Houston Zoo reposts 30.06. Says it's an EDU facility

[Savage20]

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-t...o-reinstates-no-gun-signs-despite-6654968.php

The Houston Zoo has reinstalled a series of signs that prohibit the carry of firearms into the gates of the family-friendly attraction almost three months after being forced to take them down at threat of legal action.
...
After the signs came down the zoo staff said that they would be conferring with lawyers to see what the next step should be.
On Tuesday Walker was notified of the zoo’s sign reinstallation and said that he soon plans on taking a complaint to the Office of the Texas Attorney General.

 

[Army 1911]

That should be an education for the Zoo.

 

[Savage20]

Hopefully the AG takes them to school

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

 

[TX69]

Wow! Some communist agenda driven Libtard at the Zoo is extremely ignorant and afraid of a Federally background checked and State schooled on safety for firearms with shooting test legal American citizen being on the grounds of the Zoo with a paid ticket with their hard earned money.

 

[Mreed911]

Wow! Some communist agenda driven

What would prohibition of firearms carry at the zoo have to do with the social ownership of the means of production and re-distributing goods based on need alone?

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

Cause Communists don't want folks carrying guns.

 

[Renegade]

Even if they are an EDU, you cannot be charged with 30.06 offense. Signs are meaningless.

 

[txinvestigator]

Even if they are an EDU, you cannot be charged with 30.06 offense. Signs are meaningless.

Absolutely correct.

 

[Renegade]

Absolutely correct.

Am I correct the only time a 30.06 matters on gov property is when posted for gov meeting?

eta

and then it is 46.035 offense, not 30.06. Kinda confusing.

 

[Mreed911]

Even if they are an EDU, you cannot be charged with 30.06 offense. Signs are meaningless.

Absolutely correct.

Is this really true? In other words, couldn't they arrest and charge, and leave it up to you to prove out (or at least argue)? Think about this from a street cop perspective.

I'm asking, not arguing.

 

[Renegade]

Is this really true? In other words, couldn't they arrest and charge, and leave it up to you to prove out (or at least argue)? Think about this from a street cop perspective.

I'm asking, not arguing.

Well sure you could get arrested, but it would be a false arrest as 30.06 does not apply on government property *(except as asked above)

If it is an EDU, then you are arrested for 46.03

 

[jrbfishn]

And be sued big time. But yea, they could. Wouldn't be smart though.

sent from an idgit coffeeholic

 

[motorcarman]

Cause Communists don't want folks carrying guns.

Wolverines!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

bob

 

[Bithabus]

Is this really true? In other words, couldn't they arrest and charge, and leave it up to you to prove out (or at least argue)? Think about this from a street cop perspective.

I'm asking, not arguing.

Yes, you cannot be charged. 30.06 uses the correct "exception from the application" language. Overcoming any exception is an element of the charge, and the prosecution must articulately overcome any exceptions to charge an offense. So unless the prosecution can show the property is not owned or leased by the gov (or is listed in 46.035) they can't charge 30.06.

You can still be arrested though.

 

[Bobk]

This is what I got told when I asked about the status of a complaint against Texas Workforce Commission:

".... there have been several official requests for OAG Opinions regarding the new laws, particularly the handgun laws, those Opinions have not yet been rendered. We are compiling all of the complaints that have come in, but are not going to take any action until those Opinions have been issued as they will affect the validity of many of the complaints. I assure you that all valid complaints will be addressed. If you would like to see the pending request list, the link to the OAG website is https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opin/opin_recent.php. The most significant request is RQ-0040-KP, please let me know if you have any further questions."

 

[TyMD]

Does anybody know if the AG ever released an opinion on the legality (which we all know is the case) of these signs? Ive looked all over the place and cant seem to find any info. Its been over 6 months now and that should be plenty of time.

 

[easy rider]

if I was the mischievous type I might just scratch out "family friendly" and write "terrorist friendly", but I'm not and Houston is just too far.

 

[locke_n_load]

Does anybody know if the AG ever released an opinion on the legality (which we all know is the case) of these signs? Ive looked all over the place and cant seem to find any info. Its been over 6 months now and that should be plenty of time.

The AG has not ruled on the Houston Zoo yet. And it's been 9 months, not 6.

 

[A.Texas.Yankee]

Technically 9 months is over 6 months. *lol*



Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

 

[Phil1979]

Is this being pursued any further, or is the zoo getting a free pass to violate our rights?