Yet ANOTHER 30.06 scenario

CHL discussions that do not fit into more specific topics

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

User avatar
juggernaut
Member
Posts: 145
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 2:58 pm

Re: Yet ANOTHER 30.06 scenario

Post by juggernaut »

Even a court ruling has no real meaning until you're in court. Driving While Black is not illegal but people get hassled for it.
DoubleActionCHL
Senior Member
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 3:12 pm

Re: Yet ANOTHER 30.06 scenario

Post by DoubleActionCHL »

juggernaut wrote:Even a court ruling has no real meaning until you're in court. Driving While Black is not illegal but people get hassled for it.
Legal precedents and case law are the results of court rulings, and these affect us profoundly.
Image

http://www.doubleactionchl.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Houston, Texas

"Excuses are for tombstones. Get back in the fight."
--Me
User avatar
juggernaut
Member
Posts: 145
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 2:58 pm

Re: Yet ANOTHER 30.06 scenario

Post by juggernaut »

DoubleActionCHL wrote:
juggernaut wrote:Even a court ruling has no real meaning until you're in court. Driving While Black is not illegal but people get hassled for it.
Legal precedents and case law are the results of court rulings, and these affect us profoundly.
In court? I agree.
DoubleActionCHL
Senior Member
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 3:12 pm

Re: Yet ANOTHER 30.06 scenario

Post by DoubleActionCHL »

juggernaut wrote:
DoubleActionCHL wrote:
juggernaut wrote:Even a court ruling has no real meaning until you're in court. Driving While Black is not illegal but people get hassled for it.
Legal precedents and case law are the results of court rulings, and these affect us profoundly.
In court? I agree.
I think you're either not grasping or evading my point. Anyway, back to the thread... :totap:
Image

http://www.doubleactionchl.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Houston, Texas

"Excuses are for tombstones. Get back in the fight."
--Me
User avatar
Purplehood
Senior Member
Posts: 4638
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 3:35 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Re: Yet ANOTHER 30.06 scenario

Post by Purplehood »

DoubleActionCHL wrote:I appreciate your responses, but I was really looking for something a bit more concrete.
You specifically asked for opinions. How can an opinion be more concrete?
Life NRA
USMC 76-93
USAR 99-07 (Retired)
OEF 06-07
bdickens
Senior Member
Posts: 2807
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 10:36 am
Location: Houston

Re: Yet ANOTHER 30.06 scenario

Post by bdickens »

DoubleActionCHL wrote:
bdickens wrote:Yeah, the one exception is that they can post a meeting of a government body. The meeting, not the meeting place.
Yes, 46.035(i), and there are two exceptions (that is, until we have government churches and amusement parks). Meetings of governmental entities and hospitals. Meetings are held at a "place," so for the purposes of this statute, the "place" is off limits if effective notice is given under Section 30.06 for the duration of the meeting. The VA hospital would be another example.



The VA does not have any 30.06 signs.The VA is a Federal facility. They don't have to post 30.06 to keep you from carrying there; Federal law does that.
Byron Dickens
wgoforth
Senior Member
Posts: 2113
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 11:12 pm
Location: Brownwood, Texas

Re: Yet ANOTHER 30.06 scenario

Post by wgoforth »

juggernaut wrote:Even a court ruling has no real meaning until you're in court. Driving While Black is not illegal but people get hassled for it.
mehhhhh...... :headscratch
NRA Life Member
NRA Instructor for Refuse To Be A Victim
Instructor of Basic, Advanced and Defensive Handgun, CHL
http://www.castlekeepservices.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
DoubleActionCHL
Senior Member
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 3:12 pm

Re: Yet ANOTHER 30.06 scenario

Post by DoubleActionCHL »

bdickens wrote:The VA does not have any 30.06 signs.The VA is a Federal facility. They don't have to post 30.06 to keep you from carrying there; Federal law does that.
You're probably right, however, the fact that they don't need to post 30.06 doesn't exclude the fact that they could and it would be compliant. And, of course, we have county-owned hospitals that would fall in the same category.
Image

http://www.doubleactionchl.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Houston, Texas

"Excuses are for tombstones. Get back in the fight."
--Me
DoubleActionCHL
Senior Member
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 3:12 pm

Re: Yet ANOTHER 30.06 scenario

Post by DoubleActionCHL »

Purplehood wrote:You specifically asked for opinions. How can an opinion be more concrete?
It can be supported by facts.
Image

http://www.doubleactionchl.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Houston, Texas

"Excuses are for tombstones. Get back in the fight."
--Me
Sangiovese
Senior Member
Posts: 415
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 10:34 pm
Location: Fort Worth

Re: Yet ANOTHER 30.06 scenario

Post by Sangiovese »

Asking for opinions and then blasting those who offer them is unlikely to get you anywhere.

Reading through the thread, it looks like you're really asking for any legal precedents that would apply to your case.

As for the opinions offered not being backed by facts.... they are. They are backed by the language of the statutes.

If you want anything more concrete, then you are asking for case law, not opinions.
NRA Endowment Member. Texas LTC Instructor. NRA certified Pistol & Home Firearm Safety Instructor - Range Safety Officer

Any comments about legal matters are general in nature and are not legal advice. Nothing posted on this forum is intended to establish an attorney-client relationship.
DoubleActionCHL
Senior Member
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 3:12 pm

Re: Yet ANOTHER 30.06 scenario

Post by DoubleActionCHL »

Sangiovese wrote:Asking for opinions and then blasting those who offer them is unlikely to get you anywhere.

Reading through the thread, it looks like you're really asking for any legal precedents that would apply to your case.

As for the opinions offered not being backed by facts.... they are. They are backed by the language of the statutes.

If you want anything more concrete, then you are asking for case law, not opinions.
I have yet to blast anyone. Care to point out where I have?

Statutes are not opinions, but one's interpretation of the statute constitutes opinion. How does this differ from one's interpretation of case law or other court ruling? Is this not opinion, also?

I started the thread by stating that we've talked about this before, which might suggest that I'm looking for discussion that might go beyond repetitious "it's obvious," along with a cut-n-paste of the statute. We've all been there and done that. And yes, I did specifically ask if anyone was aware of court rulings. Correct me if I'm wrong, but case law isn't established until the case is presented and ruled upon by an appellate or higher court. What I'm asking for includes, but is not necessarily limited to case law.
Image

http://www.doubleactionchl.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Houston, Texas

"Excuses are for tombstones. Get back in the fight."
--Me
User avatar
Oldgringo
Senior Member
Posts: 11203
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 10:15 pm
Location: Pineywoods of east Texas

Re: Yet ANOTHER 30.06 scenario

Post by Oldgringo »

:deadhorse:
User avatar
jmra
Senior Member
Posts: 10371
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:51 am
Location: Ellis County

Re: Yet ANOTHER 30.06 scenario

Post by jmra »

Oldgringo wrote::deadhorse:
:iagree:
Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid.
John Wayne
NRA Lifetime member
Post Reply

Return to “General Texas CHL Discussion”