TexasCHLforum.com

JALLEN wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:Did you consider doing a search for the address on the county Appraisal District website? I would think a printout of that page would suffice. After all, it's based on their records.

Why would the county show its property on the appraisal list? It isn't appraised and sure as blazes they aren't going to pay taxes on it.

In San Diego, where I have very extensive experience with these things, the parcels belonging to the government are not on the tax rolls. I'm hoping that governments in Texas are smarter than governments in CA, being run by unionized socialists and all.

That may be a foolish assumption, I guess.

SRO1911 wrote:A question for the learned masses.
First, let me say - I've forwarded this question to both our city attorney and TML. TML just sent it back and said ask the AG. The city attorney will answer, eventually, maybe, hopefully. .

Is a 30.07 /30.06 sign required at a meeting that falls under the open meeting act, or is it optional?

Thus far we've gotten along just fine without 30.06, and have never seen a handgun (I guess concealed really does mean concealed - someone should alert the press).

I know about the ubiquitous (i) in 46.035 for non - applicability if it's not posted.

Is there anything that requires such meetings be posted elsewhere in the massive dead forest that is TPC?

Taypo wrote:I was at the Collin County Tax Assesor's office to renew my registration and noticed they're still posted 30.06. Is there any particular reason that anyone is aware of?

Glockster wrote:

unicyclist wrote:

puma guy wrote:

AJSully421 wrote:Wow... Fort Worth zoo combining 30.06 and 30.07 signs on city property. How else can they fail to comply with the law? They don't care, they just don't want icky guns near their dangerous animals... Or the zoo animals either.

It is almost like they know that they are doing it wrong, they are counting on the gun carrying public to not know in their efforts to be the most law abiding group in Texas.

I look for them to begin a propaganda campaign. I would bet a dime to a dollar they'll be making statements to the public how they are legitimately exempted and the evil gun people are trying to turn the the zoo and war zone and dangerous place. I wouldn't doubt they'd even threaten closing.

I plan on calling the zoo to enroll my child in the Fort Worth Zoo day care.

FYI, as is with the Dallas Zoo and being discussed in a separate thread, Fort Worth Zoo also holds an amusement park license.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

locke_n_load wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Hospitals are off-limits if a 30.06 sign is posted. SB273 does not prohibit the posting of a 30.06 sign on such property for two reasons. First, they are off-limits under §46.035 even though 30.06 notice is required. Secondly, the legislature would not create a legal impossibility, i.e. requiring a sign that is prohibited by a different statute.

Chas.

Interesting that city owned hospitals and nursing homes can post legally enforceable 30.06 signs.
Seems inconsistent, seeing that any other publically owned buildings, barring courthourses, cannot probibit carry via 30.06.

In some ways it is inconsistent, but the legislature has expressly made hospitals, nursing homes and schools off-limits. It did not do so with any other buildings that are owned by cities.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

ScottDLS wrote:

Taypo wrote:

ScottDLS wrote:

Glockster wrote:Have they even stated what their basis is for claiming that being a child care center then makes them a GFZ? I don't see how claiming to be that makes them a school (assuming that's the angle they're trying to take).

I wonder if they also realize that the wording of the sign is invalid until January 1 anyway....

Pretty sure it doesn't matter what the wording is, a combined sign is a no go.

Really? On what basis in law?

Tex. Penal Code §§30.06 and 30.07.

Chas.

TPC §30.06 as of 1/1/16 wrote:(3) "Written communication" means:
(A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by license holder with [of license to carry] a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code ([concealed] handgun licensing law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun"

TPC §30.07 as of 1/1/16 wrote:(3) "Written communication" means:
(A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.07, Penal Code (trespass by license holder with an openly carried handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (handgun licensing law), may not enter this property with a handgun that is carried openly"

Taypo wrote:

ScottDLS wrote:

Glockster wrote:Have they even stated what their basis is for claiming that being a child care center then makes them a GFZ? I don't see how claiming to be that makes them a school (assuming that's the angle they're trying to take).

I wonder if they also realize that the wording of the sign is invalid until January 1 anyway....

Pretty sure it doesn't matter what the wording is, a combined sign is a no go.

Glockster wrote:Have they even stated what their basis is for claiming that being a child care center then makes them a GFZ? I don't see how claiming to be that makes them a school (assuming that's the angle they're trying to take).

Taypo wrote:Awww, that's cute! You'd think they could afford two signs.