Official oppression?

The Times printed an Associated Press article the other day about a Texas county that is suing an individual citizen for complaining about one of their policies.

The citizen has complained to Waller county (near Houston) that they have no right to ban firearms in the entire Waller county courthouse.

Texas law evidently prohibits guns from being carried by citizens into courtrooms and related offices, but not the remainder of the building.  The Texas attorney general agrees that guns cannot be prohibited from an entire courthouse.

That is evidently not the answer that the Waller county district attorney wants.  He has sued the citizen individually.  According to the article he said “he’s simply seeking a ruling by a state judge that the county has the legal right to ban guns from the entire courthouse building”.

The suit seeks $100,000 in damages but the district attorney “promised that the county would not pursue any monetary damages”.


The district attorney evidently said that the monetary claim was included as boilerplate language.   If they don’t want the money why did they ask for it?  Could it be another way to try to intimidate the citizen?

A law is passed by the legislature.  The state attorney general was asked to give his opinion about the limits of the law.  He did.  The county did not like the ruling.  A citizen complained.

Now the citizen has been sued by the county for complaining that the county was following neither the state law nor respecting the attorney general’s interpretation of it.

The citizen now has to spend money to defend himself against these thugs.

This distict attorney needs to be corrected.

We deserve better



7 Responses to Official oppression?

  1. Deputy Dawg says:

    Betcha $1 that they are Republicans..


  2. mamboman3 says:

    Doesn’t Texas always pass some kind of legislation trying to prevent frivolous lawsuits? Now the state is guilty of the same thing.

    Anyway, what is the sense of allowing people to be carrying their gun in the hallways and bathrooms of the building but not in the courtroom or offices? Are they doing their “business” in the hallways and bathrooms now?


  3. Judy Maddox says:

    I think that our County Judge did the same thing.

    Sent from my iPhone



  4. Babyape says:

    First they tax you until you can’t take it anymore then they ban your guns so you can’t defend yourself. Best Wake Up America!


    • Give Me a Break says:

      Give me a break. Folks have been saying for seven years now that our guns were going to be taken away. In fact, they said the same thing before Obama took office. It didn’t happen in Obama’s first term and it hasn’t happened in his second term. We haven’t lost a thing, not even our assault rifles or large capacity magazines. The fear-mongering strategy of the NRA has a been a great perpetual marketing campaign for the gun manufacturers and it’s helped members of congress suck more money out of the gun lobbyists. Feel free to go out and spend more money every time the fear mongering gun runners blow their whistle and tell you the sky is falling.


  5. U says:

    Counter sue for First Amendment violations and seek damages of 100 million dollars would be my response in thos case


Leave a Reply -- you do not have to enter your email address

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: