Illegally Carrying but have CHL

GlockandLoad · #1

I am about to go take the course and get my CHL. One thing that has been on my mind is this. And before I continue, I have every intention of following the rules. BUT, crazy things can happen. 30.06 signs can be missed and so on and so on.

So I am in a place, with my concealed weapon and I am not supposed to have my concealed weapon on me in this location. I'll use a bar for example. I am in a bar. As we all know, this is a place we are NOT allowed to take a firearm. So I am in this bar, eating some cheese fries with my wife, and all of a sudden I hear BANG BANG BANG and the place goes nuts. Someone has just walked in and started shooting - Luby's style. Those of us from TX know exactly what that means. So I draw my weapon and fire, killing the BG who was shooting up the place. What kind of legal recourse would I be looking at here? I can legally carry a firearm, but I have it in a location that is illegal for me to carry, and the homicide I just committed was 100% justified?

Thanks!

jbirds1210 · #2

Outback Steakhouse makes a mean cheese fry

and you don't have to worry about breaking the law.

LedJedi · #3

i'm sure more educated folks I will respond in full but my initial impression is...

I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6 any day of the week.

seamusTX · #4

In general, if you are justified in defending yourself, any technical violations that you committed are excused. We saw this when it was illegal for a non-CHL holder to have a handgun in a car, and people defended themselves.

This is true for Texas and other states that have a similar political and legal climate. It definitely is not true for parts of Illinois and northeastern states.

I don't worry much about this kind of thing. Very few CHL holders find themselves in circumstances where they need to draw their weapon.

- Jim

Mithras61 · #5

I believe that you have a defense of necessity in this situation.

nitrogen · #6

Well, carrying in a prohibited place is a 3rd degree felony, so I wouldn't do it, period. You can lose your rights to own guns or have a chl for life, so I totally wouldn't risk it.

Having said that, I'll play landshark (sorry Chaz

) for a second.

Nitrogen Playing Lawyer wrote: "Your honor; We know that with the recent change in the law that shootings of this nature usually get no billed by the grand jury. However, we have interesting circumstances here. The accused was in a place where he was legally prohibited from carrying a handgun, even though he had a legal CHL. Also, when tested by breathalyzer, he blew a .04. The law clearly states that you cannot carry a handgun while you are intoxicated, and I believe the accused WAS intoxicated. I think these circumstances warrant the grand jury to return an indictment. "

Heck, you also might get a cool DA that won't even bring the UCW charge up. Would you want to bet your future firearm rights on one person?

Could that happen? Possibly. One of the real legal eagles might chime in and take me to task here, but I sure as heck wouldn't risk a 3rd degree felony.

Personally, I avoid places where I am not allowed to carry. I have been to a 51% place about twice since I've been in Texas (in 2005) and the only place I visit at all regurlarly is a school as thats where my wife works. I feel reasonably safe there because they have a SRO who'se there most of the time, and the employees there are pretty on the ball about things.

EDIT: Seeing the responses above me while I was posting make me realise I might be in the minority here. I am used to living in parts of California, where the police and the DA do whatever they can to "get you" if they have one shred of reason to believe they can. I realise usually it's different here, but it's hard to get out of that mindset.

RPBrown · #7

jbirds1210 wrote:Outback Steakhouse makes a mean cheese fry and you don't have to worry about breaking the law.

+1 to that

razoraggie · #8

Agreed with the above last 2.

Even mentioning that you may carry into an establishment that is either 30.06 posted or stricktly prohibited is not wise. Knowingly doing so is even worse. There are a few things in life when it may be better to ask for forgiveness instead of permission, but I do not believe that anything pertaining to a CHL is one of those things in life. Sure, you may get away with it, but why risk it to begin with? Are you justified in using deadly force? A judge and jury may have to decide that and if you get a nasty lanshark that wants to take it further...you may lose your CHL for a conviction of unlawful carry. I welcome you to the forum, but the best advice myslef and anyoine else in here can give you is to obey the law.

seamusTX · #9

Carrying in a bar while drinking is about the worst-case scenario. You know it's a bar, and you're supposed to know that you're not allowed to carry there.

The kind of scenario where you might escape prosecution is carrying outdoors where a school-sponsored event was going on, or not noticing a 30.06 sign.

Lawyers like the phrase "totality of the circumstances." If you could articulate a good reason for carrying, you would be more likely to get away with it. For example, many sports venues are in dangerous neighborhoods and people taking public transportation to the event are at risk.

- Jim

Xander · #10

Well, I agree with the posters above that it's unwise to carry in an establishment where you know it isn't legal, but I still think it's an interesting question, particularly in the case where you're carrying unintentionally. It's entirely possible, for instance, that one could carry in a location that's properly posted under 30.06, but due to distraction or any of a number of other reasons, simply miss the posting.

seamusTX · #11

Xander wrote:It's entirely possible, for instance, that one could carry in a location that's properly posted under 30.06, but due to distraction or any of a number of other reasons, simply miss the posting.

It's especially possible because the law does not require posting at the entrance, or at every entrance. Many malls have this problem.

- Jim

propellerhead · #12

The issue of the shooting being justified is a separate issue from the UCW by a CHL.

KBCraig · #13

propellerhead wrote:The issue of the shooting being justified is a separate issue from the UCW by a CHL.

Exactly. You can be 100% golden on the shooting, yet be guilty of UCW.

I've actually seen this with "prohibited persons": no-billed on the shooting, but prosecuted (and convicted) for being a felon in possession of a firearm.

seamusTX · #14

KBCraig wrote:I've actually seen this with "prohibited persons": no-billed on the shooting, but prosecuted (and convicted) for being a felon in possession of a firearm.

The issue of felon in possession seems a lot different from an otherwise honest citizen being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

- Jim

nitrogen · #15

seamusTX wrote:
KBCraig wrote:I've actually seen this with "prohibited persons": no-billed on the shooting, but prosecuted (and convicted) for being a felon in possession of a firearm.
The issue of felon in possession seems a lot different from an otherwise honest citizen being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

- Jim

Not according to the law, it's a felony either way.