Instructor update

[troglodyte]

Ten hour round-trip drive, and a night in a hotel, and the 'class' lasted 1 hour. That 1 hour included the time to take the test and have it graded.

12 hours round-trip, hotel, and a PTO day. I overheard one gentleman say he was from Stratford.

They couldn't give a good answer to most of the questions. You'd think the DPS would anticipate the most common questions and get the AG to make an interpretation.

I was hoping for a better answer to if an LTC could carry under "Permitless Carry" if a business posted a 30.06/30.07 sign but no 30.05.

[Tex1961]

Ten hour round-trip drive, and a night in a hotel, and the 'class' lasted 1 hour. That 1 hour included the time to take the test and have it graded.

12 hours round-trip, hotel, and a PTO day. I overheard one gentleman say he was from Stratford.

They couldn't give a good answer to most of the questions. You'd think the DPS would anticipate the most common questions and get the AG to make an interpretation.

I was hoping for a better answer to if an LTC could carry under "Permitless Carry" if a business posted a 30.06/30.07 sign but no 30.05.

Good luck.
Their not law makers or attorneys, so until a legal interpretation of a badly written law gets settled either through legislation or the courts there isn’t much they can say or do.

[jmorris]

Ten hour round-trip drive, and a night in a hotel, and the 'class' lasted 1 hour. That 1 hour included the time to take the test and have it graded.

12 hours round-trip, hotel, and a PTO day. I overheard one gentleman say he was from Stratford.

They couldn't give a good answer to most of the questions. You'd think the DPS would anticipate the most common questions and get the AG to make an interpretation.

I was hoping for a better answer to if an LTC could carry under "Permitless Carry" if a business posted a 30.06/30.07 sign but no 30.05.

I asked the instructor about that during the break and he said that they were aware of the traffic that question is generating but DPS had not gotten any clarification.

[KC5AV]

Ten hour round-trip drive, and a night in a hotel, and the 'class' lasted 1 hour. That 1 hour included the time to take the test and have it graded.

12 hours round-trip, hotel, and a PTO day. I overheard one gentleman say he was from Stratford.

They couldn't give a good answer to most of the questions. You'd think the DPS would anticipate the most common questions and get the AG to make an interpretation.

I was hoping for a better answer to if an LTC could carry under "Permitless Carry" if a business posted a 30.06/30.07 sign but no 30.05.

I asked the instructor about that during the break and he said that they were aware of the traffic that question is generating but DPS had not gotten any clarification.

That’s actually one of the questions I was waiting to have brought up yesterday. The RSD guys had little to say, but one guy said he’d spoken to a judge who indicated that, once your ID revealed that you were an LTC holder, they’d likely be harsher on you because you obviously had intent to violate 30.06/30.07. Take that for what it’s worth.

[K.Mooneyham]

Ten hour round-trip drive, and a night in a hotel, and the 'class' lasted 1 hour. That 1 hour included the time to take the test and have it graded.

12 hours round-trip, hotel, and a PTO day. I overheard one gentleman say he was from Stratford.

They couldn't give a good answer to most of the questions. You'd think the DPS would anticipate the most common questions and get the AG to make an interpretation.

I was hoping for a better answer to if an LTC could carry under "Permitless Carry" if a business posted a 30.06/30.07 sign but no 30.05.

I asked the instructor about that during the break and he said that they were aware of the traffic that question is generating but DPS had not gotten any clarification.

That’s actually one of the questions I was waiting to have brought up yesterday. The RSD guys had little to say, but one guy said he’d spoken to a judge who indicated that, once your ID revealed that you were an LTC holder, they’d likely be harsher on you because you obviously had intent to violate 30.06/30.07. Take that for what it’s worth.

Well, the followup question to that judge should have been something like, "But if someone without a permit walks past those .06/.07 signs, it's okay because they didn't have an LTC, and there was no 30.05 sign?"

Like I said previously on the subject, this law will need a "cleanup bill" to clarify how this is really supposed to work.

[troglodyte]

Ten hour round-trip drive, and a night in a hotel, and the 'class' lasted 1 hour. That 1 hour included the time to take the test and have it graded.

12 hours round-trip, hotel, and a PTO day. I overheard one gentleman say he was from Stratford.

They couldn't give a good answer to most of the questions. You'd think the DPS would anticipate the most common questions and get the AG to make an interpretation.

I was hoping for a better answer to if an LTC could carry under "Permitless Carry" if a business posted a 30.06/30.07 sign but no 30.05.

I asked the instructor about that during the break and he said that they were aware of the traffic that question is generating but DPS had not gotten any clarification.

That’s actually one of the questions I was waiting to have brought up yesterday. The RSD guys had little to say, but one guy said he’d spoken to a judge who indicated that, once your ID revealed that you were an LTC holder, they’d likely be harsher on you because you obviously had intent to violate 30.06/30.07. Take that for what it’s worth.

I stopped listening to that guy when he started talking about his airplane.

[troglodyte]

Ten hour round-trip drive, and a night in a hotel, and the 'class' lasted 1 hour. That 1 hour included the time to take the test and have it graded.

12 hours round-trip, hotel, and a PTO day. I overheard one gentleman say he was from Stratford.

They couldn't give a good answer to most of the questions. You'd think the DPS would anticipate the most common questions and get the AG to make an interpretation.

I was hoping for a better answer to if an LTC could carry under "Permitless Carry" if a business posted a 30.06/30.07 sign but no 30.05.

I asked the instructor about that during the break and he said that they were aware of the traffic that question is generating but DPS had not gotten any clarification.

That’s actually one of the questions I was waiting to have brought up yesterday. The RSD guys had little to say, but one guy said he’d spoken to a judge who indicated that, once your ID revealed that you were an LTC holder, they’d likely be harsher on you because you obviously had intent to violate 30.06/30.07. Take that for what it’s worth.

Well, the followup question to that judge should have been something like, "But if someone without a permit walks past those .06/.07 signs, it's okay because they didn't have an LTC, and there was no 30.05 sign?"

Like I said previously on the subject, this law will need a "cleanup bill" to clarify how this is really supposed to work.

This is my take on it. If a business wants to keep anyone with a gun (assuming the bearer is law-abiding) out then they need to post a 05,06, and 07. If it is just an 06/07 then an LTC should be able to carry under Permitless. I don't see anything that says an LTC gives up their right to carry permitlessly just because they have a license.

I did find it interesting that the LEOs are being taught the 30.05 has to have the same sign requirements of the 06/07, assuming that gentleman was correct. He seemed to be reading from something official in nature.

[KC5AV]

Ten hour round-trip drive, and a night in a hotel, and the 'class' lasted 1 hour. That 1 hour included the time to take the test and have it graded.

12 hours round-trip, hotel, and a PTO day. I overheard one gentleman say he was from Stratford.

They couldn't give a good answer to most of the questions. You'd think the DPS would anticipate the most common questions and get the AG to make an interpretation.

I was hoping for a better answer to if an LTC could carry under "Permitless Carry" if a business posted a 30.06/30.07 sign but no 30.05.

I asked the instructor about that during the break and he said that they were aware of the traffic that question is generating but DPS had not gotten any clarification.

That’s actually one of the questions I was waiting to have brought up yesterday. The RSD guys had little to say, but one guy said he’d spoken to a judge who indicated that, once your ID revealed that you were an LTC holder, they’d likely be harsher on you because you obviously had intent to violate 30.06/30.07. Take that for what it’s worth.

I stopped listening to that guy when he started talking about his airplane.

I wish I'd thought to ask if anyone else was going to be in class yesterday. Where were you in the class?

[troglodyte]

KC5AV - yessir. Left side of room. Second row. 1st seat from the middle.

[jmorris]

.......

I did find it interesting that the LEOs are being taught the 30.05 has to have the same sign requirements of the 06/07, assuming that gentleman was correct. He seemed to be reading from something official in nature.

If you're talking about physical requirements for the sign there are the same.

PC 30.05
(c) A person may provide notice that firearms are prohibited on the property by posting a sign at each entrance to the property that:

(1) includes language that is identical to or substantially similar to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.05, Penal Code (criminal trespass), a person may not enter this property with a firearm";

(2) includes the language described by Subdivision (1) in both English and Spanish;

(3) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and

(4) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.

[KC5AV]

KC5AV - yessir. Left side of room. Second row. 1st seat from the middle.

Well, you were almost right behind me. I was on the front row, far right.

[Tex1961]

I'm on the side of you NOT legally being able to put your LTC in your car and walk past a .06/.07 under Constitutional Carry... To me it's like being a Doctor, lawyer, police, etc. Just because your degree or badge isn't on you does not mean you are still not certified or licensed... Only if my license were revolked or no longer valid I'm still licensed...

[srothstein]

I'm on the side of you NOT legally being able to put your LTC in your car and walk past a .06/.07 under Constitutional Carry... To me it's like being a Doctor, lawyer, police, etc. Just because your degree or badge isn't on you does not mean you are still not certified or licensed... Only if my license were revolked or no longer valid I'm still licensed...

The difference in this case is how the law reads. Both 30.06 and 30.07 use the wording that they only apply to a person who is carrying a pistol under the authority of his LTC. That is the key point. When are you carrying under the authority of the LTC? That authority is defined in 46.15 as being an exception to the law, i.e. if it would be illegal under 46.02, 46.03(a)(14), or 46.04(a-1) and you are licensed and carrying a pistol then you can do it under that authority. But if it is not illegal, you are not carrying under the authority of the LTC, you are just obeying the law.

Thus, we have the weird case of it not being illegal for anyone to carry in the location if it does not have a 30.05 sign. This means you are not needing your exception to the law. If it is posted 30.06 and 30.07, you can ignore them because they only apply to people carrying where it would otherwise be illegal. If it is posted 30.05, then there is an exception there that says you can carry if you are licensed, so they need extra signs to ban you because you are then carrying under the authority of your LTC.

Or, to look at it differently, I am an honorably retired peace officer. I have an exception to the law in 46.15 that covers more than the LTC exception. I also have my LTC. Since 30.06/07 only apply to people carrying under the authority of the LTC, do they apply to me? If so, what happens to my authority as a retired police officer? What if I were still an active police officer? As you can see from these situations, there must be some way to determine which authority you are carrying under.

I use, and believe the courts will use, the lowest one which protects me and makes my action legal. You get that same benefit. Look at the law and see if what you are doing is generally illegal. If it is, do you have an exception that allows you to do something? If there is a second point that nullifies the exception, do you have an exception that nullifies that point? Keep going as far as you need til you are legal.

An interesting side note that applies to me an other retired officers. For years, I have been able to ignore 30.06/07 signs because of my retired status. I can no longer do so if there is a 30.05 sign posted also. There is no exception or defense to a 30.05 sign for retired peace officers. So, if I go past it now, it is because I am carrying under my LTC. That means 30.06/07 do apply to me in that case where there are all three signs.

There are two possible reasons for the weird case of needing all three signs. Either it was done deliberately by the bill author because anti-gunners did not think through the law like this, or it was an accident because no one thought it all the way through. Either way, I expect to see it clarified in the next session. There will be enough uproar from the anti-gunners trying to get places to post and trying to get it enforced, that they will be able to force the change. It won't be me setting up the case which causes this because if I see 30.06/07 signs, I do not shop there when I can avoid it. They have expressed their opinion that they don't want me and there are very few places I will force to accept my money. My hope is that enough LTCs do this, even if the signs are not quite 100% right, so as to cause both an economic loss for the anti-gunners and that there are not enough incidents to justify a law change.

[Ruark]

They might use the confusion to justify a "one sign fits all" proposal. That would certainly be welcomed by a lot of business owners, who are getting sick and tired of plastering the front of their businesses with all these signs.