Trans-Texas Corridor - Texas Transportation Code...

[stevie_d_64]

OK, heres a new headache for y'all...

I have been known to not be a one issue political hack...This is one of them, but it is an issue that I have yet to determine if it will impact our right to keep and bear arms while transiting these "toll roads" being constructed and leaased to a foriegn entity...

First, lets not get too bogged down in who and why this is either a good or bad idea about the roads and project in and of itself...Thats a bit off topic...

But...

What I do believe may impact us is the work being done below the radar on the Texas Transportation Code Section 227...

http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/tn.toc.htm

There is a lot to read, and try to interpret; but I believe it would be prudent to put as many eyes on this as possible to see if there really is any impact at all on our ability to transit on these toll roads...

Section 227, and just below it Section 228 might give us some clues as to how this Trans-Texas Corridor Project may impact our right to keep and bear arms in this state...

I would like to propose that this thread be made a sticky for the time being, and that if anyone else sees anything post is here for discussion...

Be aware though that the project itself is not so much the issue, but the impact the regulations and operation of these roads may effect us in a way that we may not like...Its a feeling I have, yet it can be safely said I am vehemently opposed to the legislative (non-public) approval and construction of this "system"...If you are for it, thats ok as well...But the impact of this is what I am bringing to bear for attention...

There will not be a test!

I trust the judgement and analysis of the folks here more than anywhere else...

[Rex B]

Steve
I followed the link and did not get past all the subsection listings, none of which looked like they specifically applied to firearms. Most of us get glazed over pretty quickly reading this stuff.

Why don't you help us out by telling exactly what sections you have a problem with, with regard to firearms rights?
Maybe some quotes?

and BTW, I am vehemently against TTC for all the OTHER reasons.

Rex

[stevie_d_64]

Rex,

This is what I meant...There could be some subtleties buried in this thing that I may have missed, or not pinged to...

I did some general searches "firearms", "guns" "Concealed Handgun Licenses" etc etc...And I got nothing...

That doesn't mean there aren't provisions to allow the regulation or restriction of said items and licensees to use these facilities once they are implemented...

And since it is a foreign entity coming in to construct and operate for 50 years...I figure this is something needing to be reviewed...

BTW, I am with you on the "other" reasons as well...No problem there...

[Lumberjack98]

Perhaps I'm not thinking about this hard enough but why would there be any impact on RKBA issues?

This will not be considered foreign property. It's still governed by Texas laws. For instance, I can go into a foreign owned building so long as it is not 30.06 posted.

[stevie_d_64]

Perhaps I'm not thinking about this hard enough but why would there be any impact on RKBA issues?

This will not be considered foreign property. It's still governed by Texas laws. For instance, I can go into a foreign owned building so long as it is not 30.06 posted.

Considering that "bonded" cargo could be in transit along these "roads" could create a "secure" area that would, or could in some way prohibit the posession of firearms within the confines of that corridor...Might be something they could play off of...

Thats just one thing I was thinking about...

I'm just looking for extra eyes that might see something that could be used against us in the code...My eyes go to mush sometimes, and I know there are a bunch of folks here that would take a scan of this, knowing how I think about stuff like this to see if there is any potential risk...

I'm thinking like a "bad guy" here...If I wanted to restrict or regulate you, I'll find a way in some code that could be exploited to do so...

Thats why I posted this...I want to see if anyone else sees anything I (and a few others, not in the gun chat forums I know) may have missed...

[HankB]

I think this is a stretch . . .

If the road was a "secure" area, wouldn't they have to "secure" it like they do the airport - meaning security checkpoints to enter it and fence (and guard) it for it's full length?

When Bush's motorcade goes by, do the sidewalks along his route become "secure" and thus prohibited for concealed carry?

[stevie_d_64]

I think this is a stretch . . .

Maybe...Maybe not...

If the road was a "secure" area, wouldn't they have to "secure" it like they do the airport - meaning security checkpoints to enter it and fence (and guard) it for it's full length?

You betcha...

When Bush's motorcade goes by, do the sidewalks along his route become "secure" and thus prohibited for concealed carry?

Nope, but sidewalks are probably not any part of the scope of this "commerce or commercial right-of-way"...I don't see anyone (public) walking anywhere on this thing...

[austin]

I doubt that the TTC will be subject to any special laws. The owner will still be the State of Texas.

Rules? Its a big mess already and thats why CINTRA is in here in the first place. No US company wanted the mess.

The Secret Service PSD around the President is awesome. Just awesome.

[Liberty]

I doubt that the TTC will be subject to any special laws. The owner will still be the State of Texas.

Rules? Its a big mess already and thats why CINTRA is in here in the first place. No US company wanted the mess.

And I thought it was because CINTRA bought the most votes. Thanks for clearing this up

[srothstein]

I strongly suggest you actually read the laws governing this, as with most laws that afect your life or are controversial.

There are several parts of this that bother me, and at least one which may bother you with regards to your RKBA.

TTC section 227.021(c) says that the department decide who is allowed on the road and may deny access. Think of the legal battle if they decide to bar access to all gun owners. We might win in the long run, but they have specific authority here to make up their own mind and could argue that 30.06 does not apply due to this law.

Other sections make the road a sort of private property, subject to taxes and everything, for the leased parts. This may have the benefit of giving us a road without a speed limit (which does not apply on private property) but may also cost us the RKBA on those sections, say if the Spanish company doesn't like guns.

The concept of redoing our roads for future transportation needs is not only a great idea, but a necessary one also. The way it is implemented here is a bad way to go for many reasons, tolls being just one of them.

[KBCraig]

OK, heres a new headache for y'all...

I have been known to not be a one issue political hack...

I try not to be, but truth be told, I am, and that one issue is Liberty.

The Trans-Texas Corridor is completely incompatible with freedom. Forget whether or not you can carry a gun there: its very existence is antithetical to the Liberty for which our founding fathers fought. Not just the founding fathers who held Lexington and Concord, but also those who died at the Alamo, and who won at Goliad!

The TTC is not a "corridor"; it's not one or two high-speed passageways. It's a spiderweb of passageways across the state:



After the much-cursed Kelo v. New London ruling, where SCOTUS held that states may seize private property through eminent domain and turn such property over to private individuals or corporations, many states rushed to change their laws to forbid such takings. Texas was among those states, except the TTC was specifically excluded.

Here's the TTC reduced to its most basic point: Rick Perry wants to seize 9,000 square miles (5,760,000 acres) of privately-owned Texas land through eminent domain, and carve 1,200-foot wide corridors through Texas farms, without the landowners' consent. After spending taxpayer money to seize this land and develop the infrastructure, he wants to cede total control of these new passageways to a private company, Cintra-Zachry, which is based in Madrid.

I don't care if your "one issue" is RKBA. I don't care if your "one issue" is abortion. I don't care if your "one issue" is freedom of speech. I don't care if your "one issue" is immigration. Without the right to own property free from worry that the government will seize it, none of the other issues matter!

RKBA can help secure the right to own property, but unless you're prepared to turn back the bulldozers with a .45, you're better off demanding that your government not seize private property. Not anyone's private property, even if the majority of his neighbors thing it's a swell idea. Would you want your right to own your property up for debate based on a majority vote?

"We can bring untold riches to the majority, if only you will let us destroy one amongst you..."

No thank you! I love my neighbor as myself, and I don't want the government to steal his land.

Kevin

[nuparadigm]

Kevin is right on the mark with this. It's as if we were watching some Organized Crime family publically scheming to commit theft of some sort. In this case, though, it is the predatory State government which is planning to steal land by violent means.

Some may argue with my choice of the word "violent". But armed persons coming on to one's property to enforce an imminent domain property seizure is a fairly violent scenario.

[Cosmo 9]

Well said Kevin!!!

[Lumberjack98]

Great post Kevin.

[stevie_d_64]

Kevin always comes up with the good stuff...

But Mr. Rothstein nailed it...I saw this Section 227.021(c) and scratched my head also on this one...I believe this is their "operational loophole" that will give them the authority to ban anything they want traveling on (or even across) "their" toll-roads...

Not just guns, it could be anything...

And the state is basically handing this authority to them on a silver platter...

All the hunters raise your hands if you do not believe this could effect you?

See, I am not trying to raise a stink at all with anyone...All I am doing is what I always do...Think like a bad guy...

If I really wanted to restrict, infringe and regulate what is an "inalienable right" you have as citizens of this state and nation...How could I go about doing so...

So my methodology is to identify the risk(s), make myself the bad guy and try to figure out a way to implement these restrictions, infringements and regulations and see how best to beat them to the punch, so to speak...

This whole issue is one of those under the radar projects, that needs to be detected, disseminated and adressed before its too late...

Obviously, there is a lot of attention on this project finally, and the land grab issue in my opinion is the largest issue...

But this particular facet is one that could bring a few more people into the bru-ha-ha that have another issue to keep this on the surface identifying yet another negative effect on our citizens...

As much as it appears that I have a negative feeling and do not support this project, I tried, and am continuing to try and find a way to wrap around and support this project...I have yet to find one...

Ironic? Sure...But as it stands now...I'm in the big fat "No" column...