TexasCHLforum.com

seamusTX wrote:Then the defense attorney have to lobby the legislature and get what the prosecutors have. That's how these things are done.

- Jim

I think they should both should have just been allowed to carry in the first place

I agree with Governor Perry's statement that CHLs should be able to carry everywhere. Failing that, all attorneys should be able to carry in the courthouse, not just prosecutors. I seriously doubt I'd need a gun in the courtroom, but once I leave the courthouse and am on the way to the car, I'm an easy target. This is precisely what happened in the Tyler shootings where Mark Wilson was killed.

I feel the same way about professional sporting events. I don't think I'll need my gun at the football game, but at least a half dozen people have been killed in the Astrodome parking lot on the way to their cars.

Chas.

seamusTX wrote:I'll bet the thinking behind 46.15 allowing district attorneys to carry is that they are frequently the object of threats from criminals that they have put behind bars, and their fellow gang members and families. I don't know if every courthouse in Texas has metal detectors and secure storage facilities. If they do now, they did not 20 or 30 years ago.

- Jim

Such thinking is understandable, even while I disagree with its conclusion of admitting prosecution carry in the courtroom. If I was a legislator, I would favor expedited/fast-track CHL applications for prosecution types before favoring permission to carry in the courtroom. Both still smack of "some are more equal than others"---but the same thing may be claimed of CHL in general. That said, the law is written a certain way at present, and I doubt there is a strong constituency for changing the law to enforce courtroom hoploparity, on principle, between prosecution and defense (unless the state bar membership has a sudden spike in CHL licensees).

yerasimos wrote:...Changing the law to enforce courtroom hoploparity, on principle...

According to Google, we have a winner. The term "hoploparity" appears nowhere else. I'm submitting it to the Oxford English Dictionary on behalf of yerasimos. Coop would be proud.

Now back to the Topic...

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I feel the same way about professional sporting events. I don't think I'll need my gun at the football game, but at least a half dozen people have been killed in the Astrodome parking lot on the way to their cars.

That's always my response when asked, "Why do you need a gun at... (fill in the blank)?"

I always say that if I thought I needed a gun there, I wouldn't go, and I'll be happy to leave my gun behind as soon as they perfect teleportation so that I can be whisked instantly from the safety of my home to the safety of (fill in the blank)."

I also point out that no one thought they would need a gun at Luby's, or Wedgwood Baptist Church, or the classrooms of Virginia Tech. There are times when it really, truly sucks to be wrong.

I had jury duty last week in Dallas County. I had no intention of setting foot in that courthouse without my gun...

I think it's a good idea. If the voters can't carry then don't allow the public servants to carry either. Equal under the law.