Repeal the 30.06 law

[Jaguar]

Repeal of 30.06 would be a "solution" in search of a problem. No likely gain, lots to lose. Bigger fish to fry. IMHO. Which I value highly!

I think changing the penalty to a Class C misdemeanor is a large fish.

I agree, a $4,000 fine, a year in jail, and loss of CHL seems extreme for missing a sign or going in an unposted entrance when another is posted. JMHO

[Charles L. Cotton]

Repeal of 30.06 would be a "solution" in search of a problem. No likely gain, lots to lose. Bigger fish to fry. IMHO. Which I value highly!

I think changing the penalty to a Class C misdemeanor is a large fish.

I agree, a $4,000 fine, a year in jail, and loss of CHL seems extreme for missing a sign or going in an unposted entrance when another is posted. JMHO

I agree. There's no justification for any jail time for merely entering with a firearm, just as there's no justification for jail time for violation of TPC §46.035(a) (concealment requirement). There are other offenses that can be charged if the firearm is misused in some manner.

These things are doable, it will take work, but it can be done. Stripping private property owners' right and practical ability to bar armed CHLs is, as JMRA noted, just fantasizing.

Chas.

[Jaguar]

Repeal of 30.06 would be a "solution" in search of a problem. No likely gain, lots to lose. Bigger fish to fry. IMHO. Which I value highly!

I think changing the penalty to a Class C misdemeanor is a large fish.

I agree, a $4,000 fine, a year in jail, and loss of CHL seems extreme for missing a sign or going in an unposted entrance when another is posted. JMHO

I agree. There's no justification for any jail time for merely entering with a firearm, just as there's no justification for jail time for violation of TPC §46.035(a) (concealment requirement). There are other offenses that can be charged if the firearm is misused in some manner.

These things are doable, it will take work, but it can be done. Stripping private property owners' right and practical ability to bar armed CHLs is, as JMRA noted, just fantasizing.

Chas.

I will be watching for calls to action next legislative session. Just say the word Charles.

[BenGoodLuck]

Repeal of 30.06 would be a "solution" in search of a problem. No likely gain, lots to lose. Bigger fish to fry. IMHO. Which I value highly!

I think changing the penalty to a Class C misdemeanor is a large fish.

I agree, a $4,000 fine, a year in jail, and loss of CHL seems extreme for missing a sign or going in an unposted entrance when another is posted. JMHO

I agree. There's no justification for any jail time for merely entering with a firearm, just as there's no justification for jail time for violation of TPC §46.035(a) (concealment requirement). There are other offenses that can be charged if the firearm is misused in some manner.

These things are doable, it will take work, but it can be done. Stripping private property owners' right and practical ability to bar armed CHLs is, as JMRA noted, just fantasizing.

Chas.

8 pages and 108 posts ago, I brought forth on this forum a proposition: repeal 30.06 and allow 'no-guns' signs, but they should not have the force of law. Allow businesses and stores to post the standard 'no-guns allowed' sign (a picture of a handgun, surrounded by a red circle with a diagonal red bar in the circle). Permit holders could still carry on the premises but would know how the establishment feels about guns and could decide whether to enter or not.

Many on the forum took umbrage at my proposition, saying that I was putting concealed carry rights before property owner rights. The consensus appears to be that we should be focusing on reducing 30.06's penalty to a Class C Misdemeanor. Chas. writes: "There's no justification for any jail time for merely entering with a firearm..."

So, after 8 pages and 108 posts, it appears we're saying the same thing! I never wanted to trump property owners' rights, and I now understand how sacred those rights are in Texas. I also learned about the history of 30.06 and understand how it solved a major problem at the time it was passed. But I am also concerned for concealed carriers who are forced to disarm because of 30.06 signs. Sometimes it's not practical or possible to shop somewhere else - suppose you are scheduled for a medical exam at a facility that has posted 30.06 signs; or you work in a private office building that has posted signs. The reason we conceal carry is because we want be able to defend ourselves. Criminals don't make appointments before they strike, nor do they let us know where they will be striking. 30.06 disarms us and we face criminal penalties if we disregard the signs, whether purposefully or accidentally.

Ok, so let's work for changing the penalty to a Class C Misdemeanor. As I understand it, a Class C misdemeanor offense is the most basic offense and does not include a jail term, only a fine of not more than $500. Conviction of this class of misdemeanor does not result in any legal disability or disadvantage, meaning, under normal circumstances, you won't lose any freedoms or privileges. Conceal carrying past 30.06 will still have a penalty, but it will not be criminal in nature.

[Aileronguy]

Oldgringo posted a good example. Keep the wording just get rid of the force of law part. If someone is found carrying they are asked to leave. If they don't then they can get a citation. It is that simple. As I said it is not the end of the world if the sign doesn't carry the weight of law. If you don't want someone to carry you ask them to leave. This is the best solution where each party's rights are respected.

Given the strong property rights sentiment in TX, I'm not sure the "what you don't know won't hurt you" approach will fly. What you are telling business owners that don't want firearms on their property is "catch me if you can". Other places have gotten away with that but Texas is not other places. This simply will not pass.
We need to stop fantasizing and get back to reality. Changing the penalty to a class C misdemeanor in 2015 sounds like something that could be accomplished. Maybe in 2017 or 2019 you could get it to a civil penalty (get caught past a 30.06 sign pay $50 - much better than "go directly to jail").

STRONG property rights? Like the governors Trans-Texas corridor? Property WAS lost in that land grab. Not that those poor folk will ever get it back. And yes, I do know it eventually failed, but such is the power of the government to do whatever, thought through or not.

[jmra]

Oldgringo posted a good example. Keep the wording just get rid of the force of law part. If someone is found carrying they are asked to leave. If they don't then they can get a citation. It is that simple. As I said it is not the end of the world if the sign doesn't carry the weight of law. If you don't want someone to carry you ask them to leave. This is the best solution where each party's rights are respected.

Given the strong property rights sentiment in TX, I'm not sure the "what you don't know won't hurt you" approach will fly. What you are telling business owners that don't want firearms on their property is "catch me if you can". Other places have gotten away with that but Texas is not other places. This simply will not pass.
We need to stop fantasizing and get back to reality. Changing the penalty to a class C misdemeanor in 2015 sounds like something that could be accomplished. Maybe in 2017 or 2019 you could get it to a civil penalty (get caught past a 30.06 sign pay $50 - much better than "go directly to jail").

STRONG property rights? Like the governors Trans-Texas corridor? Property WAS lost in that land grab. Not that those poor folk will ever get it back. And yes, I do know it eventually failed, but such is the power of the government to do whatever, thought through or not.

You're way off topic.

[ScottDLS]

I'm in favor of making 30.06 a Class C also. In fact, I believe I was one of the first posters to suggest it as an alternative. I've always felt that a Class A or Class B was harsh for violating some arguably arbitrary rule in a place generally open to the public. I will also note, however, that there is essentially a blanket exemption in 30.05 for LEO's (including off duty!) for carrying a weapon, whether against the property owner's wishes or not. Therefore, I don't agree that Texas has some greater respect for private property owners' rights than other states that don't enforce trespass penalties against CCW. I guess business owners could put up a "No Cops" sign (circle slash badge) which would theoretically be a Class B misdemeanor for a LEO to walk past, just like a NO GUNS sign was a Class A pre-30.06.

Of course, we'll never know until there's a (drum roll, scary music....!) test case. It'll be up to the (arresting) LEO and the prosecutor, and the jury, and the appellate courts, and state supreme court, and maybe the Governor if he decides to pardon the subject LEO, or maybe the Federal courts if it's a Special Agent. Until then (more cliches) concealed means means concealed...What if they accidentally flash their badge when looking for credit card? Can a Fed use his "Fed Creds" as ID at the bank? Is walking past a sign in uniform the equivalent of open carry?

Anyway, maybe we can make 30.06 a class C.

[Jason K]

Class C misdemeanor for 30.06 is fine, but we should push for no criminal penalty. Tresspassing law covers it well enough for property owners.

[Unicorn Rancher]

Tresspassing law covers it well enough for property owners.

Trespassing is a Class A misdemeanor if you're carrying a deadly weapon.

[Jason K]

Tresspassing law covers it well enough for property owners.

Trespassing is a Class A misdemeanor if you're carrying a deadly weapon.

Maybe that's the law that needs fixing.....

[stavos]

I support the enhanced penalty if a criminal carries a weapon when violating my property rights.

[Deltaboy]

I support the 30-06 law lest every anti gun or scared business owner bans CCW.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I think I need to clarify one of my posts. As I said, I think reducing the offense category for a TPC §30.06 violation to a Class C Misdemeanor is something that can be done and should be done. However, I'm not suggesting that we'll file such a bill in 2015. There are too many other things that need our attention to start adding to the "To Do List" for the upcoming session.

Chas.

[jmra]

I think I need to clarify one of my posts. As I said, I think reducing the offense category for a TPC §30.06 violation to a Class C Misdemeanor is something that can be done and should be done. However, I'm not suggesting that we'll file such a bill in 2015. There are too many other things that need our attention to start adding to the "To Do List" for the upcoming session.

Chas.

I know it's probably too early but I would be interested in an idea of what we might be shooting for in 2015. I know we hope to get OC moved forward and I assume there will be an attempt to expand campus carry. Is there anything else that you can share at this time? Maybe the Church security issue?
Maybe I should have asked this question in a new thread.

[Jason K]

I agree with jmra. Reducing the 30.06 penalty would be a good thing to start on this next session along with campus carry and church security. Even if it doesn't pass, it plants a seed for the next session....and a litmus test for the next election cycle. And we should have plenty of time to work on it....considering OC isn't going anywhere.....