Search found 3 matches

by speedsix
Mon Jul 25, 2011 9:30 pm
Forum: 2011 Texas Legislative Session
Topic: Proof that SB321 is not limited to CHL's
Replies: 20
Views: 22352

Re: Proof that SB321 is not limited to CHL's

tacticool wrote:
txsmokeater wrote:I work for one of those companies. I know in the past law if you passed through a gate access point or guarded enterance, I could not leave a gun in my vehicle. I do park in a lot at my site; we don't actually drive into the plant. Does SB321 allow me now to keep it in my vehicle? I'm not a lawyer by any means and I want to make sure I understand all the legal talk. :bigear:
Is the parking lot open to the public? Is it inside of a secured and restricted area that's monitored?

...the plant is inside...the parking lot/garage/etc must be OUTSIDE the secured/restricted/monitored area...it's kinda confoosin!!!
by speedsix
Mon Jul 25, 2011 9:25 pm
Forum: 2011 Texas Legislative Session
Topic: Proof that SB321 is not limited to CHL's
Replies: 20
Views: 22352

Re: Proof that SB321 is not limited to CHL's

...OK, thanks for that...now I read it that it is the "secured and restricted area" that must meet the three criteria...that's why the "contains the physical plant"...non-CHL do not have the right to have it on company property at all.....if the "secured and restricted area" doesn't meet the three criteria...then even a CHL can't leave his car in company-owned property with a gun in it...I thought it was the parking area that had to meet them...I only had to read it 4 times to get it chewed... ;-)
...the parking lot must be OUTSIDE the area that's secured and restricted and meets the three criteria...
by speedsix
Mon Jul 25, 2011 9:08 pm
Forum: 2011 Texas Legislative Session
Topic: Proof that SB321 is not limited to CHL's
Replies: 20
Views: 22352

Re: Proof that SB321 is not limited to CHL's

...by "contains the physical plant"...what do they mean???

Return to “Proof that SB321 is not limited to CHL's”