TexasCHLforum.com

Hoi Polloi wrote:

srothstein wrote:

Hoi Polloi wrote:It seems to me that the CHL specific laws should be clarified in the next legislative session to specifically say that a person with a CHL is not barred from having a gun in any place that those without a CHL are legally allowed to have one and it should say which laws take precedence when more than one are in effect in the same location.

This is already clear in the law. CHL is an exception to the law so it only applies where carrying would otherwise be illegal. If you are in a place where it is not illegal for anyone to carry (your car, your home, etc.) then CHL does not apply because it cannot come into play.

If you were carrying on your property and an officer asked you for identification, would you be required to give him your CHL? If so, the CHL law trumps the castle doctrine.

Ditto if you are stopped in your car, and you have a CHL. Although the penalty for failure to show your CHL has been removed, it is still a requirement to do so. A CHL holder cannot, to the best of my understanding, claim MPA in that situation.

I would love to be wrong about that one, by the way.

ELB wrote:So, I am curious about something. Couple or four questions for both of you:

Those are good questions, and I confess that I'm a little hazy on this myself, so I can only explain what I understand the law to say. If you think I'm not understanding correctly, please feel free to enlighten me.

ELB wrote:Do you both think that if you have a CHL, the CHL statutes completely define the places you are and are not legal to carry a handgun, concealed or not, on your body or not?

What I compare it to is when my wife or I carry off body. She always carries in a purse. I rarely but sometimes carry in a Safepacker or a Versipack. My belief is that, apart from MPA carry in a vehicle, carrying even off-body in a purse or a Safepacker wold be illegal for someone not in possession of a CHL. So how does carrying in a purse or Safepacker differ - for a CHL holder - from carrying in a suitcase or duffel bag? See what I mean?

As to where a CHL holder may not carry, well those seem fairly well defined to me for the most part, but I think that some of the definitions are a bit foggy. I operate on the assumption that the laws don't tell you what you may do; they tell you what you may not do. If a law doesn't limit something, then that something is completely lawful. But the guiding principle is that, under Texas law, carry of a concealed handgun is illegal. That is the default. CHL provides an exception to that law, under defined circumstances, for the CHL holder.

ELB wrote:If it does, does that mean those who are not CHL holders (and also not judges, bailffs, LEOs, DAs, assistant DAs, etc) cannot legally have a handgun at all?

No, of course not. We still have the MPA for instance, and I think the issue is partly one of concealed or not concealed. One can hunt with a handgun, for instance.

ELB wrote:In particular, if a non-CHL traveler goes to a hotel that has a 30.06 sign, but no other signs related to guns or weapons, is he legally barred from bringing a gun up to his room? Let's make it an unloaded handgun, locked in his luggage. Or is he legal to do so?

My gut reaction is to say he is legal, because the 30.06 sign does not apply to him. My question, and it is not rhetorical, I actually don't know and would like to be enlightened, is "would the same apply to the CHL holder for an unloaded handgun, locked in his luggage?"

ELB wrote:If a traveling Texas peace officer arrives at the hotel, and finds a 30.06 sign, is he barred from legally carrying his handgun, (particularly his concealed backup in the ankle holster) to his room in the hotel? (I think the answer is pretty obvious, but for the sake of illustrating a point, let's answer it).

No, he is not barred, because he is carrying under a completely separate legal authority. 30.06 does not apply to him because he is not carrying under authority of a CHL.

The way I see it, CHL holders gain the ability to carry most places that others cannot (LEOs, etc., excepted), but they lose some things in the process too - or rather, I should say they maybe 'trade away' a couple of things that non-CHLers don't have to worry about.

(Edited this morning to clarify a couple of things I wrote last night while half-asleep. ~~ TAM)

bdickens wrote:Your hotel room is your residence throughout the duration of your stay. They may be able to prohibit you from carrying in the lobby, but they can not prohibit you from carrying in your room.

Artilum may want to go back and re-read the law. 30.06 signs do not have to be posted at every entrance, they only have to be posted "conspicuously."

I'm not arguing your point, but I have some "what about" questions...

If you have a CHL and you carry a gun past a 30.06 sign, is it still a violation if the gun is unloaded and concealed in a suitcase. Is it a violation if the gun is concealed in the suitcase, loaded?

If either of the above is a violation, and the only access to your room is through a posted area, then how can you carry in your room?

Mind you, I've already said what I would do in my previous post.

I agree that a 30.06 sign makes it an offense to carry any concealed handgun into the hotel (which includes your room) whether or not the gun is loaded, and whether or not the gun is concealed on your person, or concealed in a suitcase. What matters is how the arresting officer will interpret it, and my guess is that is how they'll see it if you're carrying a obviously personal defense type of pistol. The law seems to not allow for the loophole of carrying it in your luggage if you have a CHL, unless I'm not reading it correctly. The pistol is still concealed, and it is still in your possession.

Interesting side questions: 1) What if you're traveling with a valuable hunting rifle in a locked case? Does 30.06 apply if you possess a CHL? It's not a handgun. 2) What if you're traveling with an expensive long-barreled .500 S&W magnum revolver (handgun) with a scope mounted for hunting purposes and it is locked in a case?

Here is my personal standard: concealed is concealed. If there was another hotel in town, I would give the other hotel my business. If there isn't, then concealed is concealed. I don't really like the idea of breaking the law, but my principle concern at that point becomes the security of the weapon if I'm not allowed to carry it. If there were available alternatives - for instance, if the hotel provided a safe in which to secure your weapon for CHL holders - then I would probably follow their policy if they were the only hotel in town. But for darn sure I'm not going to leave my gun in the car overnight in a hotel parking lot. That becomes a safety issue.

BTW, I don't think it's the entire Hilton hotel chain that posts "no gun" signs. Last year I stayed in a Hilton in a major city... ...let's just say it was in a neighboring state... ...and they did not have any kind of "no guns" signs at the entrances. And that state has fairly "liberal" signage requirements. A 6" gunbusters decal would constitute a compliant sign in that state.