• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Open Carry Tarrant County challenges Arlington ordinance

notalawyer

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2012
Messages
1,061
Location
Florida
Open Carry Tarrant County challenged an Arlington ordinance prohibiting the distribution of literature and a federal judge issued a restraining order preventing the ordinance from being enforced until the constitutionality can be decided in court

http://thescoopblog.dallasnews.com/...case-over-arlingtons-sidewalk-ordinance.html/

'Reasonable', content neutral, time & place restrictions to the First Amendment have been upheld by the United States Supreme Court. This case will hinge on whether it's reasonable (public safety) to restrict folks from go into traffic to hand out...anything.

I have a feeling the City will win this one.
 

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
Yeah, I'm not sure. But I'm glad the city has been restrained, albeit temporarily. I feel like they may have to change the wording of the ordinance. As far as the fact of the matter goes, the group I'm in has handed out hundreds of pamphlets to hundreds of drivers with no safety issues. I'm sure it's possible to cause a traffic hazard but it would also be entirely possible to address safety concerns without prohibiting the practice entirely.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Yeah, I'm not sure. But I'm glad the city has been restrained, albeit temporarily. I feel like they may have to change the wording of the ordinance. As far as the fact of the matter goes, the group I'm in has handed out hundreds of pamphlets to hundreds of drivers with no safety issues. I'm sure it's possible to cause a traffic hazard but it would also be entirely possible to address safety concerns without prohibiting the practice entirely.

Judges who issue out temp. orders usually will follow-up with permanent ones ... reading the memo of decision it seems as if there will be no way out for the town.

I have no idea how they can change the ordinance w/o running afoul of the judge's laid out reasoning. The only thing I could see is to put an age restriction .. maybe for minors
 

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
Firefighters with boots in hand, at intersections, looking for donations, are gunna be a thing of the past...no?

This is how the ordinance was amended to read, it looks like in May. It was amended specifically to target OCTC's activities and prevent them from continuing to hand out open carry information and pocket constitutions.

Section 15.02 Prohibited Acts
A.
A person commits an offense if he or she stands on or in any manner occupies a shoulder, improved shoulder, sidewalk, median or public right-of-way in the areas set out in Section 15.03 to solicit or attempt to solicit for purpose of an exchange with the occupants of a vehicle, sell or offer for sale any merchandise or service directly to the occupants of a vehicle, or distributes or attempts to distribute any object directly to the occupants of a vehicle, other than a lawfully parked vehicle.
B.
This Section does not relieve responsibility for compliance with all federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations. (Amend Ord 14 - 024, 5/13/14)

Edit: I'm not sure if I have the most updated version of the ordinance...

Edit again: It was amended after two members were cited under 15.02, threatened to sue the city, and those charges were dropped. It was amended specifically to target OCTC's activities and attempt to strengthen the ordinance to be used against them.
 
Last edited:
Top