Re: PC46.03-Clarification?

[Daniel Watson]

Fellow instructors, I have a question I'm hoping someone can give me some clarification on. Specifically, regarding PC46.03(a)(1) and more specifically the statement, "...any grounds or building on which an activity sponsored by a school or educational institution is being conducted..."

When I took my Instructors Course about 7 years ago this one statement caused a heated argument amongst the students and DPS instructors, therefore I remember it well. The way the DPS instructor(s) clarified this statement was to explain that, "If you were in a restaurant, and a school bus pulls up and the local high school football team gets out and comes into the restaurant and goes into the back dining area and begins their Annual Football Awards Banquet, then that has just become a building on which an activity sponsored by a school is being conducted! Therefore, you would be required to remove yourself or put your lawfully carried handgun into your car if you were to want to continue to dine there. The DPS instructor(s) further explained, "If you were on a picnic at a local park with your significant other and a school bus pulls up and the local high school cheerleading squad gets out and begins to conduct their weekly Cheer Training Camp at the park where you're at, then the park has just become the grounds on which an activity sponsored by a school or educational institution is being conducted! Therefore, you would be required to remove yourself or put your lawfully carried handgun into your car if you wished to continue your picnic.

When this was presented by the DPS instructor(s) many were outraged at the thought that they could be forced to leave their favorite steakhouse, sans steak, "just because a school bus stopped there." The DPS instructor(s) were adamant and unrepentant about this portion of the law. Therefore, I have always taught exactly that narrow, strict definition of PC46.03(a)(1). And, there have been two occasions where I ran into this and removed myself from the location where I was dining.

Has anyone heard any other definition of this portion of the law? How does everyone else teach this portion of the law? ANY information or clarification would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in Advance,
"Tac"

[jmra]

Following.

[AF-Odin]

Following too as this was not discussed when I took the instructor course. Would this also apply at the local DQ when a bus load of kids on a UIL trip stops for lunch? What about the school field trip to Lowes?

[The Annoyed Man]

Legalities aside, it's an unenforcable standard. If possession is 9/10ths of the law, then "I was here first" counts for something. Let them leave. Besides, unless you're OC'ing, who would know?

[howdy]

I don't have an answer for you. As TAM says, it is almost unenforceable. In my 18 years of licensed carry, I have not encountered such a scenario. I guess we will find out about many "gray" laws when OC starts. With the wording of that particular law, I think a defense that a jury would accept would be dicey to come by.

[Daniel Watson]

TAM/Howdy,

Agreed. I see this as probably highly unenforceable and dubious that a jury would have issues with that situation. But I'm curious if anyone else has run into the same issues teaching that particular section. I try to be very black & white when I teach the laws and this one always has me stumped as to whether there truly is some "grey area" there.

[Keith B]

While it is my interpretation and that of a couple of other instructors who are WAY smarter than me on legal things, I teach that just because a school group shows up at McDonalds to eat, YOU are not involved in the school activity and as such it does not apply to you. A school group can't just commandeer a location and make that location off limits because of who they are.

Now, on the flip side, I teach that if you are involved in the event, such as you go to McDonald's to meet your child's school group for a meal, then you are NOW illegal to carry. Same would be going to a band concert in a mall. If you are there just shopping, and there happens to be a school band playing there, it doesn't make the mall off-limits. If you go to the mall to listen to the concert, then you are part of the activity and can't carry.

Again, this is my interpretation and there has not been a case to set precedence on this statute.

[jmra]

While it is my interpretation and that of a couple of other instructors who are WAY smarter than me on legal things, I teach that just because a school group shows up at McDonalds to eat, YOU are not involved in the school activity and as such it does not apply to you. A school group can't just commandeer a location and make that location off limits because of who they are.

Now, on the flip side, I teach that if you are involved in the event, such as you go to McDonald's to meet your child's school group for a meal, then you are NOW illegal to carry. Same would be going to a band concert in a mall. If you are there just shopping, and there happens to be a school band playing there, it doesn't make the mall off-limits. If you go to the mall to listen to the concert, then you are part of the activity and can't carry.

Again, this is my interpretation and there has not been a case to set precedence on this statute.

This is what was taught in the CHL classes I have attended.

[Daniel Watson]

jmra/Keith B,

Thank you. That is a good interpretation of the law that makes sense. It was definitely not covered that way at my Instr Course!! I had never heard of or thought about the "mall" example. I think I'll use that and give different examples.

Thanks again.

[Abraham]

So, I can go to McD's and if a school group comes in or for that matter is already there, but I'm simply there to eat, if armed I'm O.K.

If, however I'm there to meet and eat with my school teacher wife, who brought the students in with her, I must'nt be armed.

Does this sounds like splitting hairs to anyone else, but me...?

Or, is my example (rather based on Keith's if I understood it correctly) off kilter?

How about this one: I don't know my wife and her students are going to be at McD's when I go there eat. If I don't sit with them or even acknowledge them, do I still have to disarm?

This is a mess.

[sjfcontrol]

I believe that Charles has pointed out that 46.03(a) says

(1) on the physical premises of a school or educational institution, any grounds or building on which an activity sponsored by a school or educational institution is being conducted, or a passenger transportation vehicle of a school or educational institution, whether the school or educational institution is public or private, unless pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the institution;

Since the institution (school) cannot give you permission to carry in a McDonalds/Museum/etc., or anywhere other than on school property itself, the law should be read as only applying to activities on school grounds. Of course, there are no on point precedents, so you're on you own if a prosecutor doesn't see it that way. This is not legal advice. Everyone must determine for themselves what they are comfortable doing, considering the consequences.

[Keith B]

So, I can go to McD's and if a school group comes in or for that matter is already there, but I'm simply there to eat, if armed I'm O.K.

If, however I'm there to meet and eat with my school teacher wife, who brought the students in with her, I must'nt be armed.

Does this sounds like splitting hairs to anyone else, but me...?

Or, is my example (rather based on Keith's if I understood it correctly) off kilter?

How about this one: I don't know my wife and her students are going to be at McD's when I go there eat. If I don't sit with them or even acknowledge them, do I still have to disarm?

This is a mess.

Yeah, it may be splitting hairs. However, when there is no case law, you have to use your noodle and think about what your defense would be if challenged on it. In the case they just showed up, I would say I happened to be there first, finished my meal and was not involved with any of them.

As for your wife and the students and you knowing they would be there, if you went there to meet them and eat with them, then you couldn't carry as you would be part of the outing. However, if you just happened to go to the same place and didn't interact with them, then I would say it would be a gray area since you knew they would be there.

Now, as sjfcontrol stated, with the interpretation that Charles has, it has to be school premise or location, so if that would hold up in court, you wouldn't be prohibited from meeting them at the location no matter.

Bottom line, you must do what you feel comfortable doing when there is no black and white definition or case law. Only YOU can make that call.

[jsjc458]

This was talked about in my CHL instructors class way back but the Captain that taught the class said that that was how the Travis County DA interpreted the law and his point was that each County has a different flavor of prosecutor and that some were anti gun and as a CHL holder you would be treated differently than say in Williamson County where the DA was pro gun. He did state the exact scenario with McDonald's and the school bus but also told us that it was just one anti gun prosecutors attempt to abuse the law. He went on to say that it was a wrong interpretation of the law and that if it was filed would never survive an appeal.


Joe