The final say on state parks and COE lands...

[davidtx]

Heck, I saw Chance blow up a big ore moving truck on Hard Target tonight.

Can you use a cross bow for fishing on a COE lake?

[tornado]

How about a bow & arrow with dynamite -- a la the Dukes of Hazzard?

Yeeeeee-haw!

[jmra]

Let's see...civil lawsuit for defending yourself or death. That's a hard one.

The law is the law. If you choose to BREAK the law for your defense, that is your call and not something I would debate. But if you use this argument, you also will not obey the 30-06 signs or any other CHL laws.

Todd

I disagree. There is a lot of difference in cc in a posted mall and cc in a state park. I for one would not visit a state park where I could not cc, but in your post you stated that if you had to use your weapon for self defense you could face civil lawsuits. What I was implying is if you chose not to cc what are you going to use to defend yourself?

I do not plan on putting myself in a situtation where I can not legally defend myself however if it comes down to defending myself illegally or death, I don't know too many people who are going to choose death.

That could be argued in any situation where you are not allowed to carry. So, I'm not sure what your point is? Aren't you just as dead in the mall you spoke of because you did not carry because of the 30.06 sign? My mention of the civil aspect was an afterthought. I was only making the point that it is against Federal law to carry on a COE park. End of story. If you want to go ahead and carry, that's something you'll have to do with the knowledge that you have been warned.

Todd

Well, I have never seen a mountain lion or a bobcat roaming the mall plus the fact that I don't go to malls that are posted. As far as being warned, by who? I place as much stock in the opinion you claim to have obtained as I do in the legal opinion obtained in another thread that claimed dps said a sign does not have to meet 30.06 requirements to prevent cc.

Now if you want to go to a state park that prohibits cc and put yourself in a position where you have chosen death over self defense...be my guest.

I bet Suzanna Gratia Hupp wishes she would have ignored the law back in 1991. By her own statements, if she had her mother and father would not have died that day.

When it comes to the protection of my family, the family comes first and the law of the land comes second, End of Story.

[marksiwel]

Whats COE?

[tornado]

Army Corps of Engineers

[RPB]

Well, I'm glad that has finally been clarified. I read all the posts and my head was spinning. Now, when can we get this problem before the legislature and get COE lands added into State and Nat'l Parks? It seems a ridiculous hardship.

Back ON topic ...
(The OP said it would open up civil lawsuits, but if you carry a firearm on Army property [US ARMY Corps of Engineers] like Nidal Hassan did at Fort Hood...a Park Ranger working for the USACOE Park/Lake would be pressing Federal Criminal Charges, not a civil lawsuit.)

I contacted Senator John Cornyn and he is very interested in the matter.
He is requesting more details. He sent me a letter which is NOT a standard form letter, along with a privacy information release form.

I'd like to use the examples of us not being able to park in the COE parking lots and not being able to use our State Parks which are leased from the COE at such places like Ray Roberts Lake/Park, Whitney State Park/lake.

I'd also like to use as examples boating/kayaking/canoeing down rivers at such places as Brazos River Authority at San Gabriel River, where it is legal, except while passing through the boundaries of Lake Georgetown and Granger Lake, both of which are USACOE. And illustrate how the USACOE has no service to check in our guns and taxi our guns to the other end of the lake for us to pick them up while we navigate down the river;(like a no-smoking in an elevator sign was unenforceable if there was no ashtray to deposit a cigarette into).

I believe there is a CITY park in Georgetown on the river, that is USACOE "claims" is their property, but can't give exact GPS coordinates to me; only "approximate boundary maps" (NO signs on the river, no property line painted on the water across the river and "approximate boundary maps, available on the internet" seem vague ambiguous and overly broad, like expecting you to obey a speed limit sign when none is posted for you to see while driving down a highway; and no "YOu are now entering xxxx County" sign even if you knew it was a different speed limit when you enter xxxx County, you wouldn't know WHEN you were in it or not with no sign) What if I anchor in Brazos River Authority water, I had no intention to enter the USACOE property, but currents and wind carried me 2 feet onto their water, which was river water moments ago where I was before the wind direction changed? I didn't see the boundary line, no sign, and my GPS map doesn't have "approximate coordinates" that they wouldn't or couln't give me.

Also examples such as Addiks Dam where there is a Harris County Park, owned by the USACOE.

I'll have to research the website at USACOE, but any others you can think of offhand?

He wants me to compile details as well as sign a privacy release form. I'll do it in my "spare time"
Please feel free to contact Senator Cornyn too.
http://cornyn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactForm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't really feel qualified to represent everyone as the "token" guy .... but I'll sign the release and do what I can .... you guys should too. Otherwise, you better check if your city/county/State park/lake is on USACOE property.

[chabouk]

Good work, RPB. I'll research my local state park that is on COE land, and see what I can add to your database.

[BoneDigger]

Let's see...civil lawsuit for defending yourself or death. That's a hard one.

The law is the law. If you choose to BREAK the law for your defense, that is your call and not something I would debate. But if you use this argument, you also will not obey the 30-06 signs or any other CHL laws.

Todd

I disagree. There is a lot of difference in cc in a posted mall and cc in a state park. I for one would not visit a state park where I could not cc, but in your post you stated that if you had to use your weapon for self defense you could face civil lawsuits. What I was implying is if you chose not to cc what are you going to use to defend yourself?

I do not plan on putting myself in a situtation where I can not legally defend myself however if it comes down to defending myself illegally or death, I don't know too many people who are going to choose death.

That could be argued in any situation where you are not allowed to carry. So, I'm not sure what your point is? Aren't you just as dead in the mall you spoke of because you did not carry because of the 30.06 sign? My mention of the civil aspect was an afterthought. I was only making the point that it is against Federal law to carry on a COE park. End of story. If you want to go ahead and carry, that's something you'll have to do with the knowledge that you have been warned.

Todd

Well, I have never seen a mountain lion or a bobcat roaming the mall plus the fact that I don't go to malls that are posted. As far as being warned, by who? I place as much stock in the opinion you claim to have obtained as I do in the legal opinion obtained in another thread that claimed dps said a sign does not have to meet 30.06 requirements to prevent cc.

Now if you want to go to a state park that prohibits cc and put yourself in a position where you have chosen death over self defense...be my guest.

I bet Suzanna Gratia Hupp wishes she would have ignored the law back in 1991. By her own statements, if she had her mother and father would not have died that day.

When it comes to the protection of my family, the family comes first and the law of the land comes second, End of Story.

This is my final word on this to you, and then I'll simply tell you good day and you can move on. If you are sincerely scared of a mountain lion or Bobcat on one of the state parks, you probably don't spend much time outside. A mountain lion MAYBE if you were at Big Bend (which is not a COE park and thus legal for carry anyway). But, a BOBCAT??? Are you serious? I would be MUCH more concerned about the two legged creatures at that mall than any four legged creature on one of the state parks.

What I have posted here is the final say from the legal division at Texas Parks and Wildlife. If you choose to carry a concealed weapon on COE lands (even if leased from the state) then you are breaking the law. That is a decision only you can make. And THAT, my friend, is the end of the story.

Good day.

Todd

[BoneDigger]

Well, I'm glad that has finally been clarified. I read all the posts and my head was spinning. Now, when can we get this problem before the legislature and get COE lands added into State and Nat'l Parks? It seems a ridiculous hardship.

Back ON topic ...
(The OP said it would open up civil lawsuits, but if you carry a firearm on Army property [US ARMY Corps of Engineers] like Nidal Hassan did at Fort Hood...a Park Ranger working for the USACOE Park/Lake would be pressing Federal Criminal Charges, not a civil lawsuit.)

I contacted Senator John Cornyn and he is very interested in the matter.
He is requesting more details. He sent me a letter which is NOT a standard form letter, along with a privacy information release form.

I'd like to use the examples of us not being able to park in the COE parking lots and not being able to use our State Parks which are leased from the COE at such places like Ray Roberts Lake/Park, Whitney State Park/lake.

I'd also like to use as examples boating/kayaking/canoeing down rivers at such places as Brazos River Authority at San Gabriel River, where it is legal, except while passing through the boundaries of Lake Georgetown and Granger Lake, both of which are USACOE. And illustrate how the USACOE has no service to check in our guns and taxi our guns to the other end of the lake for us to pick them up while we navigate down the river;(like a no-smoking in an elevator sign was unenforceable if there was no ashtray to deposit a cigarette into).

I believe there is a CITY park in Georgetown on the river, that is USACOE "claims" is their property, but can't give exact GPS coordinates to me; only "approximate boundary maps" (NO signs on the river, no property line painted on the water across the river and "approximate boundary maps, available on the internet" seem vague ambiguous and overly broad, like expecting you to obey a speed limit sign when none is posted for you to see while driving down a highway; and no "YOu are now entering xxxx County" sign even if you knew it was a different speed limit when you enter xxxx County, you wouldn't know WHEN you were in it or not with no sign) What if I anchor in Brazos River Authority water, I had no intention to enter the USACOE property, but currents and wind carried me 2 feet onto their water, which was river water moments ago where I was before the wind direction changed? I didn't see the boundary line, no sign, and my GPS map doesn't have "approximate coordinates" that they wouldn't or couln't give me.

Also examples such as Addiks Dam where there is a Harris County Park, owned by the USACOE.

I'll have to research the website at USACOE, but any others you can think of offhand?

He wants me to compile details as well as sign a privacy release form. I'll do it in my "spare time"
Please feel free to contact Senator Cornyn too.
http://cornyn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactForm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't really feel qualified to represent everyone as the "token" guy .... but I'll sign the release and do what I can .... you guys should too. Otherwise, you better check if your city/county/State park/lake is on USACOE property.

This is awesome. I'd like to see these laws overturned. As Couzin said, I think it's a long uphill climb given who we are dealing with (COE) but it's certainly is worth fighting for. A list of all COE landholdings in Texas is easy to obtain. Are you just interested in those areas that are leased for state parks and WMAs or all COE lands? Many of the lakes in Texas (Steinhagen, Whitney, Cooper, Patman, Ray Roberts, etc.) are COE lakes, but not all.

Todd

[BoneDigger]

Back ON topic ...
(The OP said it would open up civil lawsuits, but if you carry a firearm on Army property [US ARMY Corps of Engineers] like Nidal Hassan did at Fort Hood...a Park Ranger working for the USACOE Park/Lake would be pressing Federal Criminal Charges, not a civil lawsuit.)

Well, yes, but what I actually said was that you would be subject to federal laws AND open yourself up to lawsuits. I added the lawsuits part kind of as an aside. I didn't mean for it to take up so much of the discussion here. Anytime we use a handgun for defense we open ourselves up for lawsuits, so it's really not much of an argument. No, a federal LEO would not press a civil lawsuit, the family of said "victim" might though. My only reason for mentioning it was that even when you follow the law you can open yourself up for lawsuits, but if you are BREAKING the law when you use that firearm, then I would think you'd open yourself up for lawsuits even more, but again, only a side comment and not really relevant to what I was posting for.

Thanks for contacting Cornyn. It would be nice to see some movement on this front.

Todd

[RPB]

I want to look at all COE lands.

Because since cities can't prohibit in their parks, and counties can't, and TV/Newspapers at one point said State Parks ... some unsuspecting CHL will invariably go to the city park in Georgetown, the Harris County park at Addiks Dam, and will be a good law abiding citizen and present his CHL to the Park Ranger if asked for ID, and beliving he is lawfully carrying, be honest when the LEO asks if he is armed since the State said he CAN in city parks/county parks/State Parks.... but ... be arrested on a Federal criminal charge.

There are several ways this "could be changed"

1) Regulation contested in Court as vague amiguous and overly broad .... "Where there is no law, there is no sin"
There are no signs in the river nor on the shore showing "You are now entering US ARMY PROPERTY; no firearms allowed..." etc like County line signs
But, this way would be expensive and require a test case, as I doubt we'd get just an injunctive reliief or a Declaratory judgement

2) Petition the Army to allow follow suit and change their Regs
(I don't see it happening voluntarily... I actually requested written permission from the Commander, as the Regulation States, and requested Info on how to request written Permission, and they ignored me, so I CC copied the Senator..... That's when i got his reply)

3) Have Congress tack onto a bill the President really wants passed a simple sentance containing language similar to the Credit Card bill rider which provided that National Park Service/Wildlife Refuges (USACOE in this case) may not enforce any law which contradicts the law of the State in which the property is located regarding the legal carying of a loaded weapon, in accordence with that State's law. (However it was worded)
[Too bad we didn't tack it onto Obamacare along with the Student Loans and other unrelated items it contained.]

There may be other options, I'm no lawyer, but I see Option 3 as the easiest and best since OTHER STATES have the same issue (US ARMY Corps of Engineers properties), and THEIR Congressmen can go home saying they stood up and represented their local law abiding constituants .... which they'll hope will help them come election time.

[J.R.@A&M]

Back to the subject of using flare guns, here is a notable film of one being used in a self defense situation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0-yjdFxT9U" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Fangs]

But, another thought: There are adapters to use 12-gauge shotshells in a flaregun.
They are intended for flares made in the 12-gage size. I suspect just having them in proximity with a flare pistol and shotgun shells would make you eligible for a Class 3 extended vacation.
Still, the adapters are unmarked cylinders with a lip on them. They could be almost anything - boat parts, for example. <shrug>

http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=504819" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

From the website :

NOTE: NOT for firing normal 12-ga. ammunition, which will not fit this shorter chamber.

Heck, I saw Chance blow up a big ore moving truck on Hard Target tonight.

It's Human Target, and, in his defense, he shot at an already leaking fuel filter.

[davidtx]

]

Heck, I saw Chance blow up a big ore moving truck on Hard Target tonight.

It's Human Target, and, in his defense, he shot at an already leaking fuel filter.

Oops, I must have been tired last night. Or maybe I confused it with the Jean-Claude movie Hard Target where the lead character was also named Chance.

[phrogg]

So this question really intrigues me. There are two places that I frequent that would be illegal not only to carry but to have with you in the car. The first one is American Shooting Center where I took my CHL class! It is on land leased from the County as part of the Park. But its actually sitting on top of COE land. So...how are you supposed to get to the shooting range that is within the park much less shoot there! Do we have to worry about a big bust happening some day where they nab everyone that comes to the range? That might be a great way for the gov't to get a lot of guns out of circulation quickly.

Second one is when you drive down Highway 6 near I-10 in Houston. You are driving across COE land between I-10 and almost Clay Rd to the north. Technically, that land should be off limits while you are driving according to the CFR. Even Bear Creek Golf World along that stretch of Hwy 6 would actually be sitting on top of COE land.

The whole COE thing needs to change. A simple addition to the CFR like the one in the Postal CFR (39CFR232.1 (p)(2)) which says

[...]. Nothing contained in
these rules and regulations shall be construed to abrogate any other
Federal laws or regulations of any State and local laws and regulations
applicable to any area in which the property is situated.

would help the situation.