The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://mail.texaschlforum.com/
i think the consensus on this forum, is that they are invalid, however, it would take a test case to make a true precedent, and none of us are ready to go to jail, possibly, to test it.Dr. Jekyl wrote:It would seem, based on the above, that they are invalid
Not only are they invalid, they are silly. It is a gun event where attendees are there specifically to possess guns, ammo and beanie babies while eating sausage, just goes beyond ridiculous. The law states owned, nothing about what the govt agency is doing with it except for specific uses such as courts, jails, etc.Dr. Jekyl wrote:Where does that leave us in the argument about whether 30.06 postings at the gun shows in the GRB or Pasadena Convention Center are valid? It would seem, based on the above, that they are invalid since City of Houston owns GRB and City of Pasadena owns Pasadena Convention Center.Kalrog wrote:There is some difference of opinion on that one around these parts. The majority feel that you read the law the way it is written and that 30.06 cannot be enforced if a property is owned by a governmental agency. And that 30.06 cannot be enforced if a property is leased by a governmental agency. Either one is enough to render a 30.06 sign unenforceable.DoubleActionCHL wrote:But does "owned by a governmental entity" supercede "leased by a private corporation?"
The exception says nothing about private corporations or indivduals. If it's owned by the government or leased by the government, and not otherwise a prohibited place, then 30.06 doesn't apply. It's right there in black and white.But does "owned by a governmental entity" supercede "leased by a private corporation?"