TexasCHLforum.com

Yesterday I was walking our two dogs on our rural land, and it took us alongside a fence going by a US highway, where my gun in an OWB was in plain view to anyone who was driving past. That got me to wondering, is there any restriction on open carry when its on your property, but clearly exposed to the general public, on nearby public property? I guess a more extreme example would be in an urban/suburban residential area; could you open carry as long as you were standing in your front yard, even though you were right next to the curb, by the street? Taking it even further, what about carrying it around in your hand? Not pointing it at anybody, of course.

It seems like it would be OK, but I'm just guessing. Now that I think about it, if you carry a weapon (without a CHL) in your car, that's your private property and space, yet you're required to have it concealed from casual passers-by. Would the same idea apply to your front yard?

...PC46.02 (a)(1)...


...as to carrying it around in your hand...common sense would dictate that that might alarm folks and could be construed as "disturbing the peace"...it's not something a reasonable person would do unless he were about to shoot it...different from a long gun...where common sense would tell us that you WEREN'T disturbing the peace carrying it holstered or even in your belt...where a reasonable person wouldn't think you were an immediate threat...

1. You don't need a CHL to carry on your own property.
2. The 46.035 requirement to conceal only applies when carrying under the authority of your CHL.
3. ?
4. Profit!

I, as a non-LEO/non-lawyer kind of a guy, would think that unless you were doing so "in a manner calculated to alarm", then as long as you are on your property, it SHOULD be okay. That being said, depending on where you are at (country, city, etc.), it could be a case of "you can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride". On my future spread in the boondocks, I will carry how I feel I need to...living in the suburbs, I will simply take the precaution of covering it up.

Oliver Kloezov wrote:Common sense says that shotguns are more deadly than handguns.

What makes you say that? I don't see that as true at all.

Oliver Kloezov wrote:

Keith B wrote:

Oliver Kloezov wrote:Common sense says that shotguns are more deadly than handguns.

What makes you say that? I don't see that as true at all.

I don't want to get shot by anything but I think a 12ga is more powerful than a 9mm or even a 45. It makes a bigger wound and is more deadly especially with slugs or buckshot.

I would agree you potentially would have a large surface wound from a close range shot of buckshot or even #4 out of a shotgun. However, the penetration of a shotgun will normally not be as deep as a .45 or 9mm, so the projectiles may not hit vital organs.

Bottom line, it all weighs on many factors: shot placement, projectile type, clothing to penetrate, etc. etc., so generalizing a shotgun would be more deadly than a handgun is not an accurate statement.

Is it just me, or there a couple of replies that don't quite seem to fit?

Keith B wrote:

Oliver Kloezov wrote:

Keith B wrote:

Oliver Kloezov wrote:Common sense says that shotguns are more deadly than handguns.

What makes you say that? I don't see that as true at all.

I don't want to get shot by anything but I think a 12ga is more powerful than a 9mm or even a 45. It makes a bigger wound and is more deadly especially with slugs or buckshot.

I would agree you potentially would have a large surface wound from a close range shot of buckshot or even #4 out of a shotgun. However, the penetration of a shotgun will normally not be as deep as a .45 or 9mm, so the projectiles may not hit vital organs.

Bottom line, it all weighs on many factors: shot placement, projectile type, clothing to penetrate, etc. etc., so generalizing a shotgun would be more deadly than a handgun is not an accurate statement.

...While carrying openly on your property, close to or bordering public property.

There, it fits

On rural property I wouldn't sweat it. I would try to conceal the gun a little if I was right next to a road, ie carry in hand away from road. In suburbs I would definitely keep it concealed. It would just be easier than dealing with the drama. On the shotgun issue, I think back to when I was first starting to deer hunt. A load of buckshot killed quite a few deer at ranges I would be lucky to achieve with my handgun. Of course, that was with a properly choked 30" barrel.

speedsix wrote:...common sense would dictate that that might alarm folks and could be construed as "disturbing the peace"...it's not something a reasonable person would do unless he were about to shoot it...

I disagree. Common sense should be based on what is legal and normal. This is Texas, therefore common sense would dictate that someone open carrying on their own property is doing what is legal and proper and there is no reason to panic.

When we first moved into this house, I went out to my driveway to get something out of my car, and my new next door neighbor's son, who is a LEO in a different city, observed that I was carrying. This worthy didn't bother to ask me about it, but his mother came over and asked me if I was a LEO. I told her that I was not, but that it was legal for me to carry open on my property, and she left. Never heard another word.

...you pulled the quoted words out of context. which change the meaning considerably...and then argued your disagreement as if I'd said something else...read my post together and you'll get what I really said...

... your example says that you were "carrying" while going out to your car, NOT walking around your property carrying a handgun in your hand near the fence by a highway or in your yard out by the curb for an extended period of time...which is what the quoted words and the paragraph around them referred to...may I correctly assume that you were carrying in a holster or at least stuck in your belt, and not in your hand, when the neighbor came over to inquire?

...I was not addressing "open carrying" on his property...with that paragraph...I answered that question, and the second, with my first part...

The law is the law whether or not i makes sense.

...46.02(a)(1) is that cut and dried...no mistake or misunderstanding...

...the part that could be interpreted several ways is the carrying it around in your hand near a public highway or street for awhile...and that's where the common sense comes in...and what would be considered reasonable...because it would be reasonable for an LEO to say that he was displaying the handgun in a manner calculated to alarm the public...and, though he was on his private property...the effect would be realized in a public place...and it would not be unreasonable for a judge or jury to find him guilty on the charge from 42.01(a)(8), while he was NOT guilty of 46.02(a)(1)...

...so the law does make sense...with portions open for wiggle room so that the customer can get a fair shake if he's seen with a gun in his hand but proven clearly NOT to have been doing something to alarm the people who see him...and that can be completely prevented by carrying the handgun in a holster or in the belt, so that nobody can "feel alarmed"...normally, that's what we do with handguns...only carrying them in our hands when using them is imminent...

speedsix wrote:...you pulled the quoted words out of context. which change the meaning considerably...and then argued your disagreement as if I'd said something else...read my post together and you'll get what I really said...

... your example says that you were "carrying" while going out to your car, NOT walking around your property carrying a handgun in your hand near the fence by a highway or in your yard out by the curb for an extended period of time...which is what the quoted words and the paragraph around them referred to...may I correctly assume that you were carrying in a holster or at least stuck in your belt, and not in your hand, when the neighbor came over to inquire?

...I was not addressing "open carrying" on his property...with that paragraph...I answered that question, and the second, with my first part...

Your elipses are improperly applied, then, and I do not understand your statement and question.

But, since open carry is legal on one's own property, common sense still dictates that, even carried in the hand, it's open carry, legal in Texas, and whoever notices should just get over it.

Maybe I'm wrong here, but it seems that jimlongley and speedsix are arguing "beating the rap" vs. "beating the ride"...as in: "you can beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride". Just my two cents.