TexasCHLforum.com

I read in this mornings El Paso newspaper that the City of El Paso in an attempt to become compliant with the concealed gun law will amend the gun buster signs on 150 of their city buses with the wording "except as permitted by law" being placed under the sign.

Seems to me, that before this amendment good buys and bad guys could ride the bus with their guns and now the good guys and bad guys can still ride the bus with their guns.

common sense and logic have no place in municipal government. consider yourself officially reprimanded for your outrageous attempt to utilize both in a discussion of public transit

That almost sounds like the "no guns allowed unless you have a CHL" type gun buster signs you see at convenience & grocery stores.

Stash, can you post a link to that article? I'm sure a lot of us would like to read it.

joe817 -It is in this mornings edition of the El Paso Times at http://www.elpasotimes.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; on their front page, left side. Hope that helps.

Stan

http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_15043441" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


City heeds state concealed-carry law: Legal guns OK on buses

By Marty Schladen \ EL PASO TIMES
Posted: 05/08/2010 12:00:00 AM MDT

EL PASO -- The no-gun signs on Sun Metro's 150 buses are being amended.
Underneath the handgun surrounded by the universal "no" symbol, the signs will say "except as permitted by law."
Sun Metro, the city's bus company, is making the changes because El Paso attorney Mark C. Walker pointed out that the city cannot override Texas' concealed-carry law for handguns. The law allows people to carry concealed weapons in most places, as long as they have the proper permit.
"Basically, the city cannot prohibit legal permit holders from carrying legal firearms on a city bus," Walker wrote in an e-mail.
Walker approached the city attorney's staff, which advised Sun Metro to change its signs.
"The best thing is to know what the rules are and to follow them," Walker said.
Sun Metro spokeswoman Laura Cruz-Acosta said that her agency was changing the signs but that she did not know when the project would be complete.
Cruz-Acosta could not immediately say how much it will cost to change the signs.
Marty Schladen may be reached at mschladen@elpasotimes.com; 546-6127.

austinrealtor wrote:common sense and logic have no place in municipal government. consider yourself officially reprimanded for your outrageous attempt to utilize both in a discussion of public transit

austinrealtor wrote:http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_15043441


City heeds state concealed-carry law: Legal guns OK on buses

By Marty Schladen \ EL PASO TIMES
Posted: 05/08/2010 12:00:00 AM MDT

EL PASO -- The no-gun signs on Sun Metro's 150 buses are being amended.
Underneath the handgun surrounded by the universal "no" symbol, the signs will say "except as permitted by law."
Sun Metro, the city's bus company, is making the changes because El Paso attorney Mark C. Walker pointed out that the city cannot override Texas' concealed-carry law for handguns. The law allows people to carry concealed weapons in most places, as long as they have the proper permit.
"Basically, the city cannot prohibit legal permit holders from carrying legal firearms on a city bus," Walker wrote in an e-mail.
Walker approached the city attorney's staff, which advised Sun Metro to change its signs.
"The best thing is to know what the rules are and to follow them," Walker said.
Sun Metro spokeswoman Laura Cruz-Acosta said that her agency was changing the signs but that she did not know when the project would be complete.
Cruz-Acosta could not immediately say how much it will cost to change the signs.
Marty Schladen may be reached at mschladen@elpasotimes.com; 546-6127.

And here we have a prime example of someone who, instead of just ignoring patently improper signage, wrote a letter about it, and it got fixed.

It would have been cheaper for the city to just remove the signs.

But, as has been mentioned already, with some exceptions, logic and reason have little to do with government.

jimlongley wrote:

austinrealtor wrote:http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_15043441


City heeds state concealed-carry law: Legal guns OK on buses

By Marty Schladen \ EL PASO TIMES
Posted: 05/08/2010 12:00:00 AM MDT

EL PASO -- The no-gun signs on Sun Metro's 150 buses are being amended.
Underneath the handgun surrounded by the universal "no" symbol, the signs will say "except as permitted by law."
Sun Metro, the city's bus company, is making the changes because El Paso attorney Mark C. Walker pointed out that the city cannot override Texas' concealed-carry law for handguns. The law allows people to carry concealed weapons in most places, as long as they have the proper permit.
"Basically, the city cannot prohibit legal permit holders from carrying legal firearms on a city bus," Walker wrote in an e-mail.
Walker approached the city attorney's staff, which advised Sun Metro to change its signs.
"The best thing is to know what the rules are and to follow them," Walker said.
Sun Metro spokeswoman Laura Cruz-Acosta said that her agency was changing the signs but that she did not know when the project would be complete.
Cruz-Acosta could not immediately say how much it will cost to change the signs.
Marty Schladen may be reached at mschladen@elpasotimes.com; 546-6127.

And here we have a prime example of someone who, instead of just ignoring patently improper signage, wrote a letter about it, and it got fixed.

And wasted the El Paso taxpayers' money by replacing one legally meaningless sign with another. At least it may be some extra OT for the union guy that will put the new lettering on. El Paso's own little "stimulus" package... Or maybe they can get some transit money from the feds to do it.

Just for a point of technical accuracy, the new signs are no longe meaningless. Well, neither was the gun buster circle before the addition. They are meaningless to CHL's, but they still are a clear no trespassing warning to anyone who does not have a CHL (or a legal exception, like a uniformed security guard).

I know that it is rare, but it means that someone who is busted on the bus for unlawfully carrying can also be charged with P.C. 30.05, Criminal Trespass.

So can a person not carry an unloaded and locked up firearm per Federal Traveling requirements on the city bus?

Or someone who does not own a car, but it traveling to a gun range to practice?

The person going to the gun range has an exception under state law, so meets the except as permitted by law clause on the sign. The person traveling has an exception, though the federal law would not apply (I think). As I understand the federal law, it applies only to your own car and requires the gun to be secured outside the passenger compartment. Fortunately, Texas still has a traveling exception that would cover him.

So the only people the sign would apply to now is the people who are unlawfully carrying to begin with. Which, now that I think of it means even less than the previous no guns sign did. Without the "except as permitted by law" clause, the no guns sign would have applied to travelers, sportsmen, security guards, etc. It would not apply to peace officers or CHL's because of the way 30.05 is worded, but it would have applied to everyone else.

srothstein wrote:The person going to the gun range has an exception under state law, so meets the except as permitted by law clause on the sign. The person traveling has an exception, though the federal law would not apply (I think). As I understand the federal law, it applies only to your own car and requires the gun to be secured outside the passenger compartment. Fortunately, Texas still has a traveling exception that would cover him.

So the only people the sign would apply to now is the people who are unlawfully carrying to begin with. Which, now that I think of it means even less than the previous no guns sign did. Without the "except as permitted by law" clause, the no guns sign would have applied to travelers, sportsmen, security guards, etc. It would not apply to peace officers or CHL's because of the way 30.05 is worded, but it would have applied to everyone else.

I'm not convinced that a circle/slash/gun sticker constitutes sufficient notice that entry is prohibited under 30.05. Have there been any successful prosecutions?

austinrealtor wrote:common sense and logic have no place in municipal government. consider yourself officially reprimanded for your outrageous attempt to utilize both in a discussion of public transit

Just in Municipal Govt.???

Haven't you seen this? http://infohost.nmt.edu/~armiller/commonsen.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Common Sense is dead.

srothstein wrote:Just for a point of technical accuracy, the new signs are no longe meaningless. Well, neither was the gun buster circle before the addition. They are meaningless to CHL's, but they still are a clear no trespassing warning to anyone who does not have a CHL (or a legal exception, like a uniformed security guard).

I know that it is rare, but it means that someone who is busted on the bus for unlawfully carrying can also be charged with P.C. 30.05, Criminal Trespass.

In some states other than Texas, the "Gun Buster Sign" applies to everyone whether a CH licensee or not. See http://www.handgunlaw.us/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;