Can i get arrested for this?

[Neshomamench]

Originally Posted by TexasRedneck

I did read what you wrote - did you? State law says:

(a) A municipality may not adopt regulations relating to the transfer, private ownership, keeping, transportation, licensing, or registration of firearms, ammunition, or firearm supplies.

By saying I may not transport loaded, the city is in direct conflict with the "transportation" clause. Note that the law says "relating to". The intent is quite clear - as is the prohibition by the state from city-owned property being posted w/30.06 signage.

Now....please - tell me where my facts are wrong.

The first fact is your assertion that I "support" this law. Dont let that escape you. Your extrapolation of information is somewhat lacking in that respect.

Second. As always, it isnt as simple as you think it is and just because you are sure you are right, doesnt make it so.

"transportation" is an ambiguous phrase. We see in the law all the time such things. It could very well be argued that the ordinance doesnt impede transportation in anyway. You are free to transport firearms all you want. It simply regulates the condition of said transportation. (unloaded) You are free transport the ammunition as well. Just not in the firearm.

Seriously, do you honestly think that all the city lawyers would just show up without an argument? They are going to have one and I think it could very well stick.

What I fail to understand is, I have clearly stated I am on your side. I have even chided the laws, yet when I dont agree with how you see it, because I want to introduce some legal reality, you attack me. You might want to think about that as well.

[TexasRedneck]

I haven't attacked you, I have attacked your assertions. I've seen nothing to indicate your legal training, and I've already seen several instances where cities have attempted to ban concealed carry on city-owned properties be struck down.

As to the carrying of a loaded firearm, the state has clearly stated "transport". Where it doesn't say loaded or unloaded, it's quite clear that it says a city may not impose ANY restriction on their transport - and absent language allowing them to restrict transport of a loaded firearm, the intent of the state law is, IMO (and that of several attornies I've spoken with over the years) clear in that there can be no restriction (such as loaded/unloaded). It's my hope that the issues can be resolved via discussion - apparently you've missed my repeated statement of that - but failing that, then it may way be time for legal recourse.

I'll give you an example - in the early 90's, DOT regulations expanded to allow headlight modulators on motorcycles. SAPD didn't like that, and for quite a while insisted on stopping motorcycles that were using them. A blunt, but polite discussion between the Chief of Police and myself stopped their "enforcement" actions once and for all. So, yeah - I've been there and done that - and it's been my experience that most of these types of things are "we've always done it that way" until such a time as you sit down and discuss the actual issues at hand. I always try hard to stay polite and respectful, but if that doesn't work then it's a matter for the courts.