No, it's not.burrito wrote:Dallas Museum of Art is posted. Is this a legitimate "no carry" zone since it is city owned?
There is nothing in the law that forbids them from posting, but PC 30.06 can no longer be used against a CHL who carries there.I've read statements about citiy buildings not being able to post 30.06's.
The entire reasoning behind 30.06 is to protect private property rights (to not allow guns, if the property owner so chooses). Simultaneously, the big signage required to comply with 30.06 is meant to protect CHLs, so that they don't unknowingly commit criminal trespass by passing an unseen sign.Why is it that city owned property can't be posted?
Most hospitals (and all churches) are privately owned, but carry there was originally prohibited, no matter what the opinion of the owners. The legislature corrected this; it's still an offense to carry in a hospital or church, but only if posted in accordance with 30.06.
Now, as for city owned property... there is no private property right involved. You are the owner, and are entitled to equal say in the matter. Not to mention, going all the way back to the Texas constitution, only the state, not counties or cities, may regulate carrying firearms.
So, cities posting 30.06 notices was always challengeable. The legislature eliminated the question of anyone being a test case, by making such notice invalid for government buildings.
Next step... recognize that private schools should be entitled to the same rights as churches and private hospitals. After that, give the same recognition to private bars.
Kevin