Some states have exceptions like that enshrined into law, but as far as I am aware Texas is not one of them. In Tennessee, IIIRC, you cannot be charged for carrying illegally if you use a firearm to stop a crime.Beiruty wrote:My understanding if justified in defending yourself or others, those violations are overlooked.
e.g. engaging an active shooter in a school building after you were waiting outside to pick up your daughter.
Of course, what is against the law and what charges actually get filed are completely different. In the hypothetical you cite it would be political suicide for a prosecutor to charge a CHL holder who (illegally) entered a school building to stop a school shooter, and if the prosecutor did charge the CHL I would expect the jury to use their right of jury nullification.
Remember, for many years (well over a century) there was no way in Texas for a law-abiding citizen to go about his daily business armed legally. Many of those people chose to go armed anyway and my understanding is that is where the two-tiered system for charges of UCW came from. If you weren't in one of the restriced areas but merely in public, you could only be charged with a misdemeanor (and in reality most police knew that many members of the public were carrying and didn't care). If you were in one of the restricted areas it was a more serious charge (ie a felony).droshi wrote:I think this above quote is a good idea, however it just doesn't make sense that carrying without a CHL is a less serious violation than carrying on a school. To me it makes more sense to have no restrictions for CHL holders, but allow basic citizens to carry in restricted areas without a license. But I understand the world doesn't work like that!