TexasCHLforum.com

Okay, Yesterday my son was bowling in the Pro-Am in Irving. I went to watch him but was not sure if this qualfied as at the Pro-Am, the pros are not bowling for money and rotate lanes every 4 frames. Just a meet and greet type of deal.

In fact, the qualifying was done Thurs. & Fri. as well as this morning ( I know I couldn't carry at these tmes).

Would this qualify as a PSE?

RPBrown wrote:Okay, Yesterday my son was bowling in the Pro-Am in Irving. I went to watch him but was not sure if this qualfied as at the Pro-Am, the pros are not bowling for money and rotate lanes every 4 frames. Just a meet and greet type of deal.

In fact, the qualifying was done Thurs. & Fri. as well as this morning ( I know I couldn't carry at these tmes).

Would this qualify as a PSE?

I would not consider that a professional sporting event. It is amatuer.

I think some would argue whether bowling is even a sport.

Anygun

anygunanywhere wrote:I think some would argue whether bowling is even a sport.

Anygun

Thats cold-blooded!!!

I'm not sure that the monies won or played for at a "sporting event" bear on the definition in the law...Or the word "professional" or "amature" bear on it either...

Somebody will come in here and post the statute soon and we can see it again...

I would actually be afraid of getting the urge to shoot the pins at an event like that...Accept I'd only really be able to do it with a .45...My .40 can barely get them to fall...But that beside the point...

I would also think that there is a bit more control over emotions at bowling and golf events, where I just don't see people getting too fired up about shooting things up at those types of events...But thats just me...

It is the "professional sporting event" that is off-limits.

A professional Sporting Event is one in which the participants are paid for their participation.









Texas Penal Code

§46.035. Unlawful carrying of handgun by license holder.


(b) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder
intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun under the
authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless
of whether the handgun is concealed, on or about the license holder's
person:


(2) on the premises where a high school, collegiate, or
professional sporting event or interscholastic event is taking place,
unless the license holder is a participant in the event and a handgun
is used in the event;

txinvestigator wrote:It is the "professional sporting event" that is off-limits.

A professional Sporting Event is one in which the participants are paid for their participation.

Just curious, but where do you find that definition?

KBCraig wrote:

txinvestigator wrote:It is the "professional sporting event" that is off-limits.

A professional Sporting Event is one in which the participants are paid for their participation.

Just curious, but where do you find that definition?

It is not defined by the penal code, but at one of my instructor schools, don't remember which time, it was explained that way.

I think that is also the accepted "sports" difference between amatuer and professional status.

Any case law that supports this, or will someone be a test case?

I've always been curious about this, and keep forgetting to ask.

txinvestigator wrote:

KBCraig wrote:

txinvestigator wrote:It is the "professional sporting event" that is off-limits.

A professional Sporting Event is one in which the participants are paid for their participation.

Just curious, but where do you find that definition?

It is not defined by the penal code, but at one of my instructor schools, don't remember which time, it was explained that way.

I think that is also the accepted "sports" difference between amatuer and professional status.

It is indeed the case that an amateur is not compensated for playing the sport and a professional is compensated. In fact, amateur comes from the latin word meaning "lover of" and it was presumed for quite a while (historically speaking) that an amateur played for love of the sport (hence the name). In fact, this has been at the heart of many disputes in the last 40 years or so in the Olympics, since the Olympics was supposedly only amateur athletes but many communist countries had "students" and "soldiers" that their full-time job was training in their specific sport and this lead inevitably to the elimination of the "amateur" requirement in the Olympics (and IMHO, the current lack of ratings for viewership of Olympic broadcasts on television).

The trouble is when you think about hobby racers at the drag strip or local dirt oval. No one gets paid for their participation, but they can get paid out of the prize pool for winning. Same with pool and darts leagues (both "sports" just as much as bowling), triathlons, bike races, etc. Does that mean some of the participants are pros, while others are amateur, even though they're all trying to win a paycheck?

I recall the instructors talking about a particular DPS lawyer who was notoriously wrong in some of her advice, so not everything heard at instructor school should be taken as gospel.

This is yet another area where you wouldn't want to be the test case. A spirited defense could be mounted in the case of a pro-am event; likewise, a vigorous prosecutor could make the point that the "pro" is being paid for participation through his sponsors.

I'm not going to argue anyone's take on this, or personal comfort level. My point is, I do not like provisions of the Code that are not defined within the Code, and I believe the Legislature should address those definitions. Or, preferably, eliminate those poorly defined sections.

Kevin

KBCraig wrote:The trouble is when you think about hobby racers at the drag strip or local dirt oval. No one gets paid for their participation, but they can get paid out of the prize pool for winning. Same with pool and darts leagues (both "sports" just as much as bowling), triathlons, bike races, etc. Does that mean some of the participants are pros, while others are amateur, even though they're all trying to win a paycheck?

I recall the instructors talking about a particular DPS lawyer who was notoriously wrong in some of her advice, so not everything heard at instructor school should be taken as gospel.

This is yet another area where you wouldn't want to be the test case. A spirited defense could be mounted in the case of a pro-am event; likewise, a vigorous prosecutor could make the point that the "pro" is being paid for participation through his sponsors.

I'm not going to argue anyone's take on this, or personal comfort level. My point is, I do not like provisions of the Code that are not defined within the Code, and I believe the Legislature should address those definitions. Or, preferably, eliminate those poorly defined sections.

Kevin

I agree that the Penal Code should define a term like "Professional Sporting Event" since it is the difference in no violation and a Class A misdemeanor.

However, the Lawyer to to whom you refer is notoriously left-winged, and her answers leaned towards limiting your right to carry, not the other direction.

IMO, it is pretty clear that participating in a game to win a prize, and not simply being paid to participate, is not a professional sporting event.

Although I agree that it is probably an amature event, I found out that the pro's that participate in the tournament are required (not sure if paid) to participate in the pro-am. The other thing about the pro-am is it cost each person bowling 150.00 to 200.00 depending on the package they got (pictures with each pro). So are the pro's paid to participate and of so, does it make it a PSE ?

RPBrown wrote:Although I agree that it is probably an amature event, I found out that the pro's that participate in the tournament are required (not sure if paid) to participate in the pro-am. The other thing about the pro-am is it cost each person bowling 150.00 to 200.00 depending on the package they got (pictures with each pro). So are the pro's paid to participate and of so, does it make it a PSE ?

If the participating pros are members of the PBA and their participation is required by the PBA then the event is a PBA event. Therefore, it is a PSE. Just my 2 cents.

Kyle Brown wrote:

RPBrown wrote:Although I agree that it is probably an amature event, I found out that the pro's that participate in the tournament are required (not sure if paid) to participate in the pro-am. The other thing about the pro-am is it cost each person bowling 150.00 to 200.00 depending on the package they got (pictures with each pro). So are the pro's paid to participate and of so, does it make it a PSE ?

If the participating pros are members of the PBA and their participation is required by the PBA then the event is a PBA event. Therefore, it is a PSE. Just my 2 cents.

Most are outside looking in at this issue. Turn it around, if the participants are filing money earned from these events with the IRS it's pro.
That means some golf events even though they have nothing to do with the PGA can be pro, for example.