2013 and Cities Improperly posting 30.06

[2firfun50]

I was going to post this question in the 2013 legislative section, but it is still locked.

Is there any activities regarding legislation to hold local government accountable for improperly posting areas off limits? I'd also like to see law enforcement agencies liable for any false arrest claims which could result from the illegal posting.

[C-dub]

Departments and cities are already held responsible for false arrests. The problem is proving it and they don't always arrest you right away. Many times people are just brought in and held pending charges. Then when they figure out you weren't doing anything illegal they release you and if you're lucky they'll say, "Sorry, have a nice day."

[2firfun50]

Departments and cities are already held responsible for false arrests. The problem is proving it and they don't always arrest you right away. Many times people are just brought in and held pending charges. Then when they figure out you weren't doing anything illegal they release you and if you're lucky they'll say, "Sorry, have a nice day."

That is my main concern and why I think it needs to be addressed in the legislature. Ther needs to be a better way, documented in state law, for city/county governments to be held accountable by the state. I'm one who believes the law is what it says, not what a LEO, DA, and Judge says it is. That is why I adhere to gun buster signs, I can't afford to be a test case.

Even if you are not charged, you might just have to get an attorney to get your gun and plastic back. I know the law says they have to return your gun/plastic after completing their business, but who knows when some department or city/county might decide when they are done with the "investigation".

[GhostTX]

I just sent my Texas state senator AND representative an email regarding this. Texas should have a law similar to Florida that punishes government officials that ignore the law of CCW. It's sad when we know the laws better and are affected more than the supposed guardians of them.

[RPB]

I just sent my Texas state senator AND representative an email regarding this. Texas should have a law similar to Florida that punishes government officials that ignore the law of CCW. It's sad when we know the laws better and are affected more than the supposed guardians of them.

Easier to hold on to what you have than try to get back what you once had but dropped in a river or let the winds blow away while you weren't paying attention. In other words, probably easier and safer to hold government accountable now, than trying to do it from an internment camp later ... bit by bit ... boiling frog. Look at campus carry etc, where it was once legal to defend your life rather than trust some delegated person you arm and pay, who you rarely see..

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=51023" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
2012 - Grapevine Excludes CCL at Grapefest - Help end this Practice

Thu Sep 13, 2012 11:27 pm
FYI, Grapefest is again posted this year (yay I'm home on vacation!). I left my LCP in the van so I wouldn't take a chance on getting hassled... I didn't have a choice on going because it was a family thing.

City of Dallas Improper posting
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=58164#p714557" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In my three years at Love Field as a TSA screener I pointed out the improper signage more than once. And after the change in the law, I even pointed out that they could not "legally" post.

And the City of Dallas' response was that they intend to prosecute anyone carrying concealed, and several of the LEOs there said they would arrest and let the city and attorneys sort it out.

. . .

BTW, TSA only deals with the area at and beyond the secure checkpoint. As long as you don't try to go through security, TSA won't be involved at all.

And I was TSA and carried there when I traveled.

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=51023" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Non-lawyer asking a question: would someone actually have to be arrested to have "standing" for a lawsuit?

Some suits can be filed without an arrest, but since 30.06 signs on government property cannot be enforced (with limited exceptions), a pre-arrest suit is highly problematic. Even with an arrest, it's going to be hard to state a §1983 action, but not impossible.

This and numerous other examples show why we need a legislative fix in 2013. Something like Marian Hammer did in Florida would be fitting.

Chas.

[recaffeination]

I was going to post this question in the 2013 legislative section, but it is still locked.

Is there any activities regarding legislation to hold local government accountable for improperly posting areas off limits? I'd also like to see law enforcement agencies liable for any false arrest claims which could result from the illegal posting.

I'm willing to support this but only after college carry passes. That got left behind last session and in my mind should be a top priority, either by itself or bundled with 46.03/46.035 reform.

Getting rid of bad laws state wide is more important than clarifying a law that's already pretty clear.

[2firfun50]

I was going to post this question in the 2013 legislative section, but it is still locked.

Is there any activities regarding legislation to hold local government accountable for improperly posting areas off limits? I'd also like to see law enforcement agencies liable for any false arrest claims which could result from the illegal posting.

I'm willing to support this but only after college carry passes. That got left behind last session and in my mind should be a top priority, either by itself or bundled with 46.03/46.035 reform.

Getting rid of bad laws state wide is more important than clarifying a law that's already pretty clear.

I agree that college carry comes first and might be a good place to shoe horn in something about posting govenment property.

[bizarrenormality]

I was going to post this question in the 2013 legislative section, but it is still locked.

Is there any activities regarding legislation to hold local government accountable for improperly posting areas off limits? I'd also like to see law enforcement agencies liable for any false arrest claims which could result from the illegal posting.

I'm willing to support this but only after college carry passes. That got left behind last session and in my mind should be a top priority, either by itself or bundled with 46.03/46.035 reform.

Getting rid of bad laws state wide is more important than clarifying a law that's already pretty clear.

I agree that college carry comes first and might be a good place to shoe horn in something about posting govenment property.

Maybe we could add something that says it's exception to the application of 30.06 that the property is owned or leased by a governmental entity.

[RPB]

I was going to post this question in the 2013 legislative section, but it is still locked.

Is there any activities regarding legislation to hold local government accountable for improperly posting areas off limits? I'd also like to see law enforcement agencies liable for any false arrest claims which could result from the illegal posting.

I'm willing to support this but only after college carry passes. That got left behind last session and in my mind should be a top priority, either by itself or bundled with 46.03/46.035 reform.

Getting rid of bad laws state wide is more important than clarifying a law that's already pretty clear.

I agree that college carry comes first and might be a good place to shoe horn in something about posting govenment property.

Maybe we could add something that says it's exception to the application of 30.06 that the property is owned or leased by a governmental entity.

We already have that
Like 30,06 (e) ?
(e) It is an exception to the application of this section that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.


Florida has penalties a city/county must pay for posting city/county owned property; so ... they learn to obey the law, like we have to. In Texas, after a city falsely arrests you and confiscates your $1,500 weapon and equipment, never to be seen again, and you pay thousands ion attorney fees to be set free and clean up your arrest record, and the city/county does it again and posts more signs to prevent people from LEGALLY carrying because there is no penalty for them, they sure learned their lesson ... that'll teach them to arrest innocent people ...and other cities (Grapevine) see Dallas do it, so they do ... eventually all cities can ban carrying on city property in violation of the preemption/State Law and there's no penalty for cities which break the law, but Florida has penalties ...so cities will stop breaking laws and start obeying State laws... we need that here.

We need a 1) Primary focus Campus Carry bill; and part of it addressing Local Government penalties/fines Perhaps a Campus Carry bill which includes no "right of refusal" ... fines for non-compliance extending to all local govts/subdivisions including higher ed/Local School Districts etc. in "negotiation" we can concede on a portion, then see below....

And another 2) Primary Focus bill regarding Local govts complying with State Law, and toss in(include local govts such as Ind School Districts. COLLEGES which receive ANY FORM of Government funding/grants/tuition paid by Government funded grants/loans to Students etc ... Campus carry); (rinse and repeat)

IMHO ... Get more than one horse in that race so one can "draft" catch the tailwind benefit from the other. Then, we don't have to try to "tack on" Campus Carry" to a "funding/budget/money/finance bill" It's already relevant and in the small print of/to the "other" one we get introduced to have local govts comply with State Law.

(pssssst, Hey Senator Hoplophobe, I'll vote with you to strike the Campus Carry portion from the bill about local govts if you vote to pass the campus carry bill and make sure local govts comply with ... then we can both tell constituents "I voted against "this" like you wanted, but the other side got "that" through anyway ...)

[RPB]

Perhaps then cities with outdated ordinances can change to ... like Lakeway did in 1996, and I can quit having to write cities about ordinances pertaining to their city parks banning possession, 30.06 signs on city buildings, other non-30.06 language signs which *threaten* law abiding licensees with prosecution etc etc.

If there is a substantial financial penalty to a city which disregards State Law, they'll more likely comply with State Law easier and quicker, before they get caught posting 30.06 signs on city/county property where it's legal; to carry for licensees, instead of pretending they run their own autonomous kingdom.

http://z2codes.franklinlegal.net/frankl ... id=868#868" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ARTICLE 14.02 WEAPONS†
Sec. 14.02.001 Discharge of firearms, air guns or paint ball guns

(a) Definitions.

Firearm. Any device capable of discharging a projectile through a barrel using the energy generated by an explosive charge or burning substance or any device readily convertible to such use, or any device capable of discharging a projectile through a barrel using the energy by compressed air, including, without limitation, an air gun, BB gun, paint ball gun or toy gun.

Peace officer. A person designated as a peace officer or a special investigator by the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, articles 2.12 and 2.121.

(b) Prohibition; exceptions. It shall be unlawful to discharge a firearm within the incorporated limits of the city; providing, however, that the following are defenses to prosecution under this section:

(1) The person discharging the firearm was a peace officer acting in the performance of his official duties;

(2) The person discharging the firearm was lawfully defending a person or property; or

(3) The firearm discharged was a toy gun not capable of discharging a projectile a distance in excess of fifty (50) feet.

(c) Penalty. Any person violating this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be fined not more than five hundred dollars ($500.00). Such penalty shall be cumulative and not exclusive of any other rights or remedies the city may have.

(Ordinance 96-11-18-1, secs. 1–3, adopted 12/1/96)

State law references–Authority of municipality regarding firearms and explosives, V.T.C.A., Local Government Code, sec. 229.001; limitation of authority to prohibit discharge of firearms or other weapons in extraterritorial jurisdiction, V.T.C.A., Local Government Code, sec. 229.002.

[hillfighter]

I was going to post this question in the 2013 legislative section, but it is still locked.

Is there any activities regarding legislation to hold local government accountable for improperly posting areas off limits? I'd also like to see law enforcement agencies liable for any false arrest claims which could result from the illegal posting.

I'd like to see the arresting officers personal liable for their personal actions. Same for prosecutors.

Criminal and civil liability for their actions, like the rest of us.

[srothstein]

Hillfighter,

Arresting officers are personally responsible for their actions, if they violate someone's civil rights or if the break the law. The break the law part is based on whatever law is broken, while the civil rights part is based on section 1983 of Title 42 of the United States Code (42 USC 1983 is the old KKK law that bans civil rights violations under the color of law).

Arresting people is not generally a crime, but if it is an arrest for something that is clearly not a violation of the law, then it is a civil rights violation. In a case like the ones under discussion, the courts might give the first officer charged a break because the law is not what the courts call "settled law", meaning there is no binding court rulings on it. I, and I am sure most of us on the board, consider the way the law is written to be clear enough but I cannot say that a court would. Some judges might agree, some might want to see if there is precedent first. And, since CHL's tend to be polite and law abiding people, even if the law is invalid, so far we have no precedent.

Occasionally, I wonder if the reason we have no precedent is that the police chiefs and district attorneys who claim they will arrest and prosecute actually do know better and don't arrest or take the cases, or if it is because CHLs generally try to obey the stated wishes of people even if the signs may not be enforceable. My money is on the CHLs but I have to acknowledge the police/DA might be acting big for the interview knowing it is just an act.

[WildBill]

I'd like to see the arresting officers personal liable for their personal actions. Same for prosecutors.

Criminal and civil liability for their actions, like the rest of us.

Hillfighter,
Arresting officers are personally responsible for their actions, if they violate someone's civil rights or if the break the law.

What about the prosecutors? Legally, they probably are, but I can count the number of cases on one hand where a prosecutor was charged with misconduct.