TexasCHLforum.com

TexasRifleman wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

TexasRifleman wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

TexasRifleman wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Owlan wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

TexasRifleman wrote:As of January 1, unless it's a place otherwise prohibited, ignoring or not seeing a 30.06 or .07 sign is a Class C misdemeanor with a max $200 fine.

If you are verbally asked to leave and don't it's criminal trespass.

Violation of 30.06 or 30.07 is a criminal trespass whether it is a Class A or Class B misdemeanor.

Chas.

If my interpretation is correct, violation of 30.06 or 30.07 is criminal trespass, yes, but it is now only a Class C misdemeanor with a maximum $200 fine (still criminal trespass), unless verbal notice is given and the licenseholder fails to depart (in which case it is a Class A misdemeanor). Is this your interpretation as well, or no?

The Code is clear and there's no interpretation required.

Chas.

I do not believe a violation of 30.06 or 07 rises to the level of Criminal Trespass Charles and I challenge you to show how that is possible.

The penal code for 30.05, criminal trespass, specifically says that it's a defense to prosecution for Criminal Trespass if the sole charge is carrying under authority of a CHL\LTC.

Straight from 30.05:


Sec. 30.05. CRIMINAL TRESPASS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person enters or remains on or in property of another, including residential land, agricultural land, a recreational vehicle park, a building, or an aircraft or other vehicle, without effective consent and the person:

(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or
(2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.

BUT THEN

It is a defense to prosecution under this section that:

(1) the basis on which entry on the property or land or in the building was forbidden is that entry with a handgun was forbidden; and
(2) the person was carrying:
(A) a license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, to carry a handgun; and
(B) a handgun:
(i) in a concealed manner; or
(ii) in a shoulder or belt holster.

There is no possible way that it's Criminal Trespass when the penal code for Criminal Trespass says it's NOT Criminal Trespass by specifically giving an affirmative defense.

That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. 30.06 AND 30.07 stand alone as criminal law and a violation of one or the other is simply a violation of that section. You have an affirmative defense if you're charged with violating 30.05.

There is no way it's criminal trespass. It's simple trespass, even says so in the name:

Sec. 30.06. TRESPASS BY LICENSE HOLDER WITH A CONCEALED HANDGUN
Sec. 30.07. TRESPASS BY LICENSE HOLDER WITH AN OPENLY CARRIED HANDGUN

Challenge accepted. Now I challenge you to learn something about the law before making your pronouncements.

The Texas Penal Code sets out criminal offenses, including TPC §§ 30.05, 30.06 and 30.07. You apparently are trying to make the caption part of the offense, but you cannot do so. This is something a first year law student learns. So while TPC §30.05's caption is "Criminal Trespass," and the caption for TPC §30.06 is "Trespass by a License Holder With a Concealed Handgun," the operative language is the same. Both provisions make it a crime to enter or remain on the property under the circumstances set out in each Code provision. Neither §30.05, §30.06 or §30.07 contain the word "trespass" in the operative language.

I guess in your mind you don't consider §30.06 or §30.07 to be a "criminal" act. Otherwise, there would be no way for you to argue that violation of §30.06 is not a criminal trespass.

Chas.

Again you make a leap that is not logical.

Everything in the penal code is "criminal", but not everything has that name. "Criminal Trespass" is a specific crime, a violation of 30.05 ONLY.

A violation of 30.06 is "TRESPASS BY LICENSE HOLDER WITH A CONCEALED HANDGUN". That's what it will say in the charges and a violation of 30.06 CAN NOT be a violation of 30.05, by the included affirmative defense.

You're fear mongering by calling 06 and 07 "Criminal Trespass". There is no other reason to use that term in relation to those 2 laws.

Even non-attorneys know the caption (a/k/a title of a section is not the operative language. TPC §30.05, §30.06 and 30.07 contain "trespass" in the captions, but not in the operative language.

Chas.

Don't know what to tell you, I got all this from an attorney so go figure.

TexasRifleman , You got it from an attorney, but you're not debating with someone who got it from an attorney; you're debating with an attorney in the first person. And you're not only debating with an attorney, you're debating with the attorney who helped to write the law, including most of its amendments. Are you SURE you're on solid ground?


I need to go get some popcorn......

Lena wrote:Why cause an issue?
Any sign posted is conveying the intent
The more it is pushed the worse it may become
Win the battle lose the war so to say

I saw one last night at Scotty p's in Firewheel Mall area, a statement was made, notice was given

Because "intent" does not have force of law, and with concealed carry and 30.06, an invalid sign was easy to walk past. I've done it a lot of times myself. I always figured that if the business owner did not care enough to post a valid sign, I didn't care enough to pay attention to it. And if in the very unlikely event that my concealed status was revealed, I would happily leave upon receiving effective notice and go spend my $$ elsewhere.

But open carry and 30.07 are a different proposition. Sure, you can open carry past an invalid sign, but it is almost certain that you'll be quickly spotted and given effective verbal notice and forced to leave........whereas if you have been carrying concealed, it would have never been a problem.

My church posted invalid 30.07 signs last week, which I knew were going to be posted, but only saw for the first time yesterday. The church has been very friendly to concealed carry all along, and remains so even now, but the leadership's concern is that open carrying in the church might scare off newcomers, and our goal is to be as welcoming as we can. I have heard current members say that if OC isn't banned at our church, they will quit the congregation and go find another church..........not exactly a positive result. What a lot of people seem to lose sight of is that God's mission and purpose is bigger than our rights and purposes......even if they are God-given or God-directed.

I am glad the open carry law passed; but I obeyed the invalid 30.07 signs at church yesterday for several reasons:

1. I agree with the church's desire to be welcoming to ALL people, including those that are freaked out by an open display of firearms;
2. It does not affect my right to carry at church, since I personally prefer concealed carry for myself; and
3. As a member of the worship team, I spend a lot of time on stage and I don't want my openly carried handgun to be a distraction to worshippers, who ought to be focused on Christ and not on my gun or me.

My church has a security team made up of off-duty LEOs who carry concealed and wear specific blue polo shirts identifying them as part of the security team. (We also have a medical response team made up of Drs, RNs, and EMS people, wearing specific red polo shirts identifying them as medical first responders.) Members from both teams are at each service. I am friends with a number of them, including an LEO I spoke with yesterday who told me that the signs were not compliant (I hadn't seen them yet). But he also said that the leadership was aware that they are not compliant and will be rectifying that. Pending the new signs being put up, if a security person spots an open carrier inside the building, he/she will be given effective verbal notice that we do not allow open carry, invite them to cover the gun up and stay, or to please secure it in their car and come back in......but they can't stay with it in the open. AFTER the new valid signs go up, staff has been instructed to simply call the police when they see someone open carry past the compliant signs, because it is assumed at that point that the person is a law-breaker.......with or without a license......and that is the proper province of law enforcement to deal with.

I agree that walking past an improperly formatted 30.07 sign while open-carrying is just begging for trouble, and it probably invites more criticism of licensed carry while being a bad ambassador for lawful carrying of a handgun...........BUT, it isn't against the law. Lots of things are not against the law..... being drunk in your own home, trying to pet the lions in Africa, unprotected sex with a one-night-hookup you met in a bar, skinny-dipping in the middle of a school of jellyfish, mixing beer in large volumes with your legally-prescribed opioid pain-killers...... and about a million other combinations I can think of that are not illegal...... but the one thing they all have in common is a profound lack of wisdom.

Walking past an invalid 30.07 sign while open-carrying is not illegal, but it is as profoundly unwise as any of those other things. One of the things we have an excess of in the gun world is pride. I am not talking about justifiable pride in one's accomplishments or skills, or in the quality of one's children or spouse. I am talking about the pig-headed kind that doesn't know when discretion is the better part of valor - the kind of pride that shoots itself in the foot. Repeatedly. The kind of pride that blinds one to wisdom. Wisdom cannot exist in an absence of humility, and humility cannot exist in the presence of that pig-headed kind of pride.

In another thread HERE, we have a forum member who OC'd past an invalid 30.07 sign, had the cops called on him, was given effective verbal notice by the police, left, and threatened to go back in a few days and repeat his performance, despite having received effective notice. Further down in the thread, with an inflated sense of self-righteousness, he gave us all an "I'll show YOU" performance and threatened to YouTube his violation of having received effective notice. It was kind of a "hey, ya'll, watch this" sort of moment - in which any sentient being has to be thinking "THIS isn't going to turn out well", but feels compelled to watch the train wreck happen. And this from a fellow that in most of his previous posts was STRONGLY anti-open carry. One can't help but wonder it isn't his deliberate goal to sabotage open carry with his antics. He couldn't have planned it any better if it were.

As Charles Cotton reminded us in another thread, I hope that all who choose to open carry remember that they are - whether or not they want to - acting as ambassadors for the 2nd Amendment. The future of gun rights depends on it. When people forget that, or refuse to accept the mantle, they are acting against the best interests of furthering 2nd Amendment rights. Like it or not, our public behavior is what will color everyone else's perceptions of the gun-rights community, AND whether or not they will cooperate with further expansions of our rights.

There is no room for doltish behavior in that arena. I will repeat for the umpty-umpth time that I favor the right to open carry, even if I choose not to practice it myself most of the time. It cheeses me off when doltish behavior by a few tarnishes the reputation of the rest of us, and when that doltish behavior threatens to snuff out open carry while it is still in its infancy in Texas.

Good gracious......... it is NOT that hard to understand.