The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://www.texaschlforum.com/
No, Art. II, Subpart 2.01 on page 5.timtheteacher wrote:ZOO CONTRACT
The third "Whereas" is what you are talking about?
http://fortworthtexas.gov/uploadedFiles ... ntract.pdf
Not a true ghostbuster sign. However, an reference to concealed handgun licenses in addition to the ghostbuster would be unlawful.rmr24 wrote:Will the law apply to "Gunbuster" signs also?
Gov't Code §411.209 wrote:(a) A state agency or a political subdivision of the state 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.
That's Lon Bunam. He was an embarrassment and after losing the primary election, he threatened to file suit, but he never did. I'm curious to see if he runs again in 2016.timtheteacher wrote:Charles L. Cotton wrote:No, Art. II, Subpart 2.01 on page 5.timtheteacher wrote:ZOO CONTRACT
The third "Whereas" is what you are talking about?
http://fortworthtexas.gov/uploadedFiles ... ntract.pdf
Chas.
Thanks... Unbelievable he could lie to what can be found in a legal document. I have always wondered about that sign.
Will this at some point challenge other gun free zone issues? For example, the Fort Worth Museum of Science and History claims to be an educational facility. I believe the Dallas Zoo does as well, or at least they did. Assuming they leave up 30.06 signs after Sept 1, will submitting a letter to the AG force them to prove that their building is in fact an educational facility, or will it be another underhanded way they can keep law abiding citizens unarmed?Charles L. Cotton wrote:I forgot to mention that I would like someone to photograph the 30.06 sign at the Fort Worth Zoo at some point after Sept. 1st. I'll need them to fill out the affidavit, but I'll send the notice letter to the city of Fort Worth and I'll file the AG complaint when Fort Worth calls former Rep. Lon Burnam and he tells them not to take the sign down. Burnam lost his primary bid, but last session he flat out lied about the Zoo owning the property and he treated Rep. Guillen like a dog in the process. I had the contract in my hand and knew he was lying.
Yeah, this is just a little payback and man is it going to be fun!!
Chas.
I will gladly plan to take my kiddos on 9/1 and provide a photo.Charles L. Cotton wrote:I forgot to mention that I would like someone to photograph the 30.06 sign at the Fort Worth Zoo at some point after Sept. 1st. I'll need them to fill out the affidavit, but I'll send the notice letter to the city of Fort Worth and I'll file the AG complaint when Fort Worth calls former Rep. Lon Burnam and he tells them not to take the sign down. Burnam lost his primary bid, but last session he flat out lied about the Zoo owning the property and he treated Rep. Guillen like a dog in the process. I had the contract in my hand and knew he was lying.
Yeah, this is just a little payback and man is it going to be fun!!
Chas.
If TVguy can't, I live in the area and will happily provide the pictures.Charles L. Cotton wrote:I forgot to mention that I would like someone to photograph the 30.06 sign at the Fort Worth Zoo at some point after Sept. 1st. I'll need them to fill out the affidavit, but I'll send the notice letter to the city of Fort Worth and I'll file the AG complaint when Fort Worth calls former Rep. Lon Burnam and he tells them not to take the sign down. Burnam lost his primary bid, but last session he flat out lied about the Zoo owning the property and he treated Rep. Guillen like a dog in the process. I had the contract in my hand and knew he was lying.
Yeah, this is just a little payback and man is it going to be fun!!
Chas.
Mel wrote:Love Field has had 30.06 signs since the opening of the new terminal.RoyGBiv wrote:I believe Love Field still has 30.05 signs posted.
Will check in Sept.
And this place maybe?.... http://texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php? ... 8&p=965743" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Verbal notice wouldn't be enforceable either. The whole point of SB273 was to prohibit gov'ts from attempting to prohibit lawful carry in gov't owned/leased buildings that don't contain jails or courts.Rrash wrote:Another scenario we could likely see from the guilty cities is to remove signage, but still verbally give notice. While it may not happen to concealed carriers unless going through a metal detector, I would think it will happen often to everyone that chooses to open carry. I'm not really sure if there is a way to defend against it. Charles, would this be something that might be addressed in 2017?
Do they verbally warn every person that enters?TexasCajun wrote:Verbal notice wouldn't be enforceable either. The whole point of SB273 was to prohibit gov'ts from attempting to prohibit lawful carry in gov't owned/leased buildings that don't contain jails or courts.Rrash wrote:Another scenario we could likely see from the guilty cities is to remove signage, but still verbally give notice. While it may not happen to concealed carriers unless going through a metal detector, I would think it will happen often to everyone that chooses to open carry. I'm not really sure if there is a way to defend against it. Charles, would this be something that might be addressed in 2017?
