TexasCHLforum.com

Texas Firearms Coalition wrote: Local intimidation of Concealed Handgun Licensees must stop!

Government property off-limits by statute.
The Texas Concealed Handgun License statute was created in 1995 with the passage of Senate Bill 60. Among the provisions in SB60 was the designation of certain governmental property that would be off-limits to Texas Concealed Handgun Licensees (CHLs) carrying self-defense handguns. In 1997, HB2909 passed that, among other things, created Tex. Penal Code §30.06, Trespass by a Holder of a License to Carry a Concealed Handgun, with its clear and unambiguous requirements for property owners to follow if they wished to bar entry to their property by CHLs carrying self-defense handguns. This was made necessary by the practice of posting small generic “no guns” decals on locations that could easily go unseen by CHLs entering property.

Full article at: http://www.TexasFirearmsCoalition.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Looks like good news. It's a bit interesting that there is any controversy over legislation that enables enforcement of existing laws on the books.
Certainly this will solve the city-owned property 30.06 issue...

Anything to make things clear - and any way to make the state follow its own laws. that's great!

This is a stupid question, just making sure I've got the bases covered. Here's what I've printed on a laminated card for my wallet - sound complete for State restrictions? I realize Federal property follows different rules:

Don’t carry, section 46.03, third degree felony:
• Public or private school premises or at a school function
• Premises of polling place
• Premises of court or court offices
• Premises of a racetrack
• Secured area of airport
• Within 1,000 feet of an execution (with notice) unless in car

Don’t carry, section 46.035, Class A misdemeanor:
• Premises where 51% of income comes from on-site consumption
• Premises of sporting event
• Premises of correctional facility
• Premises of hospital or nursing home (if posted 30.06)
• Amusement park (if posted 30.06)
o County > 1 million
o 75 acres or more
o Access through controlled entries
o Open more than 120 days a year
o Full time security guards
o Does not include driveways or parking areas
• Premises of a church (if posted 30.06)
• Meeting of a government entity (if posted 30.06)
• Intoxicated

It's my understanding that premises is a building or portion of a building - but which applies? If I'm in the County Courthouse, but not in any of the courtrooms or court offices, I'm in the building. I'm not in the portion of the building used by courts, but I am in fact in the building. I think I can lawfully carry - but I'm queasy about my assumption.

Also, I occasionally visit our local police station, not as a customer or anything, as well as the Sheriff's office - it's cool to carry there, too, isn't it? Not that I feel the need, I just don't like to fiddle with disarming where not really required to do so.

It frustrates me the Kendall County Courthouse has gunbuster signs on the doors. The courts are on the second and third floors. They are attempting to do the same through intimidation and deception even though those signs have no force of law.

what about government buildings when being used by non-government functions
In the case in my mind- Gun shows at convention centers (Pasadena, GRB, etc)

I know the insurance companies "make" them post it, but if they "cannot" post it, then its a moot point, as its a gov't building

I've never seen any indication that it's an insurance company requirement.
It does seem to make sense, unfortunately.. Speaking with LEOs and just reading media incidents, there seems to be a number of "accidents" at gun shows.

Governmental buildings are governmental buildings - they shouldn't be posted 30.06. Especially when most city attorneys can read and understand the law. People leasing the building can ask for voluntary compliance or ask those to leave who choose not to comply.

Teamless wrote:what about government buildings when being used by non-government functions
In the case in my mind- Gun shows at convention centers (Pasadena, GRB, etc)

I know the insurance companies "make" them post it, but if they "cannot" post it, then its a moot point, as its a gov't building

The operative language in Tex. Penal Code §30.06(e) is property "owned or leased by a governmental entity." It doesn't matter how rents, leases or is otherwise in control of the property. If it is "owned or leased by a governmental entity," §30.06 signs are not enforceable.

Chas.

I've posted your article to my state Representative and Senator, and encouraged them to support the bills.

Insurance companies get blamed for a lot. Occasionally, it's even warranted.

I just don't think governments should be running against tax paying citizens.

Attached is a letter I sent to Sen. Campbell responding to the bogus testimony given by the Texas District and County Attorneys Association representative.

Chas.

Good article, Charles. This legislation needs to pass. The signage issue has been one of my hot buttons for tool long, it needs to be stopped, emphatically.

Enjoyed that letter too. I appreciate you applying your talents to calling out the liars.

Keep up the good work.

Excellent article and letter. Thanks Charles!

I had forgotten about HB508 and the civil penalty. I'm unclear as to who would receive this money if anyone was ever judged to be in violation of this law. Has anyone? Who get's the money?

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Attached is a letter I sent to Sen. Campbell responding to the bogus testimony given by the Texas District and County Attorneys Association representative.

Chas.

Permission to post your letter elsewhere (Facebook etc)?

C-dub wrote:Excellent article and letter. Thanks Charles!

I had forgotten about HB508 and the civil penalty. I'm unclear as to who would receive this money if anyone was ever judged to be in violation of this law. Has anyone? Who get's the money?

I think the money will go to the Crime Victims Compensation Fund.

Yes, great letter Charles..thank you for doing that!

A-R wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Attached is a letter I sent to Sen. Campbell responding to the bogus testimony given by the Texas District and County Attorneys Association representative.

Chas.

Permission to post your letter elsewhere (Facebook etc)?

Absolutely.

Chas.