TexasCHLforum.com

The Annoyed Man wrote:I'm not trying to dissuade you from boycotting. I'm just pointing out that it is likely to be a fruitless endeavor.

Actually, it bears fruit immediately. Everybody gets what they want. We don't have to disarm, and they can have a gun-free gun show.

The Annoyed Man wrote: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.

TAM again does make a very valid point. I'm also not happy about the 30.06 signs there but I do believe that its something required by the insurance companies. So with the fact that I really wanted to put several different guns in my hand to determine my next purchase (If you know how many guns you have, you must not have enough) I went to the High Caliber show this weekend. I know that the 30.06 is invalid there but when there is a cop there who asks I'm not going to lie to him. So when I parked I dropped the mag at the car and carried my Kahr in with me with one chambered round of .45. When I got to the front I ejected the round and checked the gun. He ran the tie wrap through it and asked if I had any ammo. I told him no...at least not until I got to the first booth . He laughed and I went on my way.

I then went to the booth where I was going to buy some Hornaday Critical Defense and picked up a box...then over to buy another magazine for the pistol I had with me (a planned purchase) and then over to fastloader booth where I picked up the fast loader (another planned purchase). I then put these items together and I had a loaded mag with me. When I walked out the door, I popped out my knife, cut the strap, dropped in my clip and racked it for the walk back to the car. I felt I was adequately protected the whole day. Especially when you go to leave and there are at lest 15 HPD officers parked along the front of the GRB who were all inside buying up what they could negotiate as the show was coming to a close

I will continue to go since it's the only place you can go and handle all the various iterations of guns in one place to see what fits you before you are ready to buy something. I will have an idea of what I'm looking for try it, buy it IF the price is right, call my favorite shop and check his price if it's close the local shop gets the sale, and the show gets their browsing fee.

The people watching is worth the price of admission. Walmart has nothing over some of the people I've seen at the Fort Worth shows.

I actually just had a run-in with 30.06 at a gun show on government premises this weekend AND (coincidence) had an email correspondence with a buddy (also a forum member) about this same topic of a private lessee posting 30.06 on premises owned by a government lessor.

As always, but especially regarding everything I write below I AM NOT A LAWYER.

First, to respond to a few ideas from this thread:

1. Insurance companies as the "cause" of gun shows posting legally unenforceable PC 30.06 signs on government premises:
My blunt response is who gave insurance companies the carte blanche right to dictate such things? What if an insurance company demands that you post signs stating "no black people allowed"? It seems some think it's OK for 30.06 signs to be posted on government property because merely posting the legallly unenforceable signs is not "breaking the law". But if someone attempts to enforce a law against me that they have no duty nor authority to enforce, have they not violated my civil rights? Much like posting and attempting to enforce a "no coloreds" sign is violating the civil rights of black people? And if insurance companies or anyone else used coercion to force another entity to violate my civil rights, then it seems to my non-legal mind that they are liable for the violation of my rights. And if the government mandates insurance which can only be obtained by posting a 30.06 sign, isn't the government also liable for violating my civil rights? Isn't this the same basic argument we use against "bullet control" laws. Sure the Constitution only says we have a right to bear "arms" but laws prohibiting our rights to bear ammunition render the "arms" useless. Sort of the "slippery slope" argument.

2. Boycotts won't do any good:
TAM is correct that even if all 400,000-plus Texas CHL holders boycotted every gun show in the state, it wouldn't make a huge dent. This is because there isn't much competition. Veering slightly off the topic, this is also PRECISELY why the exception to 30.06 on government property was enacted into law - there is no competition for government services either. You can't merely "boycott" the government or "take your business elsewhere". Thus it is immoral (and now, thankfully, legally unenforceable) for a CHL holder to be prohibited from carrying a gun on government premises (other than the few notable exceptions in statutes).

Anyway, here is the email response I sent to my buddy regarding 30.06 signs on government property rented by a private business:

***

Funny you should ask because I just ran into this exact scenario yesterday and had a brief discussion about it with the "proprietor" and two Austin police officers. I of course was NOT carrying while having this discussion - I may be dumb, but I ain't stupid.

The new location for the SAXET gun show in Austin is the Travis County Expo Center and is posted with 30.06 signs that meet all the size requirements etc (just like at the old Crocket Center). As far as I know (and the others agreed) it is owned by the county, thus according to ...

PC 30.06 (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.

My argument, which I believe Charles Cotton agrees, is that it is simply not possible to violate PC 30.06 in any premises owned by a government entity of any kind. I explained this to the cops and the proprietor and got multiple different "but you still can't carry" responses ranging from:

• "he (proprietor) is renting from the county, so he can do what he wants and has authority and responsibility for the facility"

  .... to which I retorted that the law PC 30.06 (e) does not make this distinction, only stating clearly that if owned by government then 30.06 does not apply

• "If he tells you to leave, you have to leave"

  (which I agree with - see below)
• this last one is my favorite - the proprietor told me "

  this is not political, we just don' think it's safe to have loaded guns in here. if we see you with a loaded gun I'm not going to press charges, we'll just ask that you unload and tie up your gun or leave"

  ... I didn't respond to that other than an incredulous look on my face, but really want to know if he has no plans of "enforcing" PC 30.06 then why put up the sign except to scare people into bowing to your whims? This line of thought from the proprietor really burns my rear end a bit. Again it's the "I don't trust you to have a loaded gun" argument. He even mentioned that he asks off-duty cops not to carry in the gun show (and I REALLY wanted to ask about the two moonlighting APD officers in full uniform with handguns open carried on their hip?)

Now, of course, if you are spotted carrying and someone with apparent authority orally tells you to leave and you refuse, I can see an argument that you could still be violating ...

PC 30.05. CRIMINAL TRESPASS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person enters or remains on or in property of another, including residential land, agricultural land, a recreational vehicle park, a building, or an aircraft or other vehicle, without effective consent and the person: (1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or (2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.

To my way of thinking, if someone orally tells you to leave they can make up a legally valid reason for doing so after you refuse, which gets around the exception in ...

PC 30.05 (f) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that: (1) the basis on which entry on the property or land or in the building was forbidden is that entry with a handgun was forbidden; and (2) the person was carrying a concealed handgun and a license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, to carry a concealed handgun of the same category the person was carrying.

Also it is VERY important to notice the difference between PC 30.06 (e) and PC 30.05 (f) ... one says it is an "exception to the application" of a section, which to my non-legal mind basically makes the section of law null and void if posted on government owned premises. But the other says it is merely a "defense to prosecution under this section" - so this possibly becomes one of those "beat the rap but not the ride" situations.

I went to the Pasadena gun show and government building or not it was 30.06 posted. Even though it was 30.06 posted it said all firearms had to be unloaded and have a zip tie through it. I am sure many just walked in without unloading. The only thing to intimidate you are the police officers in the front lobby who do not ask or check you. Honestly there were so many cops there and in the parking lot that I felt pretty safe even though I don't like the fact of disarming. It seems pretty stupid considering you have thousands of rounds of ammo and thousands of guns right in front of you.

Gun free gun show..sounds like an oxymoron to me. Well, I'm sure there are plenty of morons, so nevermind.

I am so, "been there done that" with gun shows, that I don't even participate anymore.

-Cain

Hello all. I have have been lurking on TexasCHLforum.com for quite a while. I appreciate the amount of knowledge that is shared here. With regard to gun shows, I have been to exactly four in my life, in Fort Worth, within the last 12 months. As a CHL holder, I do find it strange that the shows do post 30.06 signs. As a guest of the shows and out of respect of the "posted signage", I have not carry a loaded weapon into the shows. To my thinking, by asking me to disarm while attending the show, the sponsor is taking responsibility for my safety, thereby, imputing that responsibility to his insurer. If in the unfortunate event that I needed to defend myself while attending the "show" I was injured, or worse, I think there would be grounds for civil action against the promoter of the the show and/or the insurer. My 2 1/2 cents. P.S. Sorry for a long winded first post.

Lefty,
welcome.
Your post wasn't long winded :) no worries

Lefty wrote:Hello all. I have have been lurking on TexasCHLforum.com for quite a while. I appreciate the amount of knowledge that is shared here. With regard to gun shows, I have been to exactly four in my life, in Fort Worth, within the last 12 months. As a CHL holder, I do find it strange that the shows do post 30.06 signs. As a guest of the shows and out of respect of the "posted signage", I have not carry a loaded weapon into the shows. To my thinking, by asking me to disarm while attending the show, the sponsor is taking responsibility for my safety, thereby, imputing that responsibility to his insurer. If in the unfortunate event that I needed to defend myself while attending the "show" I was injured, or worse, I think there would be grounds for civil action against the promoter of the the show and/or the insurer. My 2 1/2 cents. P.S. Sorry for a long winded first post.

Welcome Lefty. Your post was not long, but remember the return key is your friend.