Instructor Renewal School & 30.06

A meeting place for CHL instructors

Moderators: carlson1, Crossfire

User avatar

Topic author
Charles L. Cotton
Site Admin
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 17787
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
Location: Friendswood, TX
Contact:

Instructor Renewal School & 30.06

#1

Post by Charles L. Cotton »

It has been reported to me that DPS staff attorney, Ms. O'Shaw, recently stated in an Instructor Renewal School that public schools can post 30.06 signs on the parking lots and that they are enforceable on the parking lots and other grounds; i.e. not only in buildings.

Does anyone recall hearing this?

Chas.

Kalrog
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1886
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 10:11 am
Location: Leander, TX
Contact:

#2

Post by Kalrog »

Did he give a statutory basis for that opinion?
User avatar

Keith B
Moderator
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 18502
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:29 pm

Re: Instructor Renewal School & 30.06

#3

Post by Keith B »

Charles L. Cotton wrote:It has been reported to me that DPS staff attorney, Ms. O'Shaw, recently stated in an Instructor Renewal School that public schools can post 30.06 signs on the parking lots and that they are enforceable on the parking lots and other grounds; i.e. not only in buildings.

Does anyone recall hearing this?

Chas.
I would sure like to know. Plano ISD has 30.06 signs posted on their entrances to the lots and I don't want to be a test case.
Keith
Texas LTC Instructor, Missouri CCW Instructor, NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun Instructor and RSO, NRA Life Member

Psalm 82:3-4
User avatar

Keith B
Moderator
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 18502
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:29 pm

#4

Post by Keith B »

I found this on the web and couldn't find any reference in the forum. What does this mean to the posting of 30.06 signs on government property? IANAL, but in reading the summary, it sounds like Cornyn said they CAN post a 30.06 to prohibit entrance into government property. Has this been opinion been overturned?

http://www.oag.state.tx.us/opinions/op4 ... c-0325.htm
Keith
Texas LTC Instructor, Missouri CCW Instructor, NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun Instructor and RSO, NRA Life Member

Psalm 82:3-4

Renegade

#5

Post by Renegade »

Keith B wrote:I found this on the web and couldn't find any reference in the forum. What does this mean to the posting of 30.06 signs on government property? IANAL, but in reading the summary, it sounds like Cornyn said they CAN post a 30.06 to prohibit entrance into government property. Has this been opinion been overturned?

http://www.oag.state.tx.us/opinions/op4 ... c-0325.htm
That opinion would have been obsoleted by SB501, it was correct at the time it was written though.
User avatar

Keith B
Moderator
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 18502
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:29 pm

#6

Post by Keith B »

OK, thanks! :grin:
Keith
Texas LTC Instructor, Missouri CCW Instructor, NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun Instructor and RSO, NRA Life Member

Psalm 82:3-4

lrb111
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1551
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 9:48 pm
Location: Odessa

Re: Instructor Renewal School & 30.06

#7

Post by lrb111 »

Charles L. Cotton wrote:It has been reported to me that DPS staff attorney, Ms. O'Shaw, recently stated in an Instructor Renewal School that public schools can post 30.06 signs on the parking lots and that they are enforceable on the parking lots and other grounds; i.e. not only in buildings.

Does anyone recall hearing this?

Chas.
iirc, she said it and then corrected herself about two sentences later. (but don't take my memory as fact yet.)
She was actually in pretty good form this time. Despite a head cold. El Gato and I even agreed on that. :lol:
Ø resist

Take away the second first, and the first is gone in a second.

NRA Life Member, TSRA, chl instructor

extremist
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 709
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 7:14 pm
Location: Keller, TX

#8

Post by extremist »

Well, just having attended the class yesterday, Ms. O'Shaw did in fact state that if the school had a 30.06 sign in the parking lot, that it would have to be decided in court and recommended abiding by it. One gentleman in the audience tried to get her to confirm or refute that school property is not in fact owned by the "state" but rather by the school board. I've never heard of that one, but that's certainly interesting.

She also wouldn't say one way or the other about police stations that have a "no guns" sign posted in their public lobby. They have the right to post a sign on the nonpublic, secure portion of the law enforcement facility IF THEY PROVIDE A GUN LOCKER, under SB1709 which amended section 411.207. But they don't have the right or authority to post a generic "no guns allowed" sign at the public walk up window where you pay tickets and such. But she wouldn't say one way or the other.

Those legal folks are always wishy washy. :roll:

James
TX LTC Instructor, NRA Endowment Life Member, USPSA CRO
NRA Handgun/Rifle/Shotgun/Home Firearm Safety, Chief Range Safety Officer
User avatar

AEA
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 5110
Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 12:00 pm
Location: North Texas

#9

Post by AEA »

If the laws were written in "Black and White" there would be no need for the "Legal Folks" and their multiple "Opinions"!

Wow.....wouldn't that be nice? :grin:
Alan - ANYTHING I write is MY OPINION only.
Certified Curmudgeon - But, my German Shepherd loves me!
NRA-Life, USN '65-'69 & '73-'79: RM1
1911's RULE!

Renegade

#10

Post by Renegade »

AEA wrote:If the laws were written in "Black and White" there would be no need for the "Legal Folks" and their multiple "Opinions"!

Wow.....wouldn't that be nice? :grin:
They are written in black & white. I do not know how they can come up with this stuff, unless it is because they do not like the law. Bottom line is their opinion really does not matter.

Greybeard
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 2410
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 10:57 pm
Location: Denton County
Contact:

#11

Post by Greybeard »

I don't think 30.06 was even mentioned when I was there on Aug. 7.
CHL Instructor since 1995
http://www.dentoncountysports.com "A Private Palace for Pistol Proficiency"

Crusader31
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 10:57 am
Contact:

#12

Post by Crusader31 »

I attended the Oct. 4 class. I remember a mention of abiding by 30.06 signs in a mall parking lot as an answer to a question. She stated that anyone, even an individual could post a 30.06 sign in their front yard and the sign must be respected.

I don't remember any reference to a 30.06 sign at a school parking lot.

Quinn

txinvestigator
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 4331
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 6:40 pm
Location: DFW area
Contact:

#13

Post by txinvestigator »

extremist wrote:Well, just having attended the class yesterday, Ms. O'Shaw did in fact state that if the school had a 30.06 sign in the parking lot, that it would have to be decided in court and recommended abiding by it. One gentleman in the audience tried to get her to confirm or refute that school property is not in fact owned by the "state" but rather by the school board. I've never heard of that one, but that's certainly interesting.
30.06 does not list "the state" but lists "governmental entity". I think School boards have elected officials and mandatory taxes for the homeowners. Sounds like the government to me.
*CHL Instructor*


"Speed is Fine, but accuracy is final"- Bill Jordan

Remember those who died, remember those who killed them.
User avatar

seamusTX
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 13551
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:04 pm
Location: Galveston

#14

Post by seamusTX »

School districts, cities, counties, and all their subsidiary organizations were created by acts of the legislature. IIRC, the legislative intent of changing 30.06 was to stop cities from prohibiting CHL.

Posting of property owned directly by the state was not much of a problem.

- Jim

DoubleActionCHL
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 3:12 pm

#15

Post by DoubleActionCHL »

txinvestigator wrote:
extremist wrote:Well, just having attended the class yesterday, Ms. O'Shaw did in fact state that if the school had a 30.06 sign in the parking lot, that it would have to be decided in court and recommended abiding by it. One gentleman in the audience tried to get her to confirm or refute that school property is not in fact owned by the "state" but rather by the school board. I've never heard of that one, but that's certainly interesting.
30.06 does not list "the state" but lists "governmental entity". I think School boards have elected officials and mandatory taxes for the homeowners. Sounds like the government to me.
I think it's safe to say that school property (with the exception of private schools) is own, leased, and/or operated by "a governmental entity". I know of a certain plot of real estate in Pasadena that is part of P.I.S.D, but actually owned by the City of Pasadena.

PC 30.06(e) clearly states that this statute does not apply to property owned or leased by a government entity and is not a location where a license holder would be otherwise prohibited from carrying.

It seems to me that the intent here is to prevent small government Napoleons from making their own gun-free zones. The rules should be uniform for all schools, all courthouses, etc. PC 30.06 defines this and no gun-hating assistant principal should be able to change it at his or her whim.
Image

http://www.doubleactionchl.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Houston, Texas

"Excuses are for tombstones. Get back in the fight."
--Me
Post Reply

Return to “Instructors' Corner”