TexasCHLforum.com

Texas zoos struggle to limit firearms under new open carry laws:
‘Guns and zoos simply do not mix’
Texas Tribune
By Morgan Smith, The Texas Tribune
07 Jan 2016 at 11:00 ET

http://nyc.epeak.in/frame/?url=aHR0cDov ... &id=257769

looks like they turned off the comments. but we all here know the deal what they are doing is illegal. IMO we need to have the legislature hold individuals responsible on a criminal basis for posting government owned and leased locations, we sure get criminal charges is we disobey the law and so should they! but alas I don't think it will ever happen so the more we think we are gaining ground the less we actually get and realistically more we lose to "liberal interpretation"

NotRPB wrote:Texas zoos struggle to limit firearms under new open carry laws:
‘Guns and zoos simply do not mix’
Texas Tribune
By Morgan Smith, The Texas Tribune
07 Jan 2016 at 11:00 ET

http://nyc.epeak.in/frame/?url=aHR0cDov ... &id=257769

The comments on this story are funny/sad at the same time. They way they view Texas makes me even happier that I live here, AWAY from most of them!
**EDIT*** After I made a reply to one of the comments, it was less than 5 minutes that it was removed as "spam". So I clicked the "this is not spam" button and the response was "we will review the comment". Nice!

Why is it taking so long for Paxton to do something about this? It seems to me about as clear cut a violation as there is and a perfect example of why this law was passed. Am I missing something?

Maybe he's worried about his own legal issues. Just sayin'...

To be fair to the AG's office, this is not the only issue they have before them. They also have to do due diligence in their investigation in order to make a finding that can and will be upheld in the event of court action. As much as I would like them to, they can not just take my word and evidence I submitted about the Fort Worth Zoo. It has to be independently verified by their office. Nothing is easier to get overturned than a sloppy investigation.

Liberty wrote:

SewTexas wrote: one time someone was trying to debate me about the 2nd. They used the "oh, it was talking about muskets and such". I said "fine, then get off the computer and turn off your MSNBC. The 1st was referring to paper and pen, hand-pressed newspapers, and standing in the pulpit." They very quickly shut up. I loved that win.

The 2nd Amendment at the time covered muskets. rifles, cannon mortars and grenades. amongst other things.

O.o think the 2017 legislative session would reconsider grenades? ...And you just added a new line to my bucket list thanks!

JP171 wrote:looks like they turned off the comments. but we all here know the deal what they are doing is illegal. IMO we need to have the legislature hold individuals responsible on a criminal basis for posting government owned and leased locations, we sure get criminal charges is we disobey the law and so should they! but alas I don't think it will ever happen so the more we think we are gaining ground the less we actually get and realistically more we lose to "liberal interpretation"

The comments are still on (need to click on them). Apparently lots of people ignoring the law and just commenting on not wanting to see guns at the zoo...

Zoo wants to get fined, I guess that's their prerogative..

cb1000rider wrote:

JP171 wrote:
Zoo wants to get fined, I guess that's their prerogative..

If only. It's going to take a few fines and cities actually seeing that this law will be enforced before it means anything. Hoping but not holding my breath.

In the mean time, is there any risk to carrying concealed at the Houston zoo? I am willing to risk unlawful arrest because I risk that every day by waking up. Is there any chance that the sign is actually valid?

cb1000rider wrote:Zoo wants to get fined, I guess that's their prerogative..

I don't think it would be the Zoos that get fined, I believe it would be the government agency that owns/leases the property would have to pay the fines. But I am not 100% sure on that.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:In the mean time, is there any risk to carrying concealed at the Houston zoo? I am willing to risk unlawful arrest because I risk that every day by waking up. Is there any chance that the sign is actually valid?

It wouldn't stop me. If the government refuses to tolerate any unlawful actions from us, I'm not going to tolerate unlawful actions from government in any form, even if that means lip-service giving them the benefit of the doubt.

rtschl wrote:To be fair to the AG's office, this is not the only issue they have before them. They also have to do due diligence in their investigation in order to make a finding that can and will be upheld in the event of court action. As much as I would like them to, they can not just take my word and evidence I submitted about the Fort Worth Zoo. It has to be independently verified by their office. Nothing is easier to get overturned than a sloppy investigation.

I understand that but it's not like the zoo's are trying to cover up what they're doing. They've been very open about keeping the signs up. Besides, how tough is it to send somebody over to the zoos to confirm? Doesn't the AG have offices in the major cities? Unless I'm missing something, there is nothing here to discuss. It's as close to a slam dunk as we're ever going to get.

Collecting a fine is step 2

I can't get over how blind some of the people are making their comments on that article. Cant say it any nicer then this, they are a special kinda stupid