TexasCHLforum.com

LSUTiger wrote:http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015/08/ ... bang-bang/

Edit:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Protesting would be a factor in the legality of carrying a firearm only if 1) the person was not a CHL; and 2) the city had an ordinance against carrying firearms at a political rally. The preemption statute was watered down slightly in response to the New Black Panthers carrying rifles and shotguns in a protest outside the Republican National Convention in Houston several years ago. The authority granted to cities and counties by this change does not apply to CHLs.

Chas.

Tex. Local Gov't Code §229.001 wrote:Sec. 229.001. FIREARMS; AIR GUNS; EXPLOSIVES. (a) Notwithstanding any other law, including Section 43.002 of this code and Chapter 251, Agriculture Code, a municipality may not adopt regulations relating to:

• (1) the transfer, private ownership, keeping, transportation, licensing, or registration of firearms, air guns, ammunition, or firearm or air gun supplies; or
  
  . . .
  
  (b) Subsection (a) does not affect the authority a municipality has under another law to:
  
  (6) regulate the carrying of a firearm or air gun by a person other than a person licensed to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, at a:
  
  . . .
  • (C) political rally, parade, or official political meeting; or . . .

Does this mean they can or can't be armed?

I was simply referring to the ability of cities to pass enforceable regulations prohibiting the carrying of firearms during political rallies and citing the relevant Code provisions. Whether the protesters could be disarmed would depend upon whether they violated any other Penal Code provisions, or whether it was necessary for officer safety.

The number of people openly carrying a long gun who have been disarmed and thrown to the ground are very few in number. The number of open-carry protesters who have carried long guns without being disarmed far outnumber those disarmed.

I'm not saying what the Black Panthers did is "right" or that it was legal. I believe it was clearly a violation of Penal Code §42.01(a)(8). They intended to be confrontational, threatening and intimidating and they should have been arrested.

Chas.