A few questions about LEOs and CHL

[jazr45acp]

Are LEOs allowed to carry while off-duty without a CHL? Are they allowed to carry in a church with a CHL, without having to ask permission? I think I know the answer, but would like to be sure. Thanks for the wealth of info. guys. Later.

P.S.
After serving for 8.5yrs as an Environmental Analyst(Biochemist) I'm seriously considering a career change to.........you guessed it, LE. Any words of advise for someone considering a career in LE? By the way, my questions above are in no way related to my contemplation of career changes. Thanks again.

[shaggydog]

Are they allowed to carry in a church with a CHL, without having to ask permission?

Any CHL holder may carry in a church unless the church is posted 30.06.

[G.C.Montgomery]

Depends on state and local statutes as well as department regulations. Texas law specifically allows commissioned peace-officers to carry on or about their person. CHL laws do not apply. But, I know for a fact that some constable's offices tell their reserve and off-duty officers/deputies NOT to carry except in uniform and/or on official business. This was a contributiing factor to the death of one local constable in Harris County. HPD on the otherhand, specifically requires officers to carry off-duty but the firearm must remain concealed unless the officer is in uniform.

[Lykoi]

tcleose allows them to carry without having to take the CHL course... that tcleose costs a "tiny" bit more than our CHLs

[CHL/LEO]

Depends upon their department's policy. While our department no longer requires us to carry off-duty we can carry if we so desire. Some departments still require their officer to carry off-duty at all times. Personally, I would never work for a department that DID NOT allow their officers to carry off-duty.

Now that being said, if an establishment decides to not allow an armed off-duty officer into their business they can do so. The House of Blues opened in Dallas recently and they check everyone for weapons that goes into their business. LEOs are always turned away - they make it perfectly clear that they want no weapons on their premises - CHL or LEO. That's their prerogative and we respect that. We have thus black balled their business. To my knowledge no LEOs from any agency will ever step foot in there due to their attitude, and that's our prerogative.

Whether it be a business, church, or whatever, if someone doesn't want to allow me to protect myself or my family, then I'll go somewhere that does.

Just my 2¢s worth...

[txinvestigator]

Texas Penal Code
§ 46.02. Unlawful Carrying Weapons.

(a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun, illegal knife, or club if the person is not:
(1) on the person's own premises or premises under the person's control; or
(2) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle that is owned by the person or under the person's control.

§ 46.03. Places Weapons Prohibited.

Statute text
(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;
(2) on the premises of a polling place on the day of an election or while early voting is in progress;
(3) on the premises of any government court or offices utilized by the court, unless pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the court;
(4) on the premises of a racetrack;
(5) in or into a secured area of an airport; or
(6) within 1,000 feet of premises the location of which is designated by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice as a place of execution under Article 43.19, Code of Criminal Procedure, on a day that a sentence of death is set to be imposed on the designated premises and the person received notice that:
(A) going within 1,000 feet of the premises with a weapon listed under this subsection was prohibited; or
(B) possessing a weapon listed under this subsection within 1,000 feet of the premises was prohibited.


§ 46.15. Nonapplicability.


(a) Sections 46.02 and 46.03 do not apply to:
(1) peace officers or special investigators under Article 2.122, Code of Criminal Procedure, and neither section prohibits a peace officer or special investigator from carrying a weapon in this state, including in an establishment in this state serving the public, regardless of whether the peace officer or special investigator is engaged in the actual discharge of the officer's or investigator's duties while carrying the weapon;



§ 30.05. Criminal Trespass.


(a) A person commits an offense if he enters or remains on or in property, including an aircraft or other vehicle, of another without effective consent or he enters or remains in a building of another without effective consent and he:
(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or
(2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.


i) This section does not apply if:
(1) the basis on which entry on the property or land or in the building was forbidden is that entry with a handgun or other weapon was forbidden; and
(2) the actor at the time of the offense was a peace officer, including a commissioned peace officer of a recognized state, or a special investigator under Article 2.122, Code of Criminal Procedure, regardless of whether the peace officer or special investigator was engaged in the actual discharge of an official duty while carrying the weapon.

Department policies can restrict carry.

And House of Blues cannot legally keep armed off duty officers out based soley on the officers being armed, but I agree that CHL/LEO's guys not pushing it is very wise.

[hoss4570]

Depends upon their department's policy. While our department no longer requires us to carry off-duty we can carry if we so desire. Some departments still require their officer to carry off-duty at all times. Personally, I would never work for a department that DID NOT allow their officers to carry off-duty.

Now that being said, if an establishment decides to not allow an armed off-duty officer into their business they can do so. The House of Blues opened in Dallas recently and they check everyone for weapons that goes into their business. LEOs are always turned away - they make it perfectly clear that they want no weapons on their premises - CHL or LEO. That's their prerogative and we respect that. We have thus black balled their business. To my knowledge no LEOs from any agency will ever step foot in there due to their attitude, and that's our prerogative.

Whether it be a business, church, or whatever, if someone doesn't want to allow my to protect myself or my family, then I'll go somewhere that does.

Just my 2¢s worth...

I'm the same way. I quit Logans Road House because they won't allow me to carry. Not many places here in Odessa that fly the 30.06 sign. Too many gun lovers here.

[KBCraig]

A federal law --"LEOSA", the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004-- states that qualified law enforcement officers may carry without regard to state laws.

That doesn't have any effect on employer policies, though. An officer who violates his agency's policy on off-duty carry can be disciplined, even if there's no crime.

[Odin]

...House of Blues cannot legally keep armed off duty officers out based soley on the officers being armed...

Why not?

[Kalrog]

...House of Blues cannot legally keep armed off duty officers out based soley on the officers being armed...

Why not?

See the highlighted section section in the previous post from TXI.

[Odin]

...House of Blues cannot legally keep armed off duty officers out based soley on the officers being armed...

Why not?

See the highlighted section section in the previous post from TXI.

I did. It says that the off duty officer cannot be charged with a crime for carrying a weapon in a place that prohibits the carrying of weapons.

But nowhere does that section take away a private business owner's right to refuse service to anyone they choose to refuse service to.

I am aware of no legal reason that the HOB cannot refuse service to armed off duty police officers, men wearing hats, short-haired women, or people wearing red shirts, if they so choose.

[txinvestigator]

...House of Blues cannot legally keep armed off duty officers out based soley on the officers being armed...

Why not?

See the highlighted section section in the previous post from TXI.

I did. It says that the off duty officer cannot be charged with a crime for carrying a weapon in a place that prohibits the carrying of weapons.

But nowhere does that section take away a private business owner's right to refuse service to anyone they choose to refuse service to.

I am aware of no legal reason that the HOB cannot refuse service to armed off duty police officers, men wearing hats, short-haired women, or people wearing red shirts, if they so choose.

What is HOB going to do if a off duty tells them he is going in and going to carry?

BTW Odin, where ya been?

[Odin]

I haven't been to HOB and have no idea what they would do, but I do know of an officer who went there off duty and was denied entry after being wanded with a hand held metal detector. That officer left.

If the off duty officer had refused to leave based on the door person's refusal to admit, I guess the management could ask them to leave and then call the police and file a CT complaint. The management could simply tell the responding officers that they asked the off duty officer to leave the premises and the off duty officer was refusing to leave.

A private business owner is not required to tell the police, and the police are not required to ask a private business owner, why a patron is being asked to leave the premises of a private business, only that the management wants the patron gone and the patron refuses. By nature of refusing to leave a private business when requested a person is creating a disturbance if their refusal to leave requires the police to be called.

I been around, busy mostly.

[txinvestigator]

I
If the off duty officer had refused to leave based on the door person's refusal to admit, I guess the management could ask them to leave and then call the police and file a CT complaint. The management could simply tell the responding officers that they asked the off duty officer to leave the premises and the off duty officer was refusing to leave.

A private business owner is not required to tell the police, and the police are not required to ask a private business owner, why a patron is being asked to leave the premises of a private business, only that the management wants the patron gone and the patron refuses. By nature of refusing to leave a private business when requested a person is creating a disturbance if their refusal to leave requires the police to be called.

I been around, busy mostly.

So the officer tells the on duty guys that they simply won't let him in because of his gun, and the police tell the owner that he cannot prohibit the off duty for that reason. ;)

Creating a distrubance? so what, Texas has no disturbance laws. we have disorderly conduct, but is has very specific languange. Its a nice stretch, but it don't reach.

The bottom line is the cop would be smart to leave, but he does not have to if the reason for his refused entry is his possession of a gun.

[shaggydog]

I
If the off duty officer had refused to leave based on the door person's refusal to admit, I guess the management could ask them to leave and then call the police and file a CT complaint. The management could simply tell the responding officers that they asked the off duty officer to leave the premises and the off duty officer was refusing to leave.

A private business owner is not required to tell the police, and the police are not required to ask a private business owner, why a patron is being asked to leave the premises of a private business, only that the management wants the patron gone and the patron refuses. By nature of refusing to leave a private business when requested a person is creating a disturbance if their refusal to leave requires the police to be called.

I been around, busy mostly.

So the officer tells the on duty guys that they simply won't let him in because of his gun, and the police tell the owner that he cannot prohibit the off duty for that reason. ;)

Creating a distrubance? so what, Texas has no disturbance laws. we have disorderly conduct, but is has very specific languange. Its a nice stretch, but it don't reach.

The bottom line is the cop would be smart to leave, but he does not have to if the reason for his refused entry is his possession of a gun.

So new we have a "mexican stand-off".

Cop won't leave.

Owners won't let him in.

Cops called to scene apparently have no basis for acting.

Everybody gets to stand around looking at everybody else.