The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://texaschlforum.com/
No but I'd rather be broke than dead. Broke I can fix. YMMV.dac1842 wrote:Do you really want to be the test case?
I have to disagree here. The airports do not have that right and are specifically barred from preventing CHL carry. I agree that private property owners have rights but when they allow unfettered public access (malls, banks, car lots, whatever) then they are bound by other rules as well. It is one thing to say i dont want short people or guns in my home but quite another to say they arent allowed in my store.dac1842 wrote:Unfortunately I spend more time than I want in baggage claim. It is not a secure area. The city does have different types of no firearms posters,decals and wording as you enter. Here is my opinion, which from experience I know will draw some fire, but that is ok too.
I see the ghost buster sign, the no weapons beyond this point signs etc as effective warning not to carry. The property owner has the right to prohibit weapons on his property if he so chooses. Now I know what 30.06 has to say. I know the regs and that they state the signs must meet all the requirements to be legal under the letter of the law.
.
I may be missing your point.....rm9792 wrote: It is one thing to say i dont want short people or guns in my home but quite another to say they arent allowed in my store.
Poster claims that an airport is private property and he follows their ghostbuster as if it were 30.06. I am saying that airports arent like home when you think of private property as they allow public access, unlike your home, and that they arent allowed to prevent chl carry. I dont see a test case happening here as the law is quite clear and obviously the airports and police know it now, since the signs are down. By anyone kowtowing to "no guns" signs as if they were 30.06 you are giving up the very right that many on this board fight hard for. If a business wants no guns then put up the proper sign.ninemm wrote:I may be missing your point.....rm9792 wrote: It is one thing to say i dont want short people or guns in my home but quite another to say they arent allowed in my store.
I agree that you can prohibit anyone you want from entering your home. And you can post a proper 30.06 sign to prohibit guns from your store. But prohibiting short people from entering your store is likely to get very expensive.
rm9792 wrote:If a business wants no guns then put up the proper sign.
Then boycott them unless you absolutely have to use them.I don't believe that is true at all. The reason that most airports can't disallow CHL carry is because they are government owned.I am saying that airports arent like home when you think of private property as they allow public access, unlike your home, and that they arent allowed to prevent chl carry.
I stand corrected on that.3dfxMM wrote:I don't believe that is true at all. The reason that most airports can't disallow CHL carry is because they are government owned.I am saying that airports arent like home when you think of private property as they allow public access, unlike your home, and that they arent allowed to prevent chl carry.
Where DO you carry? Why do you have a CHL? The law is quite specific on what a private property holder must do to legally prohibit carry....Post a 30.06 COMPLIANT sign, or verbally notify you you're not allowed to carry. If you don't carry everywhere where you think the property owner wouldn't like it, you're pretty much limited to your house. Unless Mrs. Dac1842 doesn't like guns, then you're really out of luck.dac1842 wrote:Unfortunately I spend more time than I want in baggage claim. It is not a secure area. The city does have different types of no firearms posters,decals and wording as you enter. Here is my opinion, which from experience I know will draw some fire, but that is ok too.
I see the ghost buster sign, the no weapons beyond this point signs etc as effective warning not to carry. The property owner has the right to prohibit weapons on his property if he so chooses. Now I know what 30.06 has to say. I know the regs and that they state the signs must meet all the requirments to be legal under the letter of the law.
Here is what I see happening some day. A CHL holder observes the Ghost Buster sign and goes by it. By letter of the law no issues, or is there? I see where the right combination of rookie cop, arrogant district attorney, liberal judge see the ghost buster sign as effective written warning of the intent of the owner to bar weapons. Now again, I know what the letter of the law says. But I have enough experience in court and have seen some quirkey things happen that this scenario could become reality. It woud cost some innocent CHL holder thinking he was right about 40k to try to prove it. To me, it just aint worth it.
There is also the part the reads any muncipality cannot bar weapons except in buildings were courts are housed. Well, the COH is well known for doing things their way regardless of what the law says. Do you really want to be the test case?
That is my opinion, there are many that disagree with me on this issue, and believe me I hope they are the ones that turn out to be right.
