TexasCHLforum.com

Good catch!

I haven't read all of the posts, but wanted to look at some other issues that will come out of this.

Twin Peaks will be lucky of their company survives this. Word is that the FBI and other agencies had alerted at least the local franchise that there was trouble on the horizon and they should not be allowing the gangs to congregate there. I heard that law enforcement was told the store had the right to serve whoever they chose and to basically buzz off. I don't know if the word ever got to corporate about the impending rumble, but corporate is already in damage control mode by trying to distance themselves from the Waco store by cancelling their franchise and claiming the location failed to follow corporate rules.

I don't know how many non-Bandito/Cossack related individuals were there at the time, but even if it was just employees required to work, I can see numerous civil lawsuits from them and others who were in close proximity when the riot broke out. The failure of the business to try to provide a safe environment for customers, workers and other general public in the area when they had warnings is pure negligence. IMO even a horse lawyer could win on this one and get some big settlements.

C-dub wrote:...
The law doesn't have to be changed. It is already illegal for gang members to carry a firearm.

PC §46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an
offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his
or her person a handgun, illegal knife, or club if the person is not:
(1) on the person’s own premises or premises under the person’s control; or
(2) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned
by the person or under the person’s control.
(a-1) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or
recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun in a motor vehicle or
watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person’s control at any time in
which:
(1) the handgun is in plain view; or
(2) the person is:
(A) engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a
violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic or boating;
(B) prohibited by law from possessing a firearm; or
(C) a member of a criminal street gang,

Actually, I'd like to propose a bit of arm-chair legislation:

(a-3) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun on or about his or her person or in a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control at any time in which the person is a member of a criminal street gang, as defined by Section 71.01. An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree.

DocV wrote:

C-dub wrote:...
The law doesn't have to be changed. It is already illegal for gang members to carry a firearm.

PC §46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an
offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his
or her person a handgun, illegal knife, or club if the person is not:
(1) on the person’s own premises or premises under the person’s control; or
(2) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned
by the person or under the person’s control.
(a-1) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or
recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun in a motor vehicle or
watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person’s control at any time in
which:
(1) the handgun is in plain view; or
(2) the person is:
(A) engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a
violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic or boating;
(B) prohibited by law from possessing a firearm; or
(C) a member of a criminal street gang,

Actually, I'd like to propose a bit of arm-chair legislation:

(a-3) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun on or about his or her person or in a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control at any time in which the person is a member of a criminal street gang, as defined by Section 71.01. An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree.

So what are you saying? Any club that wears or claims to be a 1%er falls under a criminal street gang.

nightmare69 wrote:
So what are you saying? Any club that wears or claims to be a 1%er falls under a criminal street gang.

You better read your statute better

(d) "Criminal street gang" means three or more persons having a common identifying sign or symbol or an identifiable leadership who continuously or regularly associate in the commission of criminal activities.

I think corporate Twin Peaks will be just fine. They may end up paying out some $$, but this is not going to bankrupt them by any means. The only people who got killed were part of the problem, and I think that is probably true of the 18 or so that got wounded, and the 170 hauled off to jail. No one is going to have a lot of sympathy for any of them.

If a nearby family of non-criminal-biker types had been wounded or killed, or some employees, it would be a different ball game, but I haven't read of any. Recall the recent incident at the College station incident. True innocents died in those, there's a judgment against McD, no doubt appealed, but Ronald McDonald is still marching along. If TP corporate has half a brain, they will give the employees generous severance packages to shut up and go away, but even if they (the employees) and some non-biker customers elect to sue for emotional distress, TP will offer them the choice between a small pay out now or years of trials and appeals, and if it goes to trial I doubt the plaintiffs will get a lot of sympathy. Biker gangs have been meeting at that TP for quite awhile now, not just last Sunday -- it wasn't like this came out of the blue. And that day in particular, hard to miss 200 bikers glaring at each other.

The franchise is already toast, of course. Hooters will move in or start another restaurant to fill the gap, and a few years from now a new Twin Peaks will open somewhere else in Waco.

I'm saying 46.02 looks a bit weak. My "parsing" of (a-1) leads me to believe that as long as a criminal street gang member is not "in a motor vehicle or water craft" they can carry "on person". My suggestion is that a criminal street gang member can never carry even if they are not on a vehicle. Additionally, I would suggest making that offense a felony, regardless of location. That said, my ability to parse legislation is questionable at best.

Frankly, people can claim whatever they want without being a real "criminal street gang member". 71.01 is clear about what that term means.

ELB wrote:I think corporate Twin Peaks will be just fine. They may end up paying out some $$, but this is not going to bankrupt them by any means. ....

The franchise is already toast, of course. Hooters will move in or start another restaurant to fill the gap, and a few years from now a new Twin Peaks will open somewhere else in Waco.

How about the other merchants who have lost at least three days of sales? I'm thinking they deserve to be compensated for those loses.

nightmare69 wrote:

DocV wrote:

C-dub wrote:...
The law doesn't have to be changed. It is already illegal for gang members to carry a firearm.

PC §46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an
offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his
or her person a handgun, illegal knife, or club if the person is not:
(1) on the person’s own premises or premises under the person’s control; or
(2) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned
by the person or under the person’s control.
(a-1) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or
recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun in a motor vehicle or
watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person’s control at any time in
which:
(1) the handgun is in plain view; or
(2) the person is:
(A) engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a
violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic or boating;
(B) prohibited by law from possessing a firearm; or
(C) a member of a criminal street gang,

Actually, I'd like to propose a bit of arm-chair legislation:

(a-3) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun on or about his or her person or in a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control at any time in which the person is a member of a criminal street gang, as defined by Section 71.01. An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree.

So what are you saying? Any club that wears or claims to be a 1%er falls under a criminal street gang.

There is a formal process for earning membership in to an established biker gang/MC. Usually one has to spend time as an associate member then at some point he earns his full member status. It's not safe to just throw on a leather jacket or vest with some patches and claim membership. I bet we all would be surprised how organized they are.

I think a previous post covers the legal definition. Interesting there are some that seem to get defensive about these thug biker gangs. They themselves know and admit they are a thug biker gang and are proud of it. Why try to defend them?

Most of the time I dont feel the need to post here which is why I read and seldom post. I feel strongly enough that there is a lot wrong with everything that is being reported on this issue and am slightly confused at the overall sentiment on this forum.

I think there are safe assumptions that can be made about the participants in the Twin Peaks meeting, but those assumptions fall far short of being beyond reasonable doubt. The State needs to prove their cases with complete thoroughness, and the bikers are innocent until proven guilty - in the eyes of the law.

As for me, I'll exercise judgement as best I can and I doubt those 170 include anyone I would feel safe around. Your mileage is welcome to vary. My judgement isn't perfect, but at least there's balance in this. Hard core Banditos and Cossacks wouldn't want to hang out with me, either. Riding to a bike shop near Fort Worth this morning, I had WRR classical radio tuned in on my Goldwing. Born to be mild, that's me. Great trumpet sonata at about 8 am, by the way. Wish I could remember who wrote it.

Anyway, bad hombres were working up to violence in Waco for at least several weeks. I think that's pretty clear.

However, the police need to exercise a little moderation, and I say that with sympathy to their mission. Right now, the Harley dealership near the scene of the shooting has a sign on the door saying it is closed indefinitely at police request. Nice they are cooperating and I assume it will only be a few days, but their property taxes, debt service, salaries, and probably a bunch of expenses continue without pause. I don't think the Waco Harley dealership is a criminal organization. It's a nice place. Visit it when they reopen. You might be surprised at how easily motorcycles foster good, wholesome friendships. Not unlike guns, actually, or sailboats, or any hobby requiring a little skill. People develop bonds when they have a common interest requiring finesse.

The Waco police are also asking all motorcyclists to stay off the street. The person I spoke with at the Waco PD said that request would still be in effect tomorrow, and may continue for some time.

The city has no beef with me, but my shiny new Goldwing is a different story at the moment. I'm grateful for what the police did at the shootout, but I'm not very happy about not being welcome on my bike.

The Waco Honda dealership organizes rides a couple of times a month. I haven't been on one in a long time, but a few years back they might get 30 or so bikes to show up. Everyone would ride maybe 50 miles to a bar-b-que or hamburger joint and have a grand time. Those rides are perfectly, completely family safe events, the kind of fellowship preachers could enjoy without guilt. Safe, friendly, polite good times.

I suppose those rides will be put on hold. Right now sounds like a bad time for the police to have to figure out if a string of 30 bikes are good guys or bad, which kind of sounds like an argument I've heard about open carry.

Thirty nice, kindly people on bikes might also present a target for hard core criminals who also happen to ride two wheels. Which, come to think of it, also sounds like an argument I've heard about open carry.

Maybe not today, but at some point it's going to make sense to admit life has risks, stop hunkering down, and ride.

Shoot straight and speak the truth while you're at it. It's a good combination.

Keith B wrote:I haven't read all of the posts, but wanted to look at some other issues that will come out of this.

Twin Peaks will be lucky of their company survives this. Word is that the FBI and other agencies had alerted at least the local franchise that there was trouble on the horizon and they should not be allowing the gangs to congregate there. I heard that law enforcement was told the store had the right to serve whoever they chose and to basically buzz off. I don't know if the word ever got to corporate about the impending rumble, but corporate is already in damage control mode by trying to distance themselves from the Waco store by cancelling their franchise and claiming the location failed to follow corporate rules.

I don't know how many non-Bandito/Cossack related individuals were there at the time, but even if it was just employees required to work, I can see numerous civil lawsuits from them and others who were in close proximity when the riot broke out. The failure of the business to try to provide a safe environment for customers, workers and other general public in the area when they had warnings is pure negligence. IMO even a horse lawyer could win on this one and get some big settlements.

There's an article on Yahoo quoting the waitresses. One said there was a fight every time they hosted one of these things....just not anything as bad as what happened. That's a management that is asking for trouble.

Since I go to restaurants for the food and I don't care what the wait staff looks like, this place and Hooters has never had any interest for me.

nightmare69 wrote:
All the while the rest of the club is living up to its 1% patch.

We did receive multiple APBs warning of the death threat to LEOs. We take this very seriously.

Ya may want to check your facts. Cossacks are not a 1% Club and do not wear a 1% patch

As to all the other criminal activity you say they do.....I honestly cant say one way or the other but I do know that the handful That I have known [ranging] from 10 to 14 years are not and would not be involved in such activities. However they dont mind getting a little rowdy....but you dont have to be a biker to enjoy that.


also some have made mention over the years of getting shot by the cops while you are defending yourself against a bad buy.... IF the cops actually did fire a shot, that is exactly what happened.

AndyC wrote:

screaminz2002 wrote:Most of the time I dont feel the need to post here which is why I read and seldom post. I feel strongly enough that there is a lot wrong with everything that is being reported on this issue and am slightly confused at the overall sentiment on this forum.

You're being overly-sensitive - this isn't about bikers, this about gang-members who just HAPPEN to be bikers.

THIS^^.