Houston: Mother Pistol-whipped and Robbed in IKEA Parking Lit

[TreyHouston]

Everyone knows you will be sued, most likely by multiple people, if you ever have to justifiably use your weapon.

Then it should be easy as pie for you to cite a dozen or more self defense shooting lawsuits that went to trial in Texas where the defendant wasn't first convicted in a criminal trial, and wasn't a government employee.

You have never heard of people being sued for self-defense? Not sure what to say, I guess you can start with my LTC instructor who gave us several he personally knew of. I have a relative that sees all the lawsuits brought against companies every day, it is truly ridiculous, everyone sues for everything. I am simply pointing out that there are risks to thinking HB435 gives you a free pass, but I get the feeling some here just want to argue angrily instead of having a productive conversation. If people want to think that 30.06 is meaningless to them, and that they won't get sued by anyone for using a gun in self defense, then I guess we will just have to respectfully agree to disagree

OK. I understand. A dozen may be too difficult. How about citing ONE in Texas in the last five years that was justified and the lawsuit went to trial.

CPZ10- you said "You could pull your weapon for a justified reason, but that will not stop the store from suing you for violating their sign, it will also not stop any customers present from suing you. Call your attorney and tell them you plan to knowingly concealed carry past a 30.06 sign because you view yourself a VESP and see what they tell you"

When did you turn this into pulling the trigger? You said the store owner and CUSTOMERS will sue YOU for pulling a firearm.

-it will never happen-

[CZp10]

OK. I understand. A dozen may be too difficult. How about citing ONE in Texas in the last five years that was justified and the lawsuit went to trial.

I found this one particularly ridiculous, with friends like this who needs enemies.
http://www.personaldefenseworld.com/201 ... -force-7-2
“The victim promptly filed a lawsuit against the friend who had saved him.” “The criminal justice system had already ruled the killing of the intruder to be justified.”
“When he wryly mentioned that there is a meme on the gun-related internet that “a good shoot is a good shoot,” there was a wave of laughter from the sea of attorneys in the audience. They knew better.”

[CZp10]

When did you turn this into pulling the trigger? You said the store owner and CUSTOMERS will sue YOU for pulling a firearm.

-it will never happen-

Kid ran into a Chick-Fil-A in Texas, hoodie up over his head, gun drawn, told the cashier to hand over the money.
LTC holder in line goes up behind him and puts a gun to his head and tells the kid to drop it. The kid does and runs out.
Turns out the gun was fake and it was supposed to be a joke. Family of kid sued the LTC holder for emotional distress of having a gun to his head.

Do you guys really not know that Texas law is clear, anyone can sue you for anything, you have to pay to defend yourself, doesn’t matter if you win or lose, you still lose in the end. The time, cost, and emotional toll of being sued for stupid reasons, even when you win, is not good.

Maybe no one here has actually talked to practicing attorneys, or doesn’t work in a field where you see ridiculous lawsuits do damage to innocent people. It is really surprising that this website has so many that think they are immune from lawsuits just because they did the right thing. I hope everyone who has an LTC has an attorney on retainer or a good legal service plan.

[CZp10]

To be clear, I am actually not as bad as I sound in this thread, I am a pretty nice guy normally. I thought I was trying to help by pointing out that: 1) you can be sued for anything and can lose no small amount of time and money even if you win, 2) HB435 gives a single line of defense for some in 30.06, it hasn’t been tested so who knows, but it doesn’t mean you are “exempt”, 3) I personally think that 30.06 signs would not stand the test in court if taken high enough and many other states agree. That’s all, I will shut up now. Goodnight .

[howdy]

To be clear, I am actually not as bad as I sound in this thread, I am a pretty nice guy normally. I thought I was trying to help by pointing out that: 1) you can be sued for anything and can lose no small amount of time and money even if you win, 2) HB435 gives a single line of defense for some in 30.06, it hasn’t been tested so who knows, but it doesn’t mean you are “exempt”, 3) I personally think that 30.06 signs would not stand the test in court if taken high enough and many other states agree. That’s all, I will shut up now. Goodnight .

I can assure you that members of this forum know very well that anyone can be sued for anything. The owner of this forum is an Attorney and he writes extensively here about responsibilities of carrying a firearm and what can happen if you break the law or legally use that firearm. One reason there is so little case law on LTC is that we, as a group, commit very few crimes. We, as a group, are very law abiding. One does not go through the hassle of getting a LTC to just turn around a break the law. We WANT to obey the law. I have legally carried since 1997 and I have NOT ONCE been asked by a LEO to see my license or to consent to a search. I could have save several hundred dollars and lots of time by just carrying a handgun without a license. I don't do that because I am a law abiding citizen. You will see on the forum people using the phrase "who wants to be the test case". The members here are probably some of the best versed group of LTC holders when it comes to the law. We discuss things in a respectful manner and some discussions get very deep. We have some members who will play the devils advocate and bring up topics to get others to think critically about some area of the law. I tell my students what the law says. I will tell them my OPINION of what that law means (only if they ask) and I always explain to them that many laws pertaining to LTC are vague because they have not been tested in court. You will enjoy this forum and the polite banter of the discussions. Welcome.

[twomillenium]

Whether I agree with the business or not, is not as important as the owner to be able to run the legal business as they legally decide. If you do not want to do business with them, go somewhere else. Don't force a business to be panty-waisted because a panty-waist demands it.

Not sure how this is anything other than blatantly offensive.
Aside from your reluctance to stand up for the second amendment, not all of us are as scared as you to stand up for the constitution. I believe that the 30.06 would not stand the test in court, and therefore not be found legal.

America fighting for independence was not “legal” at the time, slavery was “legal” once, so according to your backward thinking, people should just go elsewhere?

Your right! You are being blatantly offensive. I am more pro-second amendment than you will be in probably 3 life times. The difference is that I defend your right to do so and will not sue you to force my will on your property or thinking. Have a good day and keep it civil.

[CZp10]

Whether I agree with the business or not, is not as important as the owner to be able to run the legal business as they legally decide. If you do not want to do business with them, go somewhere else. Don't force a business to be panty-waisted because a panty-waist demands it.

Not sure how this is anything other than blatantly offensive.
Aside from your reluctance to stand up for the second amendment, not all of us are as scared as you to stand up for the constitution. I believe that the 30.06 would not stand the test in court, and therefore not be found legal.

America fighting for independence was not “legal” at the time, slavery was “legal” once, so according to your backward thinking, people should just go elsewhere?

Your right! You are being blatantly offensive. I am more pro-second amendment than you will be in probably 3 life times. The difference is that I defend your right to do so and will not sue you to force my will on your property or thinking. Have a good day and keep it civil.

You call me a “panty-waist” for stating an opinion shared by many people and more than a couple here, and I am being offensive? Then I guess you are calling several of the members here “panty-waisted.”
What a joke, guess civility and moderation is lost art on this website. No wonder tens of millions of Americans are disgusted by gun owners, I just wish they knew they are not all like you.

[twomillenium]

Whether I agree with the business or not, is not as important as the owner to be able to run the legal business as they legally decide. If you do not want to do business with them, go somewhere else. Don't force a business to be panty-waisted because a panty-waist demands it.

Not sure how this is anything other than blatantly offensive.
Aside from your reluctance to stand up for the second amendment, not all of us are as scared as you to stand up for the constitution. I believe that the 30.06 would not stand the test in court, and therefore not be found legal.

America fighting for independence was not “legal” at the time, slavery was “legal” once, so according to your backward thinking, people should just go elsewhere?

Your right! You are being blatantly offensive. I am more pro-second amendment than you will be in probably 3 life times. The difference is that I defend your right to do so and will not sue you to force my will on your property or thinking. Have a good day and keep it civil.

You call me a “panty-waist” for stating an opinion shared by many people and more than a couple here, and I am being offensive? Then I guess you are calling several of the members here “panty-waisted.”
What a joke, guess civility and moderation is lost art on this website. No wonder tens of millions of Americans are disgusted by gun owners, I just wish they knew they are not all like you.

If an apology is needed, then you have mine. After rereading the post, I can see where you may have thought I was calling you a panty-waist. I was not! In fact, I was referring to the many stories in the media, where the snowflake panty-waists were suing businesses for not running their operation the way they see fit. I did not realize that I could make you feel that you were in that group and I apologize for making you feel that way.
However, I will defend your right to feel that way. I still feel that property owner rights to do business as they feel best for themselves are sacrosanct over the wants and whims of the individual who wants everything their way and their need to be coddled. (That is how a very pro 2nd amendment patriot feels)
I even still wish you a good day!

[CZp10]

However, I will defend your right to feel that way. I still feel that property owner rights to do business as they feel best for themselves are sacrosanct over the wants and whims of the individual who wants everything their way and their need to be coddled. (That is how a very pro 2nd amendment patriot feels)
I even still wish you a good day!

I am in no way trying to tell businesses how they can or can’t run their business, I have owned businesses before and respect their rights. However, it is this one single, nationwide, issue with which I personally have a problem. I don’t feel it is constitutional for a business open to the public to take away the right to defend yourself as provided by the 2A by posting a 30.06 sign. An LTC holder has been approved by every level of government to concealed carry, the Supreme Court has upheld that right. I do not think a business open to the public should be able to override that, they do however have the right to ask anyone to leave if they go up to that person and do so. Many states believe the same thing, they have specific laws in place that prevent businesses from stopping licensed concealed carry. I would like the Texas 30.06 law to be rescinded or changed, but I am not sure the best way to have it tested in court. Currently the law provides the right of a business to post a proper 30.06 sign, but the law also provides citizens legal recourse in challenging that law, both rights should be protected/respected until the law is changed. Hopefully that makes my ranting a bit more clear .

[BBYC]

By any chance was your LTC instructor selling self defense legal insurance?

[twomillenium]

However, I will defend your right to feel that way. I still feel that property owner rights to do business as they feel best for themselves are sacrosanct over the wants and whims of the individual who wants everything their way and their need to be coddled. (That is how a very pro 2nd amendment patriot feels)
I even still wish you a good day!

I am in no way trying to tell businesses how they can or can’t run their business, I have owned businesses before and respect their rights. However, it is this one single, nationwide, issue with which I personally have a problem. I don’t feel it is constitutional for a business open to the public to take away the right to defend yourself as provided by the 2A by posting a 30.06 sign. An LTC holder has been approved by every level of government to concealed carry, the Supreme Court has upheld that right. I do not think a business open to the public should be able to override that, they do however have the right to ask anyone to leave if they go up to that person and do so. Many states believe the same thing, they have specific laws in place that prevent businesses from stopping licensed concealed carry. I would like the Texas 30.06 law to be rescinded or changed, but I am not sure the best way to have it tested in court. Currently the law provides the right of a business to post a proper 30.06 sign, but the law also provides citizens legal recourse in challenging that law, both rights should be protected/respected until the law is changed. Hopefully that makes my ranting a bit more clear .

Just out of curiosity, would you support the Government telling a citizen where they must bank, eat or shop and spend their hard earned money?

[CZp10]

Just out of curiosity, would you support the Government telling a citizen where they must bank, eat or shop and spend their hard earned money?

Are you going to make some sort of intelligent point or not? Your question is clearly leading and meant to say something, but you apparently didn’t think it through. The government already does all those things, and has for a very long time. Banks are very highly regulated, only certain people under certain conditions can open a bank. Food establishments have to go through multiple layers of government to get a license to do business. The government is already telling people where they can eat and bank, they already tell you where you can live via zoning laws, etc., etc. So it would be nice if you could just come out and say what your point is, because I really don’t understand what you are trying to say.

I have been very clear on my issue, which millions of Americans agree with, by the way. I think a business can refuse to serve me if they wish, they can ask me to leave and I have to leave, I have no problem with that. They can even put up whatever signs they want, but a business open to the public should not be seemingly granted the sacred power of judge and jury by making the simple fact of walking past a sign an automatic criminal violation by a law abiding LTC holder. I started a whole thread on this previously, the only thing I have asked for is rescinding the criminal violation part of 30.06.

[twomillenium]

Just out of curiosity, would you support the Government telling a citizen where they must bank, eat or shop and spend their hard earned money?

Are you going to make some sort of intelligent point or not? Your question is clearly leading and meant to say something, but you apparently didn’t think it through. The government already does all those things, and has for a very long time. Banks are very highly regulated, only certain people under certain conditions can open a bank. Food establishments have to go through multiple layers of government to get a license to do business. The government is already telling people where they can eat and bank, they already tell you where you can live via zoning laws, etc., etc. So it would be nice if you could just come out and say what your point is, because I really don’t understand what you are trying to say.

I have been very clear on my issue, which millions of Americans agree with, by the way. I think a business can refuse to serve me if they wish, they can ask me to leave and I have to leave, I have no problem with that. They can even put up whatever signs they want, but a business open to the public should not be seemingly granted the sacred power of judge and jury by making the simple fact of walking past a sign an automatic criminal violation by a law abiding LTC holder. I started a whole thread on this previously, the only thing I have asked for is rescinding the criminal violation part of 30.06.

I was just checking on how far you want the Government to make someone else do what you think they should. However, the Government does not tell you where to eat, bank or shop. They do tell you how to spend quite abit of you hard earned money though. Don't forget to check under your bed tonight. BTW you made my point. Thanks and have nice evening.

[Killadocg23]

Just out of curiosity, would you support the Government telling a citizen where they must bank, eat or shop and spend their hard earned money?

Are you going to make some sort of intelligent point or not? Your question is clearly leading and meant to say something, but you apparently didn’t think it through. The government already does all those things, and has for a very long time. Banks are very highly regulated, only certain people under certain conditions can open a bank. Food establishments have to go through multiple layers of government to get a license to do business. The government is already telling people where they can eat and bank, they already tell you where you can live via zoning laws, etc., etc. So it would be nice if you could just come out and say what your point is, because I really don’t understand what you are trying to say.

I have been very clear on my issue, which millions of Americans agree with, by the way. I think a business can refuse to serve me if they wish, they can ask me to leave and I have to leave, I have no problem with that. They can even put up whatever signs they want, but a business open to the public should not be seemingly granted the sacred power of judge and jury by making the simple fact of walking past a sign an automatic criminal violation by a law abiding LTC holder. I started a whole thread on this previously, the only thing I have asked for is rescinding the criminal violation part of 30.06.

I was just checking on how far you want the Government to make someone else do what you think they should. However, the Government does not tell you where to eat, bank or shop. They do tell you how to spend quite abit of you hard earned money though. Don't forget to check under your bed tonight. BTW you made my point. Thanks and have nice evening.

CZP10, you sound like a dictator. Its simple 30.06 sign posted go else where if your that paranoid or feel they take away your 2nd amendment right. Nothing wrong with your opinion. IF millions of Americans felt that way in actuality, there would be no 30.06 signs !

David

[CZp10]

CZP10, you sound like a dictator. Its simple 30.06 sign posted go else where if your that paranoid or feel they take away your 2nd amendment right. Nothing wrong with your opinion. IF millions of Americans felt that way in actuality, there would be no 30.06 signs !

David

You might want to look up how many states specifically do not allow no gun signs to have the force of law, there are quite a few. So the many millions of Americans living in those states are all dictators? Ok, that makes perfect sense. It is too bad that people don’t care enough to do something about it in Texas. I guess there is a reason the left has decided that they can turn Texas blue, they seems to be doing a good job of it so far. The notion of never going anywhere with a sign is ridiculous, sure why don’t I just tell my kids they can never go to a zoo or museum because not enough people in Texas care about their rights? And yes, I am looking to move to a state that is less left wing anti 2A than Texas, I just can't do it anytime soon. Stupid me for thinking Texans cared about their 2A rights.