TexasCHLforum.com

I filed a complaint against the City of Pasadena with the AG office over excluding CHL holders from carrying loaded guns at the Pasadena convention center during gun shows. I have not heard anything from the AG office about my complaint, but I suspect Pasadena has.

I attended a gun show today at the Pasadena convention center. There was no 30.06/30.07 sign. There was no sign generally prohibiting loaded guns as there has been in the past. The only sign present said that no one except concealed handgun licence holders and law enforcement officers may carry loaded handguns and those handguns shall remain holstered.

I count this as a win.

sugar land dave wrote:Any more activity on this?

I have not heard from the AG office. I am inclined to give them 30 days before I start pestering them. I filed the complaint on October 4, so I will wait until the first week of November before I follow up.

There is a gun show scheduled a the Pasadena Convention center this weekend (Oct. 24-25). I hope to attend. If the have any sort of sign posted excluding CHL, I intend to file a second complaint with the AG.

EEllis wrote:

dhoobler wrote: No reasonable person objects to requiring guns that will be handled be unloaded and rendered inoperative, by a police officer or otherwise. A gun that is loaded, concealed and remains concealed for the duration of the show is in an entirely different category.

That's true but the gun that stays concealed isn't the gun that the show is worried about. It's the chl that sees a holster and decided to pull out the previously concealed handgun to try it out. And you would know which firearm is which if they were not tying guns? Mind you I think that just stating any gun that would be handled or displayed must be tied would work just as well but the idea that everyone, especially the courts, will see things the same way is just unrealistic. People on here don't even see it all the same way.

No reasonable person would anticipate a CHL holder drawing their loaded weapon from concealment at a gun show. I do not take seriously hypothetical scenarios that have little or no change of becoming reality.

EEllis wrote:

dhoobler wrote:
Doing so at a gun show will get you arrested if the gun you are handling is loaded and was concealed prior to you handling it.

Why? There really isn't difference in law that I'm aware of. I mean maybe you can twist something to fit but generally speaking there is no difference in showing a loaded or unloaded gun. Then there is the fact of how you would tell with all the guns everywhere. It's not like all gun shows have the exact same policies either..

It is really difficult to take your question seriously. Current Texas law says that is an offence for a CHL holder to intentionally fail to conceal their handgun. I can't think of a scenario in which a CHL holder carried a loaded, concealed handgun into a gun show and proceeded to handle it without intentionally failing to conceal it.

kg5ie wrote:

EEllis wrote:

sugar land dave wrote:Ok, time for my opinion; let's think about this for a minute. 30.06 can not legitimately be posted at the gun show on public property unless it is one of the restricted places. If the city does, it eventually should cost them some money. The renter cannot make an enforcable 30.06 posting; 30.05 is practically a non-starter since your chl is a fine defense to prosecution written into that law and 30.06 practically supercedes it for non-restricted places, therefore it is not a criminal offence for you to carry there. The renter cannot superscede state law to make it a criminal offense when the state says it is not even if for a presumed good cause of reducing negligent discharge, therefor his claim that you cannot be there on non-restricted public property becomes a civil matter for which you must be sued. If someone under color of law lays hands on you or restricts your movement on non-restricted public space, they in all liklihood are at that point breaking criminal law themselves and may also be subject to civil suit. Frankly I would think lawyers would be lining up hoping a renter messes up and hires private security which assaults an attendee.

SB273 has helped show legislative intent and the anti-gun minority is desperate while they are running out of room to maneuver.

Since they are not posting 30.06 but signs saying guns must be unloaded before entry how is anyone making it criminal? Also intent means squat. Just ask people on here about the legality of a incorrect 30.06 sign. All the sudden it's the letter of the law then. But you are right in that if police working these show are not careful they could open themselves and the promoters to major civil liability.

The gun show at Will Rogers is posting a 30.06. Big and bold. On about a 3'x5' sign. If anywhere else, it would be a legitimate sign.

Find out which government entity owns Will Rogers. Write a letter to the chief officer (mayor, county judge, etc.) requesting that the signs not be posted in the future. Wait three days. If they get posted after that. send a complaint the the attorney general.

Give us updates. We all have an interest in getting local governments to stop violating the law.

EEllis wrote:

Jim Beaux wrote:

jimlongley wrote:

Jim Beaux wrote:I believe I read it here but: the city requires insurance in order to rent the venue & the gun show organizer cant get insurance unless he abides by the insurance company's provisions. The insurance company stipulates the firearm policies.

Too bad. If your insurance company required you to have blinking red and blue lights on top of your vehicle, would they pay the fines? The insurance company is going to have to live with the law.

Mentioned above, the gun show organizer says that by buying a ticket you enter into a contract and so on, in which case a 30.06 sign becomes unnecessary and in light of the law, illegal to post. They are going to have to put up another sign.

Something to chew on:

If the insurer can mandate this policy for gun shows, whats to stop them from banning guns at boat shows, gardening shows, art shows, etc?

Well a big thing is there are additional safety concerns because in the course of regular business people going to gun shows handle guns openly. Any other show doing so would get you arrested. That factor could make a difference in how a court rules.

Doing so at a gun show will get you arrested if the gun you are handling is loaded and was concealed prior to you handling it.

No reasonable person objects to requiring guns that will be handled be unloaded and rendered inoperative, by a police officer or otherwise. A gun that is loaded, concealed and remains concealed for the duration of the show is in an entirely different category.

sugar land dave wrote:Ok, time for my opinion; let's think about this for a minute. 30.06 can not legitimately be posted at the gun show on public property unless it is one of the restricted places. If the city does, it eventually should cost them some money. The renter cannot make an enforcable 30.06 posting; 30.05 is practically a non-starter since your chl is a fine defense to prosecution written into that law and 30.06 practically supercedes it for non-restricted places, therefore it is not a criminal offence for you to carry there. The renter cannot superscede state law to make it a criminal offense when the state says it is not even if for a presumed good cause of reducing negligent discharge, therefor his claim that you cannot be there on non-restricted public property becomes a civil matter for which you must be sued. If someone under color of law lays hands on you or restricts your movement on non-restricted public space, they in all liklihood are at that point breaking criminal law themselves and may also be subject to civil suit. Frankly I would think lawyers would be lining up hoping a renter messes up and hires private security which assaults an attendee.

SB273 has helped show legislative intent and the anti-gun minority is desperate while they are running out of room to maneuver.

If this was a baseball game, you would have just hit a walk-off home run.

Papa_Tiger wrote:IMO, all this means is that they will be hiring "private security" who have no reason not to enforce the house rule.

Private security has no authority to enforce a law. The only thing they could do is play bouncer and physically remove you. That begs a question. Does a private individual have the right/authority to physically remove you from public property?

Glockster wrote:I'm apparently confused. Isn't this a city owned property? If so then it shouldn't matter what whichever event organizer chooses to put in place whatever so-called house rules. My understanding is that if it is city property, then it should be a violation of law for the city to allow a contract that has any provisions in violation of the law or to allow a leaser to operate in such a manner so as to then cause the city to be in violation of the law.

You and I understand the law the same way. If a private entity can place a 30.06 sign on government owned property, then the City of Houston would not have asked the zoo to take down their signs.

The city cannot enact gun control that is more stringent than the state. The preemption law prohibits that. I can't imagine that a private entity can supersede state law.

JP171 wrote:

dhoobler wrote:Today I filed a complaint the the attorney general about the exclusion of CHL firearms from the gun show at the Pasadena convention center. I sent the AG office a copy of my original letter to the mayor and a photo of a sign excluding loaded firearms. Here is the text of my complaint to the AG:

There were two temporary signs displayed outside at the entrance to a gun show. The photo of one sign is uploaded. There was a uniformed Pasadena police officer at the door enforcing the prohibition of loaded concealed handguns.

The convention center displayed 30.06 signs in the past. I wrote a letter to Pasadena Mayor Johnny Isbel notifying him of the offense under SB 273. Apparently he took notice of my letter because there was no 30.06 sign present.

I contend that the sign that was present is prohibited under SB 273 because SB 273 is not limited to the 30.06 sign. SB 273 prohibits any sign that excludes holders of a CHL.

The gun show promoter with the explicit approval of the City of Pasadena is attempting to enforce a rule that is over and above that which is permitted by state law. I expect the the preemption law prohibits them from doing so.

hmmm LT. causin trouble again?

Its what I do SSG.

EEllis wrote:

gljjt wrote:Why not just have anyone who wants to holster or sell a handgun have it tagged (ziptied) at the door. Concealed handguns carried for defensive purposes cannot be removed from cover at any time except for legal self defense purposes. Any CHL holder removing their carry piece is breaking the law. It could easily argued that unloaded zipped handguns are handled for "sporting" purposes and are exempt from concealed requirements while a loaded weapon is not. This doesn't seem that difficult to me.

For the most part this is how it's been done. Sure they had the 30.06 signs but I carrried past them knowing they were unenforceable. The City cops knew they were unenforceable and even a HCSO made a statement, saw it in an article but don't remember well enough to find it, that called it a house rule referring to the GRB convention center and 30.06. But it made people keep their concealed firearms concealed. I wounder about how OC will work with the gun shows.

http://blog.chron.com/houstonpolitics/2 ... rity-jobs/

Off-duty city police replaced in gun show security jobs
By Mike Morris on January 24, 2013 at 5:38 PM

On Thursday we got a call from Mary Bean, who, with her husband, owns High Caliber Gun & Knife Shows, Inc., which regularly rents space at the city’s George R. Brown Convention Center, including this weekend.

Bean said that off-duty Houston police officers who have provided security for her shows for many years were barred this week from performing their normal duties, such as tying patrons’ guns so they can’t be dry-fired, ensuring guns are unloaded, and walking the aisles, providing a presence at the show.

Houston Police Officers Union president Ray Hunt said the officers were prevented from carrying out these duties because they violate department policies regarding off-duty jobs. The gun show’s rules are that people can’t bring a concealed handgun into the show, but state law allows patrons to do so. That makes the show’s decision a house rule, he said, and HPD policy prohibits its officers from enforcing house rules.

“It’s not that they were suspended for any reason for danger to the public or danger to the officers. It was simply that they were being asked to enforce a rule that is not a law, and we can’t do that,” Hunt said. “When it’s brought to our attention that house rules are being enforced, we make sure that that policy is changed. If the officer can’t enforce house rules, why would the vendor want to pay them?”

The issue apparently was raised in a complaint by a gun show attendee, Bean said.

kg5ie wrote:

kg5ie wrote:I filed an AG complaint about the Fort Worth Gun Show in September. Have not heard anything back. Fort Worth claimed the event organizer posted the sign.

Got a reply from AG liasion officer Captain Gregory Lewis telling me I need to follow the chain. That is complain to Will Rogers first. I got a response from the gun show organizer. Thought I would share.

"All gun shows in Texas that I am aware of are posted 30.06.



The issue is not that the gun is open or concealed carry but that it is loaded. Once the gun is unloaded, the method of carry is not an issue. All guns including concealed carry must be unloaded prior to entry into the show. Through the purchase of a ticket, you are entering a private event into a space under the control of a private entity. As a condition of entry to that private event, all guns must be unloaded. We have additional signage to that effect at our shows."

All shows are not 30.06 posted. The Pasadena show this past weekend was not 30.06 posted. It did have a generic sign, but not a 30.06 sign.

winters wrote:So who is going to do the work for the george r brown convention center postings during the gun show?

I have not been to a GRB gun show in years, but I hear that it is no longer posted. I stand to be corrected if it is posted.

Today I filed a complaint the the attorney general about the exclusion of CHL firearms from the gun show at the Pasadena convention center. I sent the AG office a copy of my original letter to the mayor and a photo of a sign excluding loaded firearms. Here is the text of my complaint to the AG:

There were two temporary signs displayed outside at the entrance to a gun show. The photo of one sign is uploaded. There was a uniformed Pasadena police officer at the door enforcing the prohibition of loaded concealed handguns.

The convention center displayed 30.06 signs in the past. I wrote a letter to Pasadena Mayor Johnny Isbel notifying him of the offense under SB 273. Apparently he took notice of my letter because there was no 30.06 sign present.

I contend that the sign that was present is prohibited under SB 273 because SB 273 is not limited to the 30.06 sign. SB 273 prohibits any sign that excludes holders of a CHL.

The gun show promoter with the explicit approval of the City of Pasadena is attempting to enforce a rule that is over and above that which is permitted by state law. I expect the the preemption law prohibits them from doing so.