Search found 4 matches

by stevie_d_64
Fri Nov 03, 2006 10:50 pm
Forum: Goals for 2007
Topic: What I would like to see
Replies: 40
Views: 9239

jrosto wrote:Colorado Law seems to work pretty well:
(4) A permit issued pursuant to this part 2 does not authorize a person to carry a concealed handgun into a public building at which:
(a) Security personnel and electronic weapons screening devices are permanently in place at each entrance to the building;
(b) Security personnel electronically screen each person who enters the building to determine whether the person is carrying a weapon of any kind; and (c) Security personnel require each person who is carrying a weapon of any kind to leave the weapon in possession of security personnel while the person is in the building.
Does their law define what "4c" entails???

- who (specifically)

- how (what constitutes possession???)

- secure meaning??? (locker, restricted access to a room)

- How do you relinquish and take repossesion of weapon, where and how discrete???

Once you get through those hurdles, I'm not totally offended by clearer information and procedure...
by stevie_d_64
Mon Oct 30, 2006 5:22 pm
Forum: Goals for 2007
Topic: What I would like to see
Replies: 40
Views: 9239

kw5kw wrote:
carlson1 wrote:Carry anywhere LEO can carry for exception of the courts. ;-)

:iagree:
Even in the courts, I know most have secure facilities to lock them up...No muss, no fuss, or cost...

I had to go to a sentencing for a family member in Austin a few years ago, and the Federal courthouse had lockers right there in the entrance...

Unused and totally available...My Dad and I both shot the breeze with the agents running the front desk and asked...

They obviously said no...And looked at us afterwards like we were "uglier than homemade soap"...

jerks...
by stevie_d_64
Mon Oct 30, 2006 5:17 pm
Forum: Goals for 2007
Topic: What I would like to see
Replies: 40
Views: 9239

Re: What I would like to see

nitrogen wrote:
txinvestigator wrote:
cxm wrote:1. Stand Your Ground Law
2. Modify 30.06 to require any public accomodation that wants to post to provide secure lockers for storage of firearms.
3. Establish strict liability for any CHL holder who suffers loss or injury as a result of criminals in establishment posting.

FIWW

Chuck
You don't own your own business, do you?

You guys know I am a staunch CHL supporter, but the government should not interfere with a business right to control itself in this manner.
I have to agree grudgingly with this.
I would say this though, I would be more likely to patronize a business that was posted if they provided secure storage for my firearm. If we could find some way to encourage businesses that want to post to do this without spending a lot of money, I'd be in favor of that.

Arizona does this, and when I lived there it was not enforced; it was basically a joke.
Utah does too...
by stevie_d_64
Mon Oct 30, 2006 12:23 pm
Forum: Goals for 2007
Topic: What I would like to see
Replies: 40
Views: 9239

How about we compel the government modify the law to grant businesses and other entities that wish to continue to restrict, tax breaks if they install secure discrete rooms, lockers for this purpose...

And if they don't in a timely, reasonable and effective manner, fine them...

It's worked before...

From what I've seen, when you combine tax breaks if you comply, and fines if you don't...It pushes the right buttons...

There are some negatives to this as well...There may be some that see this as an expansion of powers, or some form of unfunded mandate etc etc...

Me???

I plan to make money on this deal...If it ever sees the light of day...

But thats just Steve's capitalistic side showing...

Return to “What I would like to see”