HB 1298 and 1299

[Charles L. Cotton]

PC Sec. 46.03(a)(1) [emphasis added]:

Sec. 46.03. PLACES WEAPONS PROHIBITED. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly possesses or goes with a firearm, illegal knife, club, or prohibited weapon listed in Section 46.05(a):

(1) on the physical premises of a school or educational institution, any grounds or building on which an activity sponsored by a school or educational institution is being conducted, or a passenger transportation vehicle of a school or educational institution, whether the school or educational institution is public or private, unless pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the institution;

The wording of the law is ambiguous, to say the least. Charles has made the case that, due to context, this law could not be enforced against someone on non-school property; however, that is not what DPS is currently teaching new instructors, and in turn, that is not what a lot of new instructors are teaching their students. Equally troubling is the fact that the managers of certain public venues have used this law as an excuse to improperly post 30.06 signs on the premises.

PC Sec. 46.03(a)(1) is a poorly worded law that causes unneeded confusion, and it needs to be clarified.

When I took the CHL instructor course and when we had to renew with DPS in Austin, we were never told that "activity grounds" included property not owned by the school. There wasn't even a hint that this was the case.

You say I make a case "based upon context;" no, I stated Texas law. One cannot "authorize" another person to carry firearms on property they don't control. That's not based upon context, it's the law. You must have "authority" to "authorize." There's nothing ambiguous about that. The express language of §46.03(a)(1) reads ". . . unless pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the institution." The Code doesn't read "waives this prohibition," it uses the term "authorize" and that has legal significance.

[Edited to remove comments about specific bill(s).]

As I've said before, because of growing number of erroneous statements about the scope of "activity grounds," I believe the language should be clarified so that it is even more clear.

Chas.

[RX8er]

As I've said before, because of growing number of erroneous statements about the scope of "activity grounds," I believe the language should be clarified so that it is even more clear.

Chas.

[TxSheepdog]

Sorry if this post is too old to reply to or ask a question about, but it fits my situation. My daughters school is taking the kids to the San Antonio zoo for a field trip. My wife an I are going as chaperones. After reading the above section of the law, I am not allowed to carry due to the trip being a school function?

[JKTex]

Sorry if this post is too old to reply to or ask a question about, but it fits my situation. My daughters school is taking the kids to the San Antonio zoo for a field trip. My wife an I are going as chaperones. After reading the above section of the law, I am not allowed to carry due to the trip being a school function?

Exactly. That shouldn't even be a question by a CHL holder, but better yet, "that shouldn't have to be a question by a CHL holder". If you get my drift.

[C-dub]

I'm digging it up again because now it is pertinent to me. I will be chaperoning my daughter's class on a field trip. I do not have permission to carry, but there's a twist. The kids and teachers will be traveling on a bus and the parents/chaperones must drive our own vehicles. What I am unclear about is if I can still take my gun with me in my vehicle as long as it remains in the vehicle or not. Or is that still a violation?

[MeMelYup]

You are okay. It is your vehicle, not school property. If it is rented by the school then it is school property. If it is your vehicle then it is not subject to school regulation.

[C-dub]

I figured, but wanted to double check just in case I remembered incorrectly.

Now, I wonder if it makes a difference if the field trip is a three day/two night trip? I wonder if I would be in violation if one of the kids were hurt and needed to be taken to a hospital to be checked out and I were the one taking the child in my vehicle? I'm going to take it, but I wonder if I need to be aware of little trouble spots like this. It is kind of a wilderness field trip and we'll be a couple miles from "civilization" and I would take my rifle if I had a decent way to secure it away, but I don't and the handgun will lock neatly away under the seat.