FWIW, I agree. IMHO, for the (despicable) law to have the meaning that Bullwip asserts, it would have to say "in" rather than "by".dicion wrote:Read the above underlined portion a few times. The key word is 'by'Bullwhip wrote:It says "if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located". It don't say "issued by". If a Utah license doesn't make you licensed to carry in Texas, then you're UCW to start with. But it does count, that's why it's legal to carry with a Utah or Florida license. Texas says you're licensed to carry in Texas if you have a Utah license, so the GFSZA doesn't matter.Pawpaw wrote:Federal law allows an exemption if the school zone is in the same state that issued your CHL. Your Utah license won't qualify for a school zone in Texas.
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/44/922" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
You have to be licensed by the state in which the school zone is in.
With a Texas CHL, you are licensed by the state of Texas.
With a Utah CFP, you are licensed by the stare of Utah.
Reciprocity doesn't mean you're licensed by the state of Texas. You are still Licensed by Utah, Texas just recognizes that license.
Search found 1 match
Return to “Why can't Texas do this?”
- Sat Nov 13, 2010 8:32 am
- Forum: Other States
- Topic: Why can't Texas do this?
- Replies: 32
- Views: 5196