CWOOD wrote:BadCo45ACP wrote:don't over look the most improtant part of that exclusion
(f) It is a defense to prosecution under this section.........
This is a very good and valid point.
As amusing as some of the comments are, these guys ARE law enforcement officers on railroad right of way. They have been for 150 years. While they may operate within the law, the discretion they exercise is dictated by their employers, not elected officials subject to voters' will.
Although most local LEO's probably will not push it that far, the concept of "defense to prosecution" is applied AT YOUR TRIAL. By that time you have spent some time in custody and a significant sum of money. Even if/when you win the case none of that can be restored to you.
I would use considerable care if I felt that I just HAD to see that museum.
And I suspect that after you spent the time in custody, hired a lawyer, went to court, won your case, it wouldn’t impact the RR company at all. The sign would remain, or get changed to the wording for 30.06, and their view on firearms would remain the same. It’s just not worth it…
Also, isn’t there the risk that while you’re fighting the RR charges you will have your CHL revoked? One of you legal folks please step in since I am way out of my area…
GC §411.187. SUSPENSION OF LICENSE. (a) A license may be
suspended under this section if the license holder:
(1) is charged with the commission of a Class A or Class B
misdemeanor or an offense under Section 42.01, Penal Code, or of a
felony under an information or indictment;
I like llwatson’s approach:
llwatson wrote:
This is the BNRR headquarters in Fort Worth. I was there for a service call. And, being the true rebel that I am, you KNOW what government ID I presented to them. They didn't know what to think about that, as apparently, they had not seen one before!