TexasCHLforum.com

ScottDLS wrote: ↑Fri May 28, 2021 11:42 am

K.Mooneyham wrote: ↑Fri May 28, 2021 11:17 am

ScottDLS wrote: ↑Fri May 28, 2021 9:59 am

K.Mooneyham wrote: ↑Fri May 28, 2021 1:46 am So, again, I'm now confused. IF a business has up 30.06 and 30.07 signs, but does NOT have 30.05 signs posted, are people who do NOT have an LTC allowed to carry past the signs, but those WITH an LTC are NOT allowed to carry past the signs? That doesn't make any sense at all. Especially since there will now be THREE signs, some businesses might just conclude that the current signs keep everyone from carrying in their establishment. And, does it matter if you don't have the actual LTC on you if you carry into an establishment that has 06/07 but not 05 signs? Or, is the fact that you were ISSUED that LTC mean you are always carrying "under the authority of", even if you don't have it on your person? I'm with "safety1", this is making my head hurt.

You are correct, that makes no sense. The same situation has already existed since 1997 when the 30.06 law was passed. There are numerous people who are eligible for and have LTC's who currently are legally able to carry past 30.06/7 signs. Peace Officers, Special Investigators (FBI, DEA, etc.), commissioned security officers while acting in their capacity as guards. A uniformed cop openly carrying is breaking the law passing a 30.07, only because he has LTC? Absurd.

Yes, I get what you are saying, but I will guess that in the case of each of those, they are carrying under a different authority when in the capacity of their job.

How about peace officers off duty? Or retired LEO's under LEOSA...who happen to have a LTC? Or I think you saw it in your suggestion (what if you have been issued a LTC, but purposely don't have it on you?). How will the prosecution prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, the elements of 30.06 have been violated (i.e. you are carrying under the authority of LTC), when you don't need that authority to carry. Is there going to be a mechanism to turn in your LTC if you don't want it anymore because it illogically prevents you from legally carrying where you could otherwise? What if you have an Arizona license and don't have it on you? How is the prosecutor wrongly charging you for 30.06 going to know that you had a license at all?

ScottDLS wrote: ↑Fri May 28, 2021 9:59 am

K.Mooneyham wrote: ↑Fri May 28, 2021 1:46 am So, again, I'm now confused. IF a business has up 30.06 and 30.07 signs, but does NOT have 30.05 signs posted, are people who do NOT have an LTC allowed to carry past the signs, but those WITH an LTC are NOT allowed to carry past the signs? That doesn't make any sense at all. Especially since there will now be THREE signs, some businesses might just conclude that the current signs keep everyone from carrying in their establishment. And, does it matter if you don't have the actual LTC on you if you carry into an establishment that has 06/07 but not 05 signs? Or, is the fact that you were ISSUED that LTC mean you are always carrying "under the authority of", even if you don't have it on your person? I'm with "safety1", this is making my head hurt.

You are correct, that makes no sense. The same situation has already existed since 1997 when the 30.06 law was passed. There are numerous people who are eligible for and have LTC's who currently are legally able to carry past 30.06/7 signs. Peace Officers, Special Investigators (FBI, DEA, etc.), commissioned security officers while acting in their capacity as guards. A uniformed cop openly carrying is breaking the law passing a 30.07, only because he has LTC? Absurd.

ScottDLS wrote: ↑Tue May 25, 2021 12:22 pm

K.Mooneyham wrote: ↑Tue May 25, 2021 11:39 am

Papa_Tiger wrote: ↑Tue May 25, 2021 11:32 am

K.Mooneyham wrote: ↑Tue May 25, 2021 10:47 am Okay, for those in the know on these matters, it says that having an LTC is a "defense to prosecution" for violating 30.05. It's NOT an exemption from, then. It doesn't stop the police from arresting you nor does it stop a prosecutor from bringing a case against you. It only means that IF you are asked to leave a 30.05-posted business, the owner of that business calls the police on you, and you have your LTC, then you can bring that up IN COURT. In other words, it does not make you legally "immune" to 30.05, the way a police officer would be "immune" to 30.05/.06/.07 signs. Why would any business bother posting anything other than 30.05? They will no longer need to bother with 30.06/30.07 to keep you out even if you have your LTC. Am I misunderstanding how that works? Please, tell me I am. Because IF I am understanding this correctly, this is a big step backward.

EDITED TO ADD:

For instance, you walk past a 30.05 sign (only that one, no .06/.07) into a business. Your handgun is covered but somehow it shows a little at some point and the business owners see it and call police on you. You don't know that because the owners say nothing to you. The police arrive and say you're under arrest for the violation. You tell them (and show them) your LTC, and the police officer says "tell it to the court". You may "beat the rap" but you don't "beat the ride", AND you have to pay a bunch of money and also have an arrest record. I can think of one or two places where the scenario might play out.

EDITED TO ADD (2):

Seems to me that the following will need to be amended to the language of 30.05 in regards to those who have their LTC:

"It is an exception to the application of . . . ."

The LTC exception for 30.05 has always been a "defense to prosecution". Nothing changes in that regard for LTC holders with HB 1927. How many people do you hear of taking a ride for 30.05 related to handguns when they have an LTC?

There were no official 30.05 SIGNS before. I can think of a couple of VERY anti-2A, anti-self-defense folks in this state that will almost assuredly be getting the word out (and twisting the information in the process) for businesses in their area to put those signs up, AND to call police if they see someone with a firearm.

The 46.15 "exceptions" that allow carry by LTC holders, police officers, "travelers", hunting, etc. to carry handguns have ALWAYS been a defense to prosecution. Look carefully at the statute 46.15 and you'll find it doesn't say "It is an exception to the application of . . . ." either.

When the 46.15 section was drafted, the language used was not exactly "it is exception to the application of <statute> that". The language was challenged and there was an appellate court finding that since that specific language wasn't used, all the 46.15 non-applicability provisions are only "defenses" as laid out in TXPC Chapter 2 "Burden of Proof".

If you have a "defense" to a particular statute, you have just as much assurance that what you are doing is legal as Texas LEO does for carrying a handgun.

Papa_Tiger wrote: ↑Tue May 25, 2021 11:32 am

K.Mooneyham wrote: ↑Tue May 25, 2021 10:47 am Okay, for those in the know on these matters, it says that having an LTC is a "defense to prosecution" for violating 30.05. It's NOT an exemption from, then. It doesn't stop the police from arresting you nor does it stop a prosecutor from bringing a case against you. It only means that IF you are asked to leave a 30.05-posted business, the owner of that business calls the police on you, and you have your LTC, then you can bring that up IN COURT. In other words, it does not make you legally "immune" to 30.05, the way a police officer would be "immune" to 30.05/.06/.07 signs. Why would any business bother posting anything other than 30.05? They will no longer need to bother with 30.06/30.07 to keep you out even if you have your LTC. Am I misunderstanding how that works? Please, tell me I am. Because IF I am understanding this correctly, this is a big step backward.

EDITED TO ADD:

For instance, you walk past a 30.05 sign (only that one, no .06/.07) into a business. Your handgun is covered but somehow it shows a little at some point and the business owners see it and call police on you. You don't know that because the owners say nothing to you. The police arrive and say you're under arrest for the violation. You tell them (and show them) your LTC, and the police officer says "tell it to the court". You may "beat the rap" but you don't "beat the ride", AND you have to pay a bunch of money and also have an arrest record. I can think of one or two places where the scenario might play out.

EDITED TO ADD (2):

Seems to me that the following will need to be amended to the language of 30.05 in regards to those who have their LTC:

"It is an exception to the application of . . . ."

The LTC exception for 30.05 has always been a "defense to prosecution". Nothing changes in that regard for LTC holders with HB 1927. How many people do you hear of taking a ride for 30.05 related to handguns when they have an LTC?