Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Law lets firearms in more places
Fort Worth Star-Telegram / 'StartleGram' ^ | September 1, 2003 | By Anna M. Tinsley

Posted on 09/01/2003 7:07:03 AM PDT by MeekOneGOP


Posted on Mon, Sep. 01, 2003


Law lets firearms in more places


Star-Telegram Staff Writer
STAR-TELEGRAM DEWUAN X. DAVIS
CONCEALED WEAPONS

Starting today, firearms go public.

For years, local governments have been able to ban concealed handguns from many city halls, police stations, libraries, recreation centers, city and county parks and many other governmental facilities.

No more.

Today, a new state law takes effect allowing Texans with concealed-handgun permits to take their firearms into many public facilities.

And that has rankled some city officials.

"I support the right to bear arms -- I'm a lifetime member of the NRA [National Rifle Association]," said Fort Worth Mayor Mike Moncrief, who holds a concealed-handgun license. "But I think this is going too far.

"I don't think it's the responsible thing for the state to have done to ensure adequate protection of those who are in public service."

Even so, before state legislators got mired in partisanship and redistricting, they passed a law stripping local governments of the ability to ban concealed handguns in public places.

That means concealed-handgun license holders can carry their firearms onto local government property, except into buildings where courts meet and rooms where governmental meetings are being held.

Under state law, guns remain banned at schools, on school grounds and at racetracks, bars, sporting events, places of worship, amusement parks, hospitals and nursing homes, among other facilities.

Advocates of the new law say that it closes a loophole and that the Legislature never intended to prevent Texans from lawfully carrying concealed guns on most government-owned property.

"These are law-abiding citizens ... and there is a belief on our part that they ought to be able to carry legally," said Jim Dark, executive director of the Texas State Rifle Association, the Texas affiliate of the NRA.

Supporters say local governments overstepped their authority, banning guns from buildings at will. Rules varied among cities and counties so that traveling Texans didn't know which facilities restricted guns.

"It is spelled out in the Texas Constitution that only the Legislature has the right to regulate the bearing of arms," said state Rep. Suzanna Gratia Hupp, R-Lampasas, who helped shepherd the bill through the Legislature.

"Plus, if we allowed cities to do this, it would create an incredibly unwieldy patch of ordinances across the state."

Opponents disagree.

They say the new law erodes local control and treats local governments differently than other property owners, who have the right to prohibit concealed handguns on their property.

And they say Texans realize that regulations vary by city and county.

"This is a bad ol' bill," said Frank Sturzl, executive director of the Texas Municipal League, which represents cities statewide. "We opposed this vigorously, but this was passed on the basis of political strength of political-interest groups.

"Now we'll wait and see what happens," he said. "You just hope you don't get the New York City Hall-type situation."

In July, New York City Councilman James E. Davis was shot to death by a political opponent who slipped his gun into City Hall by accompanying Davis, who did not have to pass through the building's metal detectors.

The shooting occurred at the start of a council meeting.

It was 1995 when the Texas Legislature first passed the concealed-carry law that allowed Texans with a permit to carry concealed firearms.

Lawmakers outlined specific exceptions -- such as hospitals, courtrooms, churches, bars and at government meetings. In 1997, the Legislature gave private-property owners the authority to ban concealed handguns on their premises.

Through all of this, local governments expressed public-safety concerns and began to adopt bans for their facilities.

The bill's author, state Sen. Ken Armbrister, D-Victoria, could not be reached for comment recently. But in June, he told the Star-Telegram that the ability to ban guns lies with the state.

"Cities have assumed an authority they don't have," Armbrister said. "All this does is reaffirm the state's authority in this regard."

To be considered for a permit, applicants must pass a criminal-background check and take classroom training on gun laws and safety. People who are mentally ill are ineligible.

Currently, 234,408 Texans, including 17,554 in Tarrant County, are licensed, according to the Texas Department of Public Safety.

Several area government officials joined Moncrief in expressing concerns about the new law.

"This tends to erode, to some degree, what we are trying to do to provide a safe environment," said Bruno Rumbelow, assistant city manager in Grapevine.

Arlington Mayor Robert Cluck said he doesn't believe that people with licenses to carry concealed handguns are a threat because they are subject to extensive background checks and training.

But he is glad that guns are prohibited in City Council chambers during meetings.

"That's where tempers are most likely to flare," he said.

Moncrief, a former state senator who stepped down earlier this year, said he would have opposed the law if he had still been in the Legislature.

"I'm appalled [that] this is something we have to deal with," he said. "This was a mistake."

Staff Writers Sally Claunch, R.A. Dyer, Mike Lee and Ellena F. Morrison Contributed to This Report.


Anna M. Tinsley, (817) 390-7610 atinsley@star-telegram.com




© 2003 Star Telegram and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.dfw.com


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: bang; banglist; concealedweapons; firearms; publicplaces; texas
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last

1 posted on 09/01/2003 7:07:03 AM PDT by MeekOneGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: *bang_list; Shooter 2.5; autoresponder; yall

2 posted on 09/01/2003 7:08:24 AM PDT by MeekOneGOP (Check out the Texas Chicken D 'RATS!: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/keyword/Redistricting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *bang_list; TexasCowboy; Eaker; humblegunner; yall

3 posted on 09/01/2003 7:11:29 AM PDT by MeekOneGOP (Check out the Texas Chicken D 'RATS!: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/keyword/Redistricting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
"Now we'll wait and see what happens," he said. "You just hope you don't get the New York City Hall-type situation."

Some common sense "Now we'll wait and see what happens" combined with total off the wall stupidity "You just hope you don't get the New York City Hall-type situation".

The New York City Hall type situation had a ban in place and metal detectors, which were easily overcome because they did not apply to councilmen. To claim that this is somehow related to the Texas situation is simply weird and makes no sense.

The New York City situation is a perfect example of the failure of such bans and the stupidity of their enactment.

4 posted on 09/01/2003 7:19:45 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
"Arlington Mayor Robert Cluck said...he is glad that guns are prohibited in City Council chambers during meetings. "That's where tempers are most likely to flare," he said."

OK.

How 'bout if we compromise and allow citizens in the Council chambers to carry buckets of hot tar and feathers?
5 posted on 09/01/2003 7:20:02 AM PDT by WorkingClassFilth (Defund NPR, PBS and the LSC.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
It's not like the libs won't scream no matter what the law is.

The TSRA has been working on this ever since the passage of the Concealed Weapons law had passed. It's an example that some CCW laws aren't perfect when they first pass but with time, they can be changed to a better law.

The plan should be to get some sort of law passed to show the public the democrat lie of "blood in the streets" won't happen. With time, the law can be changed for the better.

6 posted on 09/01/2003 7:25:09 AM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (Don't punch holes in the lifeboat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing; Shooter 2.5
The TSRA has been working on this ever since the passage of the Concealed Weapons law had passed. It's an example that some CCW laws aren't perfect when they first pass but with time, they can be changed to a better law. "favoritis

Kudos to the TSRA for their work. Good point, which applies to any new law, like allowing only retired police to carry handguns in other states with no local CCW license.

There were cries of opposition from the purists, but my thinking has always been "small steps" in regards to rolling back gun control laws.

Once we get even a mildly pro-gun law enacted, it can always be incrementally expanded. This was the tactic the antis used and it is gratifying to see that we are waking up and using the same approach.

Now for the hospitals and churches.

7 posted on 09/01/2003 7:43:13 AM PDT by Oatka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
"This tends to erode, to some degree, what we are trying to do to provide a safe environment," said Bruno Rumbelow, assistant city manager in Grapevine.


Let's see...If law-abiding, CCW-authorized citizens are packing heat for protection, it should be obvious (except to those gun-fearing wussies) that these places will be much safer. The goblins criminals (those who don't care what the law says) will once again have to think twice about illegally bringing their weapons onto public property. Police can't be everywhere, but criminals can never predict where those darned CCW guns are.

MEMO TO GUN-FEARING-WUSSIES: It's those who would illegally bring a weapon onto public property that you should really be worried about.
8 posted on 09/01/2003 7:43:37 AM PDT by freep_toad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
I would guess that by far the majority of those honest citizens who pass background checks and then attend and pass firearms safety classes & apply for permits...

are not likely to committ violent crimes...

In fact..it's my guess that they as likely or perhaps even less likely to commit 'any' crimes -as compared to judges lawyers and other officers of the court..
9 posted on 09/01/2003 7:48:44 AM PDT by joesnuffy (Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
That means concealed-handgun license holders

Which means they have been trained, and investigated to the hilt, and are law abiding citizens of the State of Texas. This is a big deterrent for would be criminals.

10 posted on 09/01/2003 7:48:44 AM PDT by chainsaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oatka
You can already carry in hospitals and churches if they don't have the appropriate sign up at the door. In Texas anyway.
11 posted on 09/01/2003 7:53:57 AM PDT by Double Tap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
Under state law, guns remain banned at schools, on school grounds and at racetracks, bars, sporting events, places of worship, amusement parks, hospitals and nursing homes, among other facilities.

////////////////
What kind of "freedom" is this.

Even Liberal Vermont gives its residents more freedom than this. Read: NO permits required anywhere.
12 posted on 09/01/2003 8:13:43 AM PDT by BenR2 ((John 3:16: Still True Today.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
It has always been mildly amusing to me that, whenever politicians allow a concealed-carry law to pass, the FIRST PLACE they forbid carry is "government offices".

Hard to figure this out, but I suspect that it means they do not trust their own constituents- even those eligible for CCW permits, who are a pretty law-abiding lot.

I would forbid legal concealed carry in only two places- jails and courtrooms. (Only because of the presence of large numbers of criminals and their lawyers in those venues...)

13 posted on 09/01/2003 8:16:10 AM PDT by RANGERAIRBORNE ("Oderint dum metuant" -CALIGULA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WorkingClassFilth
Good for you Texas. If the pols are reminded of this freedom, they're more likely to remember the others.
14 posted on 09/01/2003 8:20:46 AM PDT by stevio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
Your constitutional rights end on government property. < /sarcasm>
15 posted on 09/01/2003 8:32:24 AM PDT by gitmo (Americans are learning world geography ... one war at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shooter 2.5; MeeknMing
"All this does is reaffirm the state's authority in this regard."

That is correct, and it should have been done a long time ago.

One point on which I disagree with most posters is that I don't think handguns should be allowed in hospitals for the mentally insane.
To me, that's like taking a can of gasoline into a furnace.

16 posted on 09/01/2003 8:32:31 AM PDT by TexasCowboy (COB1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BenR2
If you wish to make a "Vermont" law a reality, the TSRA could use you as a member. The dues are 20 dollars a year.

http://www.tsra.com/


17 posted on 09/01/2003 8:32:43 AM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (Don't punch holes in the lifeboat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
They say the new law erodes local control and treats local governments differently than other property owners, who have the right to prohibit concealed handguns on their property.

If I recall, long, long ago, it was those very property owners that owned the "public" property and the officials using the property were allowed to do so through the voice of the public. This statement appears to have a slightly different resonance to it.

18 posted on 09/01/2003 8:41:28 AM PDT by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
I would not have a problem with the state disallowing
CC holders to be armed in government buildings IF they
provided an adequite FIREARM CHECK SYSTEM. Let me check
my piece at the door.

Why should I be forced to go unarmed from my car to the building.
19 posted on 09/01/2003 8:45:36 AM PDT by tet68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
For years, local governments have been able to ban concealed handguns from many city halls, police stations, libraries, recreation centers, city and county parks and many other governmental facilities.

Nope. Only law abiding citizens were banned from carrying firearms. Criminals carried regardless of the law said.

20 posted on 09/01/2003 8:54:40 AM PDT by Mini-14
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson