TexasCHLforum.com

anygunanywhere wrote:Drinkin' and packin'..................



This is gettin' almost as bad as open carry.

Anygun

jbirds1210 wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:LEOs have to know the Texas Penal Code, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, county and city ordnances, traffic laws, and a myriad of other codes and statutes.
Chas.

Oh boy do they!

Jason

Are you there yet, Grasshopper!
Chas.

Forum Rules wrote:9. Blatant, global, or rampant law enforcement bashing is prohibited. Discussions of specific identifiable events presented factually are fine.

Keep the discussion on this specific incident. Global bashing of LEOs or agencies violates Forum Rules. Being critical of a specific event and/or people is a legitimate topic of discussion. "I hate 'um all" posts or threads are not.

Chas.

Remember folks, the law TABC officers deal with on a daily basis includes the parking lot (actually, all of the real estate) as part of the "premises." It is only when dealing with CHLs that it does not. This is an easy distinction for them to miss.

As I have mentioned before, people who take a 10 hr or 4 hr CHL course know more about the various laws that impact CHLs than any LEO, unless he/she also has a CHL. People who care enough about the issue to join and/or read TexasCHLforum know far more about laws impacting CHLs than anyone in the State, including LEOs! LEOs have to know the Texas Penal Code, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, county and city ordnances, traffic laws, and a myriad of other codes and statutes. No one, not even we lawyers, can possibly know all these in as much detail as TexasCHLforum members know the CHL laws. So I think it's understandable when a LEO misses a subtle point like we're dealing with in this thread.

That said, not knowing the limited definition of "premises" as it applies to a CHL is one thing, but it doesn't justify being rude or unprofessional.

Chas.

He was wrong about the parking lot, but I understand why he believes that. Case law and I believe the Alcoholic Beverage Code state that the parking lot would be part of the premises. This is precisely why the definition of "premises" found in TPC §46.035(f)(3) specifically excludes parking lot, among other things, and why it expressly states "building or portion of a building." The "bar" prohibition is found in TPC §46.035(b)(1).

So, you were right and he was wrong, but again, I know why a TABC guy would think that.

Chas.

TPC §46.035 wrote:§ 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE
HOLDER.
. . .
(b) A license holder commits an offense if the license
holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun
under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,
regardless of whether the handgun is concealed, on or about the
license holder's person:

• (1) on the premises of a business that has a permit or
  license issued under Chapter 25, 28, 32, 69, or 74, Alcoholic
  Beverage Code, if the business derives 51 percent or more of its
  income from the sale or service of alcoholic beverages for
  on-premises consumption, as determined by the Texas Alcoholic
  Beverage Commission under Section 104.06, Alcoholic Beverage Code;

. . .
(f) In this section:

• . . .
  (3) "Premises" means a building or a portion of a
  building. The term does not include any public or private driveway,
  street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other
  parking area.