HB1911 Com Substitute

[locke_n_load]

Apparently the TABC blue sign elimination is going to be one final amendment, per Holcomb on facebook. No other changes till the floor.

Whoops, section 18 does that. The eligibility for carrying unlicensed is going to changed via amendment: don't have to meet all the license holder criteria (class A/B misdemeanors, child support, etc.).

[ScottDLS]

I see now where doesn't eliminate 46.03/35 for LTC but it still eliminates 30.06/7 enforceability by omission.

[locke_n_load]

46.15(a) is for police, and the only changes are that they are now exempt from 46.035.
46.15(b) applies to license holders, and it adds authorized unlicensed carriers to people exempt from 46.02 as well.

[Papa_Tiger]

I didn't read anything about eliminating 30.06/30.07 for license holders, however I do see this gem:

SECTION 17. Sections 46.15(a) and (b), Penal Code, are
amended to read as follows:
(a) Sections 46.02, [and] 46.03, and 46.035 do not apply to:

[(A)] a license holder [issued] under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, [to carry a handgun;] and is
carrying
[(B)] a handgun:
(A) [(i)] in a concealed manner; or
(B) [(ii)] in a [shoulder or belt] holster;
(7) is at least 21 years of age and:
(A) has not been convicted of a felony;
(B) is fully qualified under applicable federal
law to purchase and possess a handgun;
(C) meets the requirements under Sections
411.172(a)(1)-(13), Government Code;
(D) is not a member of a criminal street gang, as
defined by Section 71.01; and
(E) is carrying a handgun:
(i) in a concealed manner; or
(ii) in a holster;

Did we just get some of HB 560 added into HB 1911?

First. The bill would appear to eliminate the effect of 30.06/7 by not updating them to include people not carrying UNDER AUTHORITY of LTC.

Second: The above is INDEED helpful for LTC, if I am reading it the same as you.

You are both missing that 46.15(a) that exempts certain people from 46.02, 46.03 and 46.035 only applies to the people listed in section 46.15(a). General LTC holders are not listed. Everyone in 46.15(a) is a government employee:
1) on or off duty peace officers or special investigators
2) Parole officers
3) community supervisioin and corrections department officers
4) active judicial officers
5) various honorably retired peace officers and investigators
6) various district and county attorneys with LTCs
7) various assistant district and county attorneys with LTCs
8) certain bailiffs with LTCs in certain situations
9) certain juvenile probation officers

46.15(b) only exempts LTCs and authorized persons from 46.02 and provides the definition of an "Authorized person".

It is true that 30.06 and 30.07 would only apply to LTC holders, but per AG Morales, any gunbuster sign, no matter the size or location would prohibit entry by an unlicensed person. So if the location doesn't have a gun buster sign anywhere, but they do have 30.06 and 30.07, an argument could be made that you were carrying as an otherwise authorized person rather than an LTC holder, but honestly I don't think it would fly with a judge or jury (provided it went to a trial for a class C). Most of the 30.06 and 30.07 signs I've seen have had the gun buster pictogram somewhere on them.

[ScottDLS]

It is true that 30.06 and 30.07 would only apply to LTC holders, but per AG Morales, any gunbuster sign, no matter the size or location would prohibit entry by an unlicensed person. So if the location doesn't have a gun buster sign anywhere, but they do have 30.06 and 30.07, an argument could be made that you were carrying as an otherwise authorized person rather than an LTC holder, but honestly I don't think it would fly with a judge or jury (provided it went to a trial for a class C). Most of the 30.06 and 30.07 signs I've seen have had the gun buster pictogram somewhere on them.

A lot of 30.06/7 signs I've seen don't. And in my argument if they do have a 30.05 effective "notice", you are exempt from it if you're a license holder and you have your license on you.

But in the argument in my Municipal Court trial (if I have one) I will ask whether a police officer with a LTC is exempt from 30.06/7, and if so why? Because they are not carrying "under the authority of their LTC". Nor am I, since I don't need it. Or theoretically I could give up my LTC to be able to carry past 06/07. And all cops with LTC would want to get rid of it too.

[ninjabread]

I take everything back, this is still a worthless bill

[TexasJohnBoy]

Nevermind.

[parabelum]

Just think how great and forthcoming this will be for LEO's. Oh boy. This is a sign makers and lawyer's paradise.

Fingers crossed the final edict will be easier to comprehend, you know, for us simpletons out here.

[AJSully421]

I want a 30.08 and 30.09 for unlicensed CC and OC, and change one word in .06 and .07, making every current sign obsolete and invalid.

[ScottDLS]

I want a 30.08 and 30.09 for unlicensed CC and OC, and change one word in .06 and .07, making every current sign obsolete and invalid.

The most recent language posted effectively renders 30.06/7 unenforceable. I have discussed why above...but here's the short version:

30.06/7 only apply to carrying "under the authority of your LTC". If you can carry without a license then you aren't carrying "under the authority" of your LTC. Otherwise a cop with LTC can never carry past 30.06/7.

30.05 has an exemption for people who are physically in possession of a LTC, even if they aren't carrying under it's authority....so a gunbuster doesn't work for license holders either.

[AJSully421]

I want a 30.08 and 30.09 for unlicensed CC and OC, and change one word in .06 and .07, making every current sign obsolete and invalid.

The most recent language posted effectively renders 30.06/7 unenforceable. I have discussed why above...but here's the short version:

30.06/7 only apply to carrying "under the authority of your LTC". If you can carry without a license then you aren't carrying "under the authority" of your LTC. Otherwise a cop with LTC can never carry past 30.06/7.

30.05 has an exemption for people who are physically in possession of a LTC, even if they aren't carrying under it's authority....so a gunbuster doesn't work for license holders either.

Hey, I like that. It sounds good enough for me to pitch it to a jury on a Class C charge. Worst case is $200 if you lose.

[G.A. Heath]

I want a 30.08 and 30.09 for unlicensed CC and OC, and change one word in .06 and .07, making every current sign obsolete and invalid.

The most recent language posted effectively renders 30.06/7 unenforceable. I have discussed why above...but here's the short version:

30.06/7 only apply to carrying "under the authority of your LTC". If you can carry without a license then you aren't carrying "under the authority" of your LTC. Otherwise a cop with LTC can never carry past 30.06/7.

30.05 has an exemption for people who are physically in possession of a LTC, even if they aren't carrying under it's authority....so a gunbuster doesn't work for license holders either.

Hey, I like that. It sounds good enough for me to pitch it to a jury on a Class C charge. Worst case is $200 if you lose.

I would suspect that if you are carrying and have your license on you then you will be presumed to be carrying under the authority of your license. If you do not have your license on you then you will be presumed to be carrying under this bill should it be passed and signed into law. I would like to wait and see what Charles has to say on this issue considering that he is an attorney and knows more than a little about gun laws.

[ScottDLS]

I want a 30.08 and 30.09 for unlicensed CC and OC, and change one word in .06 and .07, making every current sign obsolete and invalid.

The most recent language posted effectively renders 30.06/7 unenforceable. I have discussed why above...but here's the short version:

30.06/7 only apply to carrying "under the authority of your LTC". If you can carry without a license then you aren't carrying "under the authority" of your LTC. Otherwise a cop with LTC can never carry past 30.06/7.

30.05 has an exemption for people who are physically in possession of a LTC, even if they aren't carrying under it's authority....so a gunbuster doesn't work for license holders either.

Hey, I like that. It sounds good enough for me to pitch it to a jury on a Class C charge. Worst case is $200 if you lose.

I'm 100% with you on this. If this bill passes with the language in the latest post, I don't really see how the 30.06/7 could still be enforceable. If I really wanted to bolster my argument I'd throw my license in the car before entering a 30.06 posted location. If I was discovered, which I never will be, and if I got the ticket, which is unlikely, and if I decided to fight the $200 ticket which I might to avoid the class C on my record and having to explain it to DoD in my next security background check...I think I'd win at trial.

Since I have a very clear and articulable argument that walking past a 30.06/7 is not illegal, I will have no compunction about ignoring all of the very few postings that I have seen at places I wish to enter.

[ScottDLS]

...
I would suspect that if you are carrying and have your license on you then you will be presumed to be carrying under the authority of your license. If you do not have your license on you then you will be presumed to be carrying under this bill should it be passed and signed into law. I would like to wait and see what Charles has to say on this issue considering that he is an attorney and knows more than a little about gun laws.

I see what you are saying, but what if I throw my license in the car before I walk in? Or what about a cop who also has a LTC. Does he have to have it off his person when he's in uniform to cross a 06/07?