TexasCHLforum.com

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I personally won’t cross a §30.06 sign solely because it references 4413(29ee). I’d much rather make these arguments on someone else's behalf.

Chas.,

Thanks. I agree, if a 30.06-like sign references 4413(29ee) instead of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, or if the letters are 7/8" tall or even if it is English Only, I'll not pass through as the risk of being a test case is too high for me. If the letters are less than contrasting, which is very subjective, and I see the sign, I'll not pass. Even if their sign is close, but not technically compliant and you could likely win in court, the intent is clear as the owner has probably specifically put their sign in place because they at least investigated the law and likely believe they are compliant and missed out technically. It may be close enough to cost me a lot of time, money and stress.

However, ghostbusters signs, 'no weapons allowed', 'no guns', etc., mean: come on in!! I don't think we can read intent of the owner into any of these signs. Maybe they don't want CHL on their property or maybe they want to appease the ani-gun knowing that CHL will carry or maybe it's insurance related or maybe it's they don't want openly seen weapons (rifle / shotgun) which are otherwise legal or maybe they are just ignorant of the law or maybe......

Charles L. Cotton wrote: As to the reference to 4413(29ee), it does not make a difference. When a bill is passed, it becomes part of the Revised Statutes ("Black Statutes"), unless it is directly amending a Code. When the CHL statute was codified into the Government Code, it was done so "without substantive changes" to the law as passed, and the Black Statute provisions are repealed. Apparently, when the CHL statute was codified, the bill doing so failed to change the old reference to 4413(29ee) in the TPC §46.16(b)(6). (If someone were researching 4413(29ee) they would find a reference to "now codified as Tex. Gov't. Code §411.________). I know that's a long-winded law school answer - sorry.

OK, I'm confused (easy to do!). Does that mean a reference to 4413(29ee) carries the weight of law?

If so, it seems that PC §46.02 would not be applicable (assuming you carry concealed) to CHL per PC §46.15(b)(6) which references 4413(29ee) and not Subchapter H, Chapter 411. This would also imply to me that a 30.06 sign that referenced 4413(29ee) would carry the same weight as one referencing Subchapter H, Chapeter 411 for the same reason. But it has been hashed out before that is not the case, that a 30.06 sign is THE ONLY compliant sign.

If not, then PC §46.02 would be applicable for CHL and thus no CHL is allowed.

There is a disconnect in my mind, I'm missing something....

Charles L. Cotton wrote: If you have a CHL, then you can legally have it at a gun show without violating TPC §46.02, but if it's not concealed, then you are violating TPC §46.035(a).Chas.

Chas.,

I know it is true that TPC §46.02 is not applicable for CHL carrying concealed under CHL statutes, but where is that non-applicability found?

Current non applicability for CHL in the PC refers to old CHL statutes (Article 4413(29ee)). I'm sure I'm missing this somewhere, I just don't know where...

PC §46.15. NONAPPLICABILITY. (a) Sections 46.02 and 46.03 do
not apply to:
...
(6) is carrying a concealed handgun and a valid license issued
under Article 4413(29ee), Revised Statutes, to carry a concealed
handgun of the same category as the handgun the person is carrying;

Nothing about subchapter H, Chapter 411. Does that make any difference??

Thanks,