.