TexasCHLforum.com

C-dub wrote:

ScottDLS wrote:

LabRat wrote:

paperchunker wrote:http://www.myfoxdfw.com/story/26278225/ ... te-theater

AMC in Mesquite made an off duty LEO leave when they saw his gun.

I saw that today as well....I believe the lawyer and Tim Ryan said the officer had a "right" to be at the theater with his weapon. I disagree with that...businesses may prohibit admission or service to anyone so long as they don't discriminate. That doesn't mean its smart, but it is reality.
No shirt, no shoes, gun? = no service. If the business owner or person in charge decides they don't want someone in their business, they can make that happen.

AMC is notorious for their anti-gun stance. But if a business says leave and you don't, it should be trespassing...police officer to not.

LabRat

I guess he doesn't have the "right" to be there, but neither does the theater have the ability to prosecute him under Texas trespass law for carrying there against their wishes TXPC 30.05 has an exception for LEO's whether on or off duty, and 30.06 does not apply.

Sometimes 30.05 makes my head hurt and this is one of those times.

Section (a) it says that an offense is committed if a person enters or remains on or in the property of another if they had received notice to depart and failed to do so.

Then in section (f) if says that it is a defense to prosecution if the person has a CHL.

And in section (i) it says that this section, I guess all of 30.05, does not apply if you are a peace officer on or off duty.

What is giving me a headache now is trying to determine the effective difference between sections (f) and (i). It surely isn't saying that even if I have been given notice to depart that if I don't I can use my CHL as a defense to prosecution if I don't leave, right? It does sound like that, no?