TexasCHLforum.com

flintknapper wrote:If I am understanding this correcty, HPD is coming to your complex to provide a service, BUT this is by invitation....or "acceptance" of an offer. I would think....that is no wise...does that make them in "Authority of the premises". They are in fact.......guests.

If they can get away with requesting all CHL's to surrender their weapons in this setting....then what is to prevent them from walking into the nearest restaurant and doing the same thing?

The provisions by which LEO are allowed to disarm are as follows:

§ 411.207. AUTHORITY OF PEACE OFFICER TO DISARM.

(a) A
peace officer who is acting in the lawful discharge of the officer's
official duties may disarm a license holder at any time the officer
reasonably believes it is necessary for the protection of the
license holder, officer, or another individual. The peace officer
shall return the handgun to the license holder before discharging
the license holder from the scene if the officer determines that the
license holder is not a threat to the officer, license holder, or
another individual and if the license holder has not violated any
provision of this subchapter or committed any other violation that
results in the arrest of the license holder.

==============

Will someone please explain to me how any LEO would "reasonably" believe that a group of Senior Citizens (or individuals) that have gone through the CHL process, are law abiding citizens AND are there in support/co-operation of the police to dept to learn how to better be safe....would be a threat!

This is laughable and the person who alluded to the "attitude" that some police have for being "the only person present with a gun" hit it right on the head.

No way in Hades would I let this slide. This will continue to worsen unless challenged.

Flint.

The language "before discharging . . ." included in the statute leads me to believe that this authority is predicated on the CHL holder's presence at a crime scene or some such, where the CHL holder was required to notify as part of his/her presence not at a civic function.

Like I said, CC the Attorney General, and maybe the news media.

YabuUS wrote:Sorry, didn't mean that last to post twice. Don't know how that happened. The meeting is not off-limits to CHL holders, it's just that the police want to know who has a license and who is carrying. If you are carrying, they want the weapon while the meeting is going on. The new law that just went into effect says I don't have to volunteer the fact that I have a CHL; but when an officer asks you point blank "Do you have a CHL?", I don't think playing dumb or (even worse) lying to the police is a good think to do. I know the police have the authority to disarm me, but doing it in front of the crowd would be terribly uncomfortable for me. If I did as they ask then everybody would know I carry a gun and I'm not comfortable with that. Leaving the weapon at home won't get me out of revealing the fact that I have a CHL if I'm asked by the police. I would love to hear Charles Cotton's opinion on this.

If the police officer running the meeting has ordered all CHL holders to self identify and to turn in their weapons, no matter what the reason, then he has effectively made the meeting off limits to CHL holders. This would be a verbal notice from someone in authority over the premises, and my reaction would be to get up and leave, and then write a letter citing my reasons for doing so without identifying myself as a CHL holder. I have done this twice in the past with about 50/50 results, and in both cases I was not carrying, and one was even before I was eligible to obtain a CHL.

CC the letter to the police chief, the person in authority of the place where the meeting was held, and an attorney (preferably one with which you have a relationship, but the Attorney General would do), state clearly and concisely that you are uncomfortable being in a location where the police are disarming law abiding citizens. And don't accept the argument that they are allowed to do that, the circumstances under which they are allowed to disarm CHLs are different from a meeting where they have just asked all CHLs to self-identify and disarm.