TexasCHLforum.com

Headed to the SHO on Thursday with some clients...

Just realized today that regardless of what I think about golf, this is a professional sporting event...

Guess my argument that golf is not a sport wouldn't hold up in court, huh...???

It's a sport, so no it wouldn't.

RJGold wrote:Headed to the SHO on Thursday with some clients...

Just realized today that regardless of what I think about golf, this is a professional sporting event...

Guess my argument that golf is not a sport wouldn't hold up in court, huh...???

If tennis is a sport then so is golf.

Anygunanywhere

To me they ain't real sports like huntin', fishin' and shootin', but I can bet ya the Judge would think golf was a sport and those in the turney-ment gettin' paid to play are pre-fessionuls.

Hunting and attacking that little white ball like I do is definitely a sport.

OK, how 'bout that pesky word "premises"?

on the premises where a high school, collegiate, or professional
sporting event or interscholastic event is taking place, unless
the license holder is a participant in the event and a handgun is used
in the event;

howdy wrote:OK, how 'bout that pesky word "premises"?

on the premises where a high school, collegiate, or professional
sporting event or interscholastic event is taking place, unless
the license holder is a participant in the event and a handgun is used
in the event;

Indeed, just which building is the event being held in?

jimlongley wrote:Indeed, just which building is the event being held in?

Agreed and It is highly unlikely that you just happened to be at the location where the SHO was being held at, and you were not there to actually watch the event.
So on its faith, if you went to the SHO, I do not think premises would even be a consideration.
While it may be a defense in court, it would certainly be an attempt to skirt the meaning of the law

Teamless wrote:

jimlongley wrote:Indeed, just which building is the event being held in?

Agreed and It is highly unlikely that you just happened to be at the location where the SHO was being held at, and you were not there to actually watch the event.
So on its faith, if you went to the SHO, I do not think premises would even be a consideration.
While it may be a defense in court, it would certainly be an attempt to skirt the meaning of the law

Actually, considering my often and publicly stated opinion that Mark Twain was being kind and reserved in his often quoted (probably in error) opinion about golf, if I happened to be at the location where the SHO was being held, there is no way I would be there to actually watch.

Teamless wrote:While it may be a defense in court, it would certainly be an attempt to skirt the meaning of the law

I have always assumed "a defense to prosecution" meant that the law was by and large on your side, BUT it may still be a darn big fight. I would not want to have to convince 12 folks that I wasn't at the golf event if I was inside the gate. Thinking of Reliant, the Juice Box, Toyota Center - the premises appears to be inside the security check points? You don't have to go inside Reliant stadium, just through the fence to be on premises. I suspect the same general idea would apply here? When did you go through event security? This also differentiates between the livestock show and the rodeo. Both have security but only one is a pro sport event.

Now, I would guess that a service person (i.e. port-a-let cleaner, delivery person, network/phone admin, etc) who was only there shortly might have a strong defense. A person with a neck lanyard and a purchased ticket might have an uphill battle.

I would suspect they have security at the gate with a wand and would give you verbal warning that your handgun would not be allowed. They might also have a 30.06 sign and I believe Red Stone is a private club. I guess a porta-can might be a "building or portion of a building".

Oh, I thought a new gas station had opened up in Houston --or a new corporate office.

VMI77 wrote:Oh, I thought a new gas station had opened up in Houston --or a new corporate office.

My first thought too, I had to read the thread to find out it was about a waste of grass.

goose wrote:

Teamless wrote:While it may be a defense in court, it would certainly be an attempt to skirt the meaning of the law

I have always assumed "a defense to prosecution" meant that the law was by and large on your side, BUT it may still be a darn big fight. I would not want to have to convince 12 folks that I wasn't at the golf event if I was inside the gate. Thinking of Reliant, the Juice Box, Toyota Center - the premises appears to be inside the security check points? You don't have to go inside Reliant stadium, just through the fence to be on premises. I suspect the same general idea would apply here? When did you go through event security? This also differentiates between the livestock show and the rodeo. Both have security but only one is a pro sport event.

Now, I would guess that a service person (i.e. port-a-let cleaner, delivery person, network/phone admin, etc) who was only there shortly might have a strong defense. A person with a neck lanyard and a purchased ticket might have an uphill battle.

A defense to prosecution is not in play here. A defense to prosecution is labeled by the phrase "it is a defense to prosecution".

If the professional sporting event is not being held at a premise, as defined in penal code 46.035, then it is not off limit to concealed carry under a CHL.

When entering most football stadiums you enter a least a portion of a building, which is a premise under PC 46.035.

The law clearly defines premises. Evildoers who ignore the definition to violate the civil rights of a citizen would be the ones subverting the law.