TexasCHLforum.com

Katygunnut wrote:No trial yet. I've done alot of really dangerous things like carrying past non-compliant signs, etc., but just haven't run across any LEO's that were sufficiently ignorant of the law to arrest me.

Personally, I think the whole "don't want to be a test case" thing is a bit overblown. I may change my mind if we start to see a rash of CHL holders arrested for things that aren't actually illegal.

Well, as I mentioned earlier in the thread, at Austin City Hall, not only is there a posted 30.06 sign, they require you to pass through a metal detector and to run your bags through an x-ray machine in order to enter the building. There are almost always uniformed police officers milling about the lobby or just outside the building, because after all this is City Hall. This is not a matter of ignoring a non-compliant sign and going about your business with minimal chance of your properly concealed weapon being detected. Your firearm will be detected, you will in all likelihood be arrested immediately (probably in a most unpleasant manner) and it will probably make the 6:00 news.

If that happened to me, I would almost certainly lose my job, not to mention the countless amount of time and money it would take to defend myself, even if I ultimately came out victorious as I should. I have a family to support and I am not independently wealthy enough to risk that. Sorry if that disappoints you in some way, but you are welcome to walk into Austin City Hall with your concealed handgun any time you want and tell the rest of us whether or not the whole "don't want to be a test case" thing is overblown.

Glenn61 wrote:This whole thing just goes to show you how backwards the State of Texas is when it comes to stupid things like enforcing compliance with 30.06 signage. If these people are going to be allowed to post fake signs--then law enforcement should be told not to take them seriously. Maybe the state should make these people/businesses apply (and pay a good amount of money) for a license to legally put the sign on their store window--just like we have to apply, get refresher training and pay to get/keep a license.

You made a similar post on another board. I don't understand what you think the State should do about private businesses posting "no guns" signs. The statutes we have now treat them in almost all, if not all, circumstances as meaningless. Whether a particular police officer knows this and enforces it properly is a different issue, but that's true for pretty much any law.

I prefer to think that the "no guns" businesses know the law and are taking advantage of it to appease anti-gun fanatics while knowingly allowing properly licensed CHL holders to carry in their business. Keep your mouth shut and they won't be forced to post a proper sign. But even if they did, it's a private business and they have every right to do so and shouldn't have to get a license for it.

Where I do think the State is falling down on the job is with the city/county owned places, like Austin City Hall as mentioned earlier, that post 30.06 signs. They can't bar CHL holders, period, except in limited specified circumstances and even then I believe the use of the 30.06 sign is inappropriate. I wish there was a way to file a complaint with DPS and have them investigate and force the city to comply with the law. I wish the law would be changed to require cities/counties to post a simple "COURT" sign on the outside of the building that houses a courtroom, or "GOVERNMENT MEETING" outside the door of a government meeting.

The law isn't perfect and there are some areas that need a bit of clean up, but by no means is Texas "backwards" on this issue. That's just preposterous.

I understand the sentiment to ignore the sign, especially if there's no City Council meeting going on, but it's not like walking into an improperly posted grocery store. The City has metal detectors and security guards at each entrance and usually, since it's City Hall, there are uniformed police officers walking around for one reason or another and quite often TV cameras. I know this because my mother-in-law works there and I drop my daughter off with her two or three times a month.

If you try to carry in Austin City Hall, you will in all likelihood be taken down in a matter of seconds. I don't have the time or money to be the test case. It seems like there should be somebody at the state that we could at least report this to and have them investigate. Asking the mayor or City Attorney about it is a complete waste of time - I guarantee you these people will not take that sign down or implement a bypass lane like they do at the Capitol unless somebody above their pay grade forces them to.

I missed this the first time through, but I see now that "government meetings" are treated like hospitals and churches in that they aren't automatically restricted but can be posted.

I don't see any way that the City of Austin is getting away with posting a 30.06 sign at the entrances to City Hall. The language says "at any meeting of a government entity", not "on the premises of..." like it does for court buildings, racetracks and such. I could accept a 30.06 sign at the door of the City Council chambers while they were in session but I cannot for the life of me understand how they're getting away with one posted at the entrances to the entire City Hall building 24/7.

Is there anybody at DPS or the AG's office that takes questions or complaints about things like this? It's a blatant violation of state law, taking place barely a mile from the Capitol.

Hoosier Daddy wrote:

RottenApple wrote:As for government offices posting 30.06 signs, there's nothing in the law that says they can't post them, just that it's not enforceable. Of course, if the metal detector goes off and security finds you with a firearm, you may then be told you can't carry there. That would be effective notice under 30.06.

It's notice in the same way a 30.06 sign is notice. No more, no less.

They don't have to allow you in, but it looks like you wouldn't be violating the 30.06 rule if you sneak it in.

This does not sound right to me. The statute seems pretty clear that 30.06 is not applicable to government entities that don't fall under one of the specified exceptions. We talk a lot about the 30.06 sign, but all "notice" is covered under 30.06 and government entities are explicitly exempted from it. How can they not allow me in?

RottenApple - THANK YOU!!! That's what I was missing. I will sleep better tonight.

As far as the government offices, I thought they weren't allowed to prohibit CHL holders at all (other than the specified exceptions), not just with a 30.06 sign. You're saying they can give oral notice and it's valid? That doesn't make sense.

Notwithstanding that, is my understanding of "government meeting" correct? As I read the statute, you just can't carry into the meeting itself, not the entire building, right?

Beiruty wrote:Church , Mosques, etc, and hospitals are NOT off-limits unless they are posted 30.06. Zealous PD can arrest you, but the law says those places are not-off limit unless posted (as per law) with a valid 30.06 sign.

Yes, but hospitals are listed as statutorily off-limits in 46.035(b)(4) and churches/mosques in 46.035(b)(6). I'm missing something.

I thought I understood this but I took my CHL class over the weekend and came away confused. I searched the forum for answers and now I'm even more confused.

My basic understanding was that a CHL holder could legally carry anywhere a 30.06 or 51% sign was not posted, except for the various exceptions specified in 46.035 (schools, sporting events, courthouses, etc.) and of course federal properties. It was my understanding that those exceptions listed in 46.035 did not need a 30.06 - they were off limits by virtue of the statute saying so. Is this correct?

Now, I noticed that churches and hospitals are still on the 46.035 list, and I was almost certain that concealed carry was now up to the individual church or hospital. Further, someone in class noted that Seton hospital in Austin has a non-compliant sign posted, and the instructor said that they were "grandfathered". I think he was wrong about the "grandfathering" stuff, but apparently there is another section of the Penal Code that exempts churches and hospitals from being statutorily off-limits, but allows them to post a 30.06 if they want to. Is that correct and if so, what is the citation because I can't find it?

Finally, and this may be the most important one, it was also my understanding that state, county, city, and other non-federal governmental entities could not post 30.06 signs unless they fell under one of the 46.035 exceptions. Austin City Hall has a 30.06 sign posted, and they have metal detectors at both entrances to the building. As far as I can tell, there are no courtrooms in the new City Hall. I know they have City Council and probably many other official government meetings there, but the 30.06 signs are posted whether there is a meeting going on or not. Further, even if there is a meeting going on, as I read the statute you are only prohibited from carrying in to the meeting itself, not the entire building. What am I missing?