Hey JD. Our Gun Shows are Gun-free Zones

It's useless to continue this "discussion". You have your viewpoints and I have mine. I think most of your viewpoints are incorrect and you think most of my viewpoints are incorrect. I could respond to your statements with my opinions on why they are wrong and then you would respond with your opinion as to why my statements are wrong and it will never end. Let it end and we'll probably continue in the future. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

You're probably right but I must point out that yours are opinions while mine are experiences.

You're probably right but I must point out that yours are opinions while mine are experiences. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

You are soooooooo wrong. Not one of the issues discussed in this thread can be related your life experiences. Not unless you were at one of the scenes of those mass murders. It is pure opinion and speculation as to whether or not the incidents at gun free zones came about simply because they were gun free zones. Or whether gun free zones do or do not work. Yes, you certainly have more knowledge of handguns and other similar weapons than me. Congratulations!! But there is not one other subject discussed between us where your wonderful "life experiences" give your opinions advantage over mine.

BTW, I did read your links and quotes from Diane Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, Eric Holder, and Joe Biden. Listen closely -- NONE OF THEM HAS STATED THAT THEY SUPPORT A BAN ON HANDGUNS IN THIS COUNTRY. In Diane Feinstein's quotes, she is supporting banning of handguns in S.F. only, and supports the assault weapons ban. Nancy Pelosi's quotes had to do with the assault weapons ban only. Nothing Holder or Biden said, in any way, can be interpreted as asking for an outright ban of handguns in this country.

Also, I was interested in your statements on malls as gun free zones so I went to the mall nearest my home. Inside the main door there was a sign stating that the mall requests people entering the mall to not bring handguns or other weapons into the mall. This is simply a request and can't be interpreted as this mall being a gun free zone. A person with a CHL can carry a concealed handgun into the mall with no fear of being prosecuted under Texas law. Obviously a sample of one is not very valid.

You do realize that Hitler never came out and said he wanted to kill all the Jews don't you, but that is how it ended up. Maybe, MAYBE, I cannot find a public utterance by the afore mentioned assholes that they want to ban all guns but that is where they are heading and I don't hear them saying NO to the idea.

You did not come and say that you wanted a gun ban but you sure didn't make much of a case against a total ban. Lawyers and politicians are very careful of NOT saying exactly what they really believe but their actions sure speak volumes. I still maintain that those assholes would get in line to vote FOR a complete weapons ban if they thought they could get away with it.

As for your signs. It is impossible for a private entity to create a law prohibiting guns. They can only put up signs expressing their desires. Sometimes that desire can be backed up by law (they can ask you to leave and if you refuse then you are treaspassing) and sometimes it can't. I would expect you to know the difference. Gun shows (in my experience) are usually held in public buildings and are bound by legal codes such as no loaded weapons on the premises. This is not the gun show but the city enforcing those codes.

You do realize that Hitler never came out and said he wanted to kill all the Jews don't you, but that is how it ended up. Maybe, MAYBE, I cannot find a public utterance by the afore mentioned assholes that they want to ban all guns but that is where they are heading and I don't hear them saying NO to the idea.

. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Goodwin says our lovable loser JDCornhole has lost again...

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/godwins-law
While Godwin’s Law was originally conceived for the Usenet newsgroup discussions, the humorous rule remains just as applicable today in any threaded online discussion, such as message boards, chat rooms, comment threads and wiki talk pages. Since the dawn of online discussions, Godwin’s Law has been used as an indicator of whether a thread has gone on too long, who’s playing fair and who’s just slinging mud and who finally gets to “win” the discussion.

You do realize that Hitler never came out and said he wanted to kill all the Jews don't you, but that is how it ended up. Maybe, MAYBE, I cannot find a public utterance by the afore mentioned assholes that they want to ban all guns but that is where they are heading and I don't hear them saying NO to the idea.

You did not come and say that you wanted a gun ban but you sure didn't make much of a case against a total ban. Lawyers and politicians are very careful of NOT saying exactly what they really believe but their actions sure speak volumes. I still maintain that those assholes would get in line to vote FOR a complete weapons ban if they thought they could get away with it.

As for your signs. It is impossible for a private entity to create a law prohibiting guns. They can only put up signs expressing their desires. Sometimes that desire can be backed up by law (they can ask you to leave and if you refuse then you are treaspassing) and sometimes it can't. I would expect you to know the difference. Gun shows (in my experience) are usually held in public buildings and are bound by legal codes such as no loaded weapons on the premises. This is not the gun show but the city enforcing those codes. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

First, I have no idea if Feinstein, Pelosi, Holder, or Biden REALLY want a total ban on handguns in the U.S. All I can say is they've never, to the best of my knowledge and in the information you gave us, said anything close to that.

Myself? If people want to own and carry a gun, fine by me. I support your right to carry a handgun just as I support my right to not carry a handgun. I support each state having the right to enact gun legislation as they see fit. I may not agree with the gun laws or lack of gun laws, but if the matter is that important to me I have the right to move to a state where the gun laws are more acceptable to me. I don't see that happening.

Finally, and I can only speak for the state of Texas, a private entity can in fact put up a sign that legally prohibits gun owners from carrying a handgun on that site. This is why I stated that the sign I saw in the mall yesterday was simply a request since it did not meet the standards found below. So once again you are WRONG. I guess your "experience" didn't cover this.

30.06 signage

TPC section 30.06 covers "Trespass by a person licensed to carry a concealed handgun". It allows a residential or commercial landowner to post signage that preemptively bars licensed persons from entering the premises while carrying concealed. It is a Class A misdemeanor to fail to heed compliant signage.

• The courts have yet to rule on any specific requirements of 30.06, but CHL permittees are generally instructed that signage which does not comply exactly with TPC Sec. 30.06(c)(3)(B) is not binding. The law states a compliant sign must be:
  • In contrasting colors;
  • With block letters;
  • Having text 1" or greater in height;
  • Containing "identical" text to the following:

    • "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun"[10]
      

  • In both English and Spanish;
  • Posted conspicuously and "clearly visible to the public".
• Certain specific types of buildings are required to post compliant signage in order to prohibit carry: meetings of government entities, places of religious worship, and amusement parks.
• Hospitals are a gray area due to conflicts in the law and multiple provisions that may apply to a medical facility:
  • License holders were originally prohibited from carrying concealed inside a hospital without written authorization, under TPS 46.035(b)(4).
  • An amendment in 2007 added paragraph (i) to the same section, stating that (b)(4) the prohibition does not apply if the license holder did not receive notice (oral or written communication, including posting of a sign, under TPC 30.06) of the prohibition.
  • But, a hospital may be a "teaching hospital" and considered a school, where firearms carry is prohibited, under TPC 46.03(a)(1).
  • It may also be a VA or military hospital, and thus subject to federal prohibition on weapons carry.
  • "High-security" wings of a hospital used to treat convicted inmates fall under the heading of "correctional facilities", where carry is prohibited.
  • All hospitals are required under Government Code Section 411.204(b) to post a sign stating that possession of a handgun whether licensed or not is a felony. It is unknown, given the amendments to 46.035, whether the GC 411.204 signage would actually prohibit a CHL holder from carrying, as it would not constitute "effective notice under section 30.06" and GC 411.204 does not describe failure to heed such a sign as an offense by the license holder.
• Anyone who owns or controls property may orally or in writing, inform a person carrying a concealed handgun that they must leave the property.

In the state of Kansas the only thing a property owner can do is to ask the person to leave the premises. It is not illegal to ignore a sign posted by the owner. Though it is bad form. In Missouri a person can be arrested for ignoring a private owners sign without first asking them to leave. I guess you're wrong in some states. Since you're an ex patriot from NY why do you think everything revolves around Texas?


I suppose I have to state the obvious considering the brain power of some of the people here. If a private owner repeatedly asks (or orders) someone to leave their property then they are guilty of criminal treaspass. Then they can be arrested in Kansas.

In the state of Kansas the only thing a property owner can do is to ask the person to leave the premises. It is not illegal to ignore a sign posted by the owner. Though it is bad form. In Missouri a person can be arrested for ignoring a private owners sign without first asking them to leave. I guess you're wrong in some states. Since you're an ex patriot from NY why do you think everything revolves around Texas?


I suppose I have to state the obvious considering the brain power of some of the people here. If a private owner repeatedly asks (or orders) someone to leave their property then they are guilty of criminal treaspass. Then they can be arrested in Kansas. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I am NOT wrong in some states because I was very specific in stating the law in Texas, which made your statement incorrect. Signs can legally block someone from carrying a weapon onto the site here. Only took one instance to prove you wrong. When I was in NY guns were never a topic of conversation. Here in Texas the topic comes up on the news, in the newspaper and elsewhere on a daily basis. Since I am inundated with information on guns so frequently, I know more about the laws concerning them here than in NY. I am interested though in finding out more on the subject.

Serious question for you. If, as what say is true and signs at a mall IN MOST STATES can only suggest to visitors that they not carry handguns or other weapons, how can a mall in reality be called a gun free zone? Seems like anyone with a CHL if necessary could legally carry a handgun into the mall.

BTW, I did read your links and quotes from Diane Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, Eric Holder, and Joe Biden. Listen closely -- NONE OF THEM HAS STATED THAT THEY SUPPORT A BAN ON HANDGUNS IN THIS COUNTRY. In Diane Feinstein's quotes, she is supporting banning of handguns in S.F. only, and supports the assault weapons ban. Nancy Pelosi's quotes had to do with the assault weapons ban only. Nothing Holder or Biden said, in any way, can be interpreted as asking for an outright ban of handguns in this country.
Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

You're a fucking, lying little weasel, Speedy! Who the fuck gets to define what constitutes an "assault weapon", Speedy? ... little pin-headed mutha-fuckers like you, Speedy?

You fuckin' lib-retards are equivocating weasels, Speedy. Remember when the Odumbocare tax wasn't a tax until it had to be a tax, Speedy? Or, Speedy, do you recall: "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is" or "If you like your doctor/insurance, you can keep your doctor/insurance"?

Lib-retards are 100% congenital liars!

FYI, Speeedy, this was Britain's primary "assault weapon" for about 100 years:





By the time little pin-headed lib-retards like you get finished parsing words and codes, the Brown Bess will be a fuckin' proscribed "assault weapon", Speedy.

You shore gots lotsa mean things to say IBIdiot. Seems like you grip a little harder on churchin days. Izzat some kinda hillbilly guilt?

You shore gots lotsa mean things to say IBIdiot. Seems like you grip a little harder on churchin days. Izzat some kinda hillbilly guilt? Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

I've decided to totally ignore the gentleman in hopes that he will realize that his comments are just too stupid to even reply to.

I've decided to totally ignore the gentleman in hopes that he will realize that his comments are just too stupid to even reply to. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

You lost... LOL

I'm sorry Speedie but sometimes trying to talk to you is like trying to convince mentally disabled kid that Santa doesn't exist. It doesn't matter what we say or how we say it. We can even get uncle Lloyd to admit that he dresses up every year but you still believe and that gets us frustrated. Particularly when we suggest something really simple like going to a gun show and you just poo poo that idea. What are you so afraid of?

I'm sorry Speedie but sometimes trying to talk to you is like trying to convince mentally disabled kid that Santa doesn't exist. It doesn't matter what we say or how we say it. We can even get uncle Lloyd to admit that he dresses up every year but you still believe and that gets us frustrated. Particularly when we suggest something really simple like going to a gun show and you just poo poo that idea. What are you so afraid of? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Exactly what gets you frustrated? That I consistently prove you wrong? And if not wrong, I challenge your statements with my contrary opinions and contrary opinions from others? First you say that MOST malls are gun free zones and then you say, and I quote: "It is impossible for a private entity to create a law prohibiting guns. They can only put up signs expressing their desires." First I prove you wrong on your second statement. Second, you do realize that you contradicted yourself? Malls are gun free zones yet the signs put up are not enforceable so people can legally carry guns into the malls. Which is it???

What on earth would I gain from going to a gun show? Waste weekend time going to an event in which I have no interest. Waste money (gas, entrance fee, and possibly a parking fee). Gain unwanted knowledge about handguns. Handguns and other similar weapons are YOUR thing, your passion. I have no problem with that. For some unknown reason, you want me to engage in YOUR passion.

You lost... LOL Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

Yeah. I just gotta listen to myself and keep trying.

I've decided to totally ignore the gentleman in hopes that he will realize that his comments are just too stupid to even reply to. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

There is no "stupidity" in pointing out how you and your ilk lie, Speedy.