TexasCHLforum.com

Just saw this on the news, "Now the event scheduled for February 20-21 will be held at a building that used to be a Target store off Interstate 35 in Southeast Austin."

Here's the link http://www.kvue.com/news/local/Gun-show ... 39552.html. Not much details, I'm sure others will chime in quickly though

This isn't even updated yet on the gun show's website http://www.texasgunshows.net" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Isn't that the same location where they were BEFORE Saxet left town and they grabbed up Saxet's old venue?

I get the impression that they weren't willing to put up a fight, just talk and cry victim. Even the TSRA stood idle. I don't think I'm ready to support either organization any further until more facts come out.

O6nop wrote:I get the impression that they weren't willing to put up a fight, just talk and cry victim. Even the TSRA stood idle. I don't think I'm ready to support either organization any further until more facts come out.

I don't think the TSRA stood idle at all. They had it on their website and were in communication with involved parties pretty well right from the git-go as best I can tell. See this thread where Charles posted several posts http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic. ... 55&start=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I talked to Alice Tripp, the Legislative director, via email and she told me that the promoter agreed to not allow non-FFL, basically end of story. I'll re-check that email when I get back home to verify that, because I'm going from memory. I'll also go over those posts again. If I'm wrong, I'll correct that statement.

If I understand correctly, Charles is newly elected to the staff and may not have made all the connections he needs to, yet.

O6nop wrote:I talked to Alice Tripp, the Legislative director, via email and she told me that the promoter agreed to not allow non-FFL, basically end of story. I'll re-check that email when I get back home to verify that, because I'm going from memory. I'll also go over those posts again. If I'm wrong, I'll correct that statement.

If I understand correctly, Charles is newly elected to the staff and may not have made all the connections he needs to, yet.

Well, first off, Charles has been on the TSRA and NRA Legislative boards for many years, so he is definitely not new to the organizations. He also has plenty of 'connections' both from TSRA, NRA and politically both at a state and national level. He was recently elected as the new Executive Director, but there probably aren't many, if any that are more aware of the workings in the TSRA.

As for them not being involved, the issue is this: If the promoter decides to accept the restriction, the TSRA can't override him, that would be dumb. I feel confident if he wanted to pursue it that he would have the full backing of the TSRA and the resources they have.

Edited to add: Also, if it weren't for Charles Cotton and his 10 years of working diligently with the TSRA and the legislature from 1985 to 1995, we would not have CHLs here in Texas. He has also been a key player every legislative session to improve the CHL rights and remove unnecessary restrictions.

He is also the owner and administrator of this forum you get to use for free.

I don't think it should be over with either TSRA or NRA. Campaigns or lawsuits should be instigated against both the Austin detectives and the ATF agent involved. It appears that both agencies coerced HEB to alter the agreement on Thursday.

The promoter apparently had only two choices with dealers already in transit to set up on Friday. He could abide by the new terms or cancel the show. To cancel the show would have meant financial loss and even angrier dealers.

From the outset, the only possible solution was to secure another venue. But another venue in Austin will likely encounter the same interference from APD and ATF, especially since they will feel the need to prove their activities were justified.

The agencies and personnel involved need to be hit with every kind of pressure that can be brought to bear.

KeithB-
You are right, I apologize if my frustration in the matter appeared to demean the TSRA, for sure, they have advanced gun ownership to where it is today.
I take it that since the promoter agreed, TSRA is out of the picture. Maybe they are forming a strategy, but I think the issue is lost. I realize the promoter had to make a quick decision and not enough time was allowed to seek help or advice. Now, if they open at a new venue, they can keep an eye on any other discussions.
It's just that it takes so long for a grassroots movement to take hold. What sort of action is happening right now? Who was involved in the negotiations and who was responsible for what happened. Who do we boycott? Wal-Mart, HEB, TGS ??? Do we write letters to Acevedo, our congressmen? Do we fly Gadsden flags? There was a tea party, but there wasn't much notice. At least there was about 200 people that went.

Very much agree with Mike1951 and 06nop. Something more needs to be done. At this point, it seems the gun show promoter (with or without TSRA/NRA) has just turned tail and run back to his old location. If the gun show promoter refused TSRA/NRA help, I would like to know this. He might have good reason (can't afford the lost time/money). But at this point, no one seems to know. Obviously this is his own personal business decision and all RKBA believers and the TSRA/NRA must respect that. But I - and I assume many others - are looking for someone to support here (and/or someone to protest) and there just doesn't seem to be anyone stepping up to the plate after just a few short weeks.

Not blaming TSRA/NRA, gun show promoter, or anyone else for this. Just saying it's disappointing. There was a groundswell of grass roots support brewing. And seems it may have waned a bit.

Hope this isn't a missed opportunity. And hope even more that it isn't an opportunity wasted because the right people couldn't all agree on a game plan.

Respectfully, of course

This issue is quickly losing steam in most places, apparently because the promoter/owner of Texas Gun Shows is playing the victim but is really the one who kind of bowed down from the start. On his website, he's asking for donations to cover legal fees, but there is no evidence of him retaining a lawyer. He's also got an online petition going. I just think we should make sure who we are supporting and why. The APD is apparently the real culprit and I know that the TSRA is looking into the matter from a legal standpoint. I may have thought they were doing little or nothing at first but I now know I was wrong in making that judgement.
Go TSRA!

O6nop wrote:This issue is quickly losing steam in most places, apparently because the promoter/owner of Texas Gun Shows is playing the victim but is really the one who kind of bowed down from the start. On his website, he's asking for donations to cover legal fees, but there is no evidence of him retaining a lawyer. He's also got an online petition going. I just think we should make sure who we are supporting and why. The APD is apparently the real culprit and I know that the TSRA is looking into the matter from a legal standpoint. I may have thought they were doing little or nothing at first but I now know I was wrong in making that judgement.
Go TSRA!

Thanks 06nop

Folks, the hyperlink above in 06nop's post is VERY WORTHWHILE READING. Answers a lot of the questions I've had.

I'm a little troubled by the TSRA's conclusion that Mr. Boedecker was in no way threatend, coerced, or intimidated. This may be true that APD/ATF did not do so openly/flagrantly, but was there any pressure applied from APD/ATF through the building owner to implement these no private sales rules "or else"? And if so could this be some violation of the terms of Mr. Boedecker's lease contract? Could this still be some sort of "official" coercion on part of APD/ATF? Still seems a grey area to me.

If Mr. Boedecker truly said "OK, sure, whatever y'all suggest" without any outside factors influencing that decision, then he is a fool and deserves NO SUPPORT from the RKBA community. But I doubt it's that clear. I'm thinking the guy was probably stunned, and more than a little frightened, that APD/ATF were in this meeting and making these "suggestions" and he went along because he didn't know what else to do and didn't want to get himself personally into even more trouble or risk losing a substantial investment and business. The other stories I've heard surrounding this whole mess indicate this meeting was a last-minute surprise to him, day before his show's vendors were to arrive. So that explains to me why he didn't retain legal counsel.

And if Mr. Boedecker had done anything other than say "yes sir" and accept these new conditions, would he have been told "OK, then no show this weekend", and lost the money he put up for that show? All I'm saying is money is a POWERFUL coercive factor that can force people to seemingly openly accept something they wouldn't normally accept. That scenario reeks of coercion in my book; legally "coercion" or not, it doesn't pass the smell test for me.

Other than the concerns expressed above, I am thankful for Ms. Alice Tripp's lengthy and detailed account found via 06nop's link. She did a wonderful job explaining TSRA's side of things

Other than the concerns expressed above, I am thankful for Ms. Alice Tripp's lengthy and detailed account found via 06nop's link. She did a wonderful job explaining TSRA's side of things

Thanks for posting the link 06nop! and thank you Alice for a good explanatory article!

Austin police say illegal gun sales were taking place on the property on North Lamar, and the property owner was advised to pull the plug on the show.

First, the assumption of illegal gun sales is just that...Assumption...Nothing was reported to any arrests of those involved with illegal gun sales, so I believe that statement to be extremely dubious...

Where are the arrests APD???

Second, the property owner, not the gun show promoter was advised (and I may say extremely poorly by APD) to "pull the plug" on the show, as if they needed to be that "hip" in their advise...So, I believe everything about this shakedown to be directly attributed to an attack not only on our right to keep and bear arms, but free enterprise as well...

My advice (to the gunshow promoter) would be to seek friendlier confines to gather the flock and conduct business as usual, because nothing illegal is going on...

I was at the Pasadena show this morning, and a group of guys in the back (walking billboards) were discussing this very thing...I told them if they start shaking Houston down, we should all go outside to the parking lot...If they somehow run us off, go to a Walmart parking lot...If that doesn't work, then the nearest school parking lot should suffice to get this really on the front burner of everyones attention!!!

We need to be very strong on this and not allow this to go unchallenged, and I have the upmost confidence in Charles Cotton and the TSRA to be the point on this till it is resolved clearly and sufficiently where ALL parties are on the same page!!! APD and whomever this wet dream of a shakedown was, need to be severely and publically dressed down for this abomination! We have a responsibility to maintain the integrity of our rights and to assemble to conduct business that is legal...The insinuation by APD and the powers at be about the illegality of this gathering is horrific, and corrections need to be done publically and with haste!!!

Just my humble opinion!!!

stevie_d_64 wrote:We need to be very strong on this and not allow this to go unchallenged, and I have the upmost confidence in Charles Cotton and the TSRA to be the point on this till it is resolved clearly and sufficiently where ALL parties are on the same page!!!

The problem is, TSRA appears to have finished their investigation and blames the entire thing on the promoter.

But if the lessor told the promoter on Thursday (no firm reports to this effect), that he would enforce the new restrictions or the show would be canceled, then the promoter could not be held responsible.

TSRA reported that the promoter was not coerced by anyone and agreed to the changes willingly. They went on to criticize the promoter on other issues.

I still haven't heard whether or not the promoter had a valid lease/rental agreement and the lessor tried to unilaterally impose new conditions . . . if that's the case, it would seem the promoter would have a cause of action for contract violation. (Just speculation, IANAL, etc.)