Gun Shows - and 30.06

[Divided Attention]

Thanks guys! NO I am NOT willing to be a test case, which is why if there is legal signage - posted appropriately or not - I just won't go there unless absolutely necessary (i.e. hospital or the only RR for miles and no trees )

I was not aware GRB was city owned, I thought it was a private entity. I appreciate the clarification on that one.

[NEB]

Now for my clarification, how does city owned translate to government owned? Are city government buildings subject to the same rules as state government buildings?

--NEB

[Teamless]

Government is any entity that gets tax money from the populous. therefore city / state / municipality / village, county, etc, etc, etc, it all falls under the same umbrella

[5thGenTexan]

My question is why the TSRA does not file suit in state court against one of the larger venues, their insurance carrier, and the city. If and when they do so I would be willing to contribute a couple of bills to the cause.

Short of that someone needs to file a bill during this session invoking a penalty on any municipality that allows or encourages any posting of property that is statutorily excluded from such posting with 30.06 signage. If state law preempts such, shouldn't there be a penalty for those who don't follow the law.

They have no qualms in Austin offering me fines or jail time for violating the law. Let the cities know that their violation will cost them a percentage of their sales tax money or road funding from TxDOT and they will pull their collective heads out.

[Teamless]

Tthat's a great question

My question is why the TSRA does not file suit in state court against one of the larger venues, their insurance carrier, and the city.

[The Annoyed Man]

The legality of the lessee posting a 30.06 sign on a government owned building aside, I believe that it is insurance companies, not cities, that are forcing gun shows to post the signage. Furthermore, my guess is that the cities are requiring the promoters to carry insurance in order to lease a city owned facility. So the cities are indirectly forcing the promoters to post signage, but that can be laid at the insurance carrier's feet, not the city's. And in that manner, the cities can truthfully claim that they are not forcing the promoters to illegally post the signs. For the insurance companies' part, they aren't doing anything illegal. They are merely stating the terms under which they will insure the promoter. The promoter can take it or leave it.

Thus the shows are posted.

[The Annoyed Man]

Tthat's a great question

My question is why the TSRA does not file suit in state court against one of the larger venues, their insurance carrier, and the city.

They don't, because they have a limited budget, and perhaps they judge that it is better spent on legislative efforts rather than paying a bevy of lawyers to burn through the members' money in a courtroom.

[Teamless]

TAM you make valid points, as usual, and I expect no less from you, in reading all of the vast and knowledgeable posts.

Even If it is truly the insurance companies that are requiring it, it does not make it right, and I will still vote with my wallet, much like the same choice I make in not spending money at stores that have 30.06 posted.
In the end, could this be the "Taco Cabana" end, with them removing the signs? probably not, but if enough of us choose to avoid gun shows, maybe things could possibly change.

[Barbi Q]

It is revealing that even the Texas State Rifle Association is required to post 30.06 at their gun show.

That's enough for me to boycott. I'm sure they will understand because they sell these cards.

[Fire1141]

I have sent a message to hi caliber about my dislike of their posting of shows. May help, may not.

[5thGenTexan]

The legality of the lessee posting a 30.06 sign on a government owned building aside, I believe that it is insurance companies, not cities, that are forcing gun shows to post the signage. Furthermore, my guess is that the cities are requiring the promoters to carry insurance in order to lease a city owned facility. So the cities are indirectly forcing the promoters to post signage, but that can be laid at the insurance carrier's feet, not the city's. And in that manner, the cities can truthfully claim that they are not forcing the promoters to illegally post the signs. For the insurance companies' part, they aren't doing anything illegal. They are merely stating the terms under which they will insure the promoter. The promoter can take it or leave it.

Thus the shows are posted.

That is why I included Mr. Deep Pockets insurance company in the mix. The cities because so many are violating state preemption on their other buildings. I agree a legislative fix would probably be a less costly and quicker fix to it, however I don't have the utmost confidence in the Texas Statehouse to get a whole lot accomplished during their biannual sessions.

[alvins]

after last weekends show i will not be going anymore.

When they can carry a better selection of somthing other then a million glock and taurus products. might be what sells but im not interested in plastic guns.
I always wondered how legal the chl posting was at these places.

kinda like a place that sells guns and escorts you out when you buy one, but your already legally carrying.that i will never understand.

[AustinMRH]

What I don't understand about shows is the gun check/ammo check on a CCW. If I am carrying legally (even if there is an illegal sign) how can they ask me to unconceal and then render my weapon useless? If I've got an armful of guns and headed in to sell, sure, ziptie them. But my CCW works better with bullets in it.

[The Annoyed Man]

TAM you make valid points, as usual, and I expect no less from you, in reading all of the vast and knowledgeable posts.

Even If it is truly the insurance companies that are requiring it, it does not make it right, and I will still vote with my wallet, much like the same choice I make in not spending money at stores that have 30.06 posted.
In the end, could this be the "Taco Cabana" end, with them removing the signs? probably not, but if enough of us choose to avoid gun shows, maybe things could possibly change.

Many will boycott the shows, but you have to remember that, even among gun owners and gunshow patrons, CHL holders are a relatively small percentage of the whole. The boycott wouldn't have much impact unless the non-CHL holding patrons got on board with the boycott and stopped attending the shows. How likely is that?

I'm not trying to dissuade you from boycotting. I'm just pointing out that it is likely to be a fruitless endeavor. Taco Cabana's 30.06 policy was probably nothing more than that - a misguided policy. They aren't a [shudder]gun show[/shudder], so their insurance carrier wasn't calling the shots. When they got enough customer letters complaining about it, they realized that it was having an effect on their business. The only gun shows I've been to here in Texas are the Fort Worth shows (I pay no attention to who's the promoter). I'm guessing that attendance at the Fort Worth shows runs in the several thousands over the course of a two day weekend. CHL holders who boycott the event reduces that number by probably less than 1%, so it doesn't significantly impact the show's revenues, or the vendors' revenues. But a Taco Cabana location probably serves fewer than 500 meals over the course of a two day weekend, so that 1% or less has a higher impact on their botton line. Then figure in the impact on the other five days of the week, and the impact is much more significant. They thus had a strong enough financial impact to justify removing the 30.06 signs.

I bought about 250 of those TSRA business cards when I first got my CHL. I've handed out maybe 3 of them over the past 3 years. Why? Because I just don't care enough to try and make a point with a recalcitrant business owner. If they don't want my business, then I'll just move on and give it to someone who wants it. That's why I don't force the issue with Jared's jewelers for instance. There isn't anything inside a Jared's that I can't get for the same price or less from any one of at least a dozen other jewelers within a two mile radius of Jared's that aren't posted. Same with Taco Cabana. I don't even know if there is one in my area or not - never having been inside one myself. But I am pretty certain that there are at least 50 Mexican restaurants near my house that aren't posted and that serve good food.

The point is that restaurants and jewelry stores are plentiful, and they have to compete. If you care enough to protest their policy, then they know they are not only going to lose you business, but they are going to lose it to a competitor. But gun shows are different because they aren't open every day of the week, 52 weeks out of the year, and they don't really have any competition to whom you can transfer your allegiances. Since all of them in my area (DFW) are posted, I have no choice. I can't "take my business elsewhere" if I want to go to a gun show.

That's why I don't think that boycotting gun shows will have much effect. We are far more likely to have this issue resolved legislatively. At least that's how it seems to me.

[Teamless]

TAM, as I said before, you make very valid points.
I figured there was a greater presence of CHL's than that small of a percentage, and while 1 % maybe to small, it could be relatively insignificant compared to the whole as you said.

I am still not sure I will go to any gun shows, just on my own principle, but it may not make a difference in the grand scheme of things.

Thanks for your insight, as usual!