TexasCHLforum.com

Blue Demon wrote:

steveincowtown wrote:

Blue Demon wrote:I am a member of [a prepaid legal service] and would have called them immediately.

[Moderator edit.]

Unless you know of some service I am not aware, all the ones I have seen in Texas protect ONLY against "use of force" incidents, not LEO's ignorance of the law.

Being an LEO is just like any other profession. If you don't take the time and effort to truly "learn your craft" your knowledge of codes and laws will fade very quickly.

They provide advice and answer any questions 24 hours a day.

Perfect. Give them a ring and ask what legal protection they provide if you get arrested for not committing a crime. Again, unless it is a use a force situation, I don't see how they provide any more than a friendly voice...

Has anyone heard more on the results of this?

Just before this thread took off again today I contacted the OP, he has no new info but is going to see if he can track something down in the next few days for us.

Sorry for not checking up on this. I've had a sudden change in my position at work (for the better) and another issue to deal with so I've not thought much about it in the last couple of weeks. I'll see what I can track down.

I finally remembered and had opportunity at the same time to look back into this matter.

Apparently the case is still active. The CHL holder and the Hospital aren't saying anything since it is ongoing.

Sorry I don't have anything better to tell you. I'll keep checking on it.

troglodyte wrote:I finally remembered and had opportunity at the same time to look back into this matter.

Apparently the case is still active. The CHL holder and the Hospital aren't saying anything since it is ongoing.

Sorry I don't have anything better to tell you. I'll keep checking on it.

Thanks for the update!

Keep us in the Loop.

A quick update. According to a newspaper man the CHL holder had his license replaced by the State. The individual was never asked to leave the premise and a call, not a text,was made to the police. It was alluded to that their may still be legal action being taken towards the police department. My understanding is the administrator of the facility does not agree with the firearm restriction but is tied by corporate policy.

Not much info and is only as good as the man that relayed it.

Thanks for the update, I seem to recall that you have spoken with the licensee after the incident happened. Should you speak with him again could you please give him my email address aaron@GunRightsInTexas.com and let him know if he is interested in sharing his story I would like to help him do so.

G.A. Heath wrote:Thanks for the update, I seem to recall that you have spoken with the licensee after the incident happened. Should you speak with him again could you please give him my email address aaron@GunRightsInTexas.com and let him know if he is interested in sharing his story I would like to help him do so.

I hope he contacts you...

Cedar Park Dad wrote:EDIT: I can't see the sign itself posted in the OP (work blocked for some reason). I'm assuming its a valid 30.06 sign

It is not. Not even close.

Blue Demon wrote:I am a member of [a prepaid legal service] and would have called them immediately.

[Moderator edit.]

Any reason that the [a prepaid legal service] 's name can't be mentioned? I know other threads have specifically mentioned [a prepaid legal service] by name several times with no moderator intervention. Is this a new policy?

BTW, keep us informed on this case. This seems like an opportunity for TSRA, NRA, OCT, or any other pro-2A organization to help set some precedent to the 30.06 law.

Jason K wrote:

Blue Demon wrote:I am a member of [a prepaid legal service] and would have called them immediately.

[Moderator edit.]

Any reason that the [a prepaid legal service] 's name can't be mentioned? I know other threads have specifically mentioned [a prepaid legal service] by name several times with no moderator intervention. Is this a new policy?

BTW, keep us informed on this case. This seems like an opportunity for TSRA, NRA, OCT, or any other pro-2A organization to help set some precedent to the 30.06 law.

With all due respect, the last thing this guy needs is involvement from OCT. The guy has solid footing in the statutes. No sense in snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

TexasCajun wrote:

Jason K wrote:

Blue Demon wrote:I am a member of [a prepaid legal service] and would have called them immediately.

[Moderator edit.]

Any reason that the [a prepaid legal service] 's name can't be mentioned? I know other threads have specifically mentioned [a prepaid legal service] by name several times with no moderator intervention. Is this a new policy?

BTW, keep us informed on this case. This seems like an opportunity for TSRA, NRA, OCT, or any other pro-2A organization to help set some precedent to the 30.06 law.

With all due respect, the last thing this guy needs is involvement from OCT. The guy has solid footing in the statutes. No sense in snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

I agree.....but I wouldn't put it past them, either.

I was just coming here to look for an update to this. Thanks :)