UPDT:Freescale, Polycom, Paypal parking lot now posted 30.06

[Chityworker]

Does not 30.06 only apply to carrying under the authority of you CHL? When entering the garage within your vehicle you are covered under the Motorist Protection Act and the 30.06 posting does not apply. Is my interpretation incorrect ?

[OldCannon]

I'm thinking this one merits a call to Alice Tripp over at the TSRA. Let them handle the legislative contacts. This is clearly the opposite of the law's intention.

[chlag01]

I'm not a TSRA member yet. Would they still be open to me sending them an email on the subject?

[C-dub]

Does not 30.06 only apply to carrying under the authority of you CHL? When entering the garage within your vehicle you are covered under the Motorist Protection Act and the 30.06 posting does not apply. Is my interpretation incorrect ?

I think your interpretation is incorrect and I think Keith B. and Charles agree with me. Keith says in this very thread ...

by Keith B » 20 Sep 2011 14:17

There is no case law on this, but my personal opinion is that if you lease space, you would normally get parking lot privileges. So, at that point I think you should be protected by SB321 and 30.06 would not apply on your employer's lot. Otherwise, since many companies lease buildings and space, all the company would have to do is have the landlord post a 30.06 and prohibit you from parking there with a gun. Not sure that would be valid.

And, I still believe that MPA is out the window if you have a CHL. Don't believe you can switch hats at will, but could be wrong.

and Charles in another ...

by Charles L. Cotton » 08 Jul 2011 17:23

You're not argumentative at all. At first blush, what I posted appears to conflict with Tex. Gov't Code §411.205, but there is no conflict. In order for Tex. Penal Code §30.06 to apply to a person, they must be carrying a handgun under the authority of their CHL. However, Gov't Code §411.205 imposes a duty to display a license on every armed CHL, regardless whether they are carrying under the authority of their licenses. Therefore, it would apply in our cars, homes, sporting events, etc.

Chas.

[Chityworker]

Thank you for correcting my interpretation. I have never encountered a 30.06 at an entrance to a parking lot before but if I happen to see one I'll make a u-turn.

[G.A. Heath]

I'm not a TSRA member yet. Would they still be open to me sending them an email on the subject?

I'm not sure but there is an easy way to fix it, go ahead and join!

[i8godzilla]

Deleted--Double Post.

[i8godzilla]

Does not 30.06 only apply to carrying under the authority of you CHL? When entering the garage within your vehicle you are covered under the Motorist Protection Act and the 30.06 posting does not apply. Is my interpretation incorrect ?

I think your interpretation is incorrect and I think Keith B. and Charles agree with me. Keith says in this very thread ...

by Keith B » 20 Sep 2011 14:17

There is no case law on this, but my personal opinion is that if you lease space, you would normally get parking lot privileges. So, at that point I think you should be protected by SB321 and 30.06 would not apply on your employer's lot. Otherwise, since many companies lease buildings and space, all the company would have to do is have the landlord post a 30.06 and prohibit you from parking there with a gun. Not sure that would be valid.

And, I still believe that MPA is out the window if you have a CHL. Don't believe you can switch hats at will, but could be wrong.

and Charles in another ...

by Charles L. Cotton » 08 Jul 2011 17:23

You're not argumentative at all. At first blush, what I posted appears to conflict with Tex. Gov't Code §411.205, but there is no conflict. In order for Tex. Penal Code §30.06 to apply to a person, they must be carrying a handgun under the authority of their CHL. However, Gov't Code §411.205 imposes a duty to display a license on every armed CHL, regardless whether they are carrying under the authority of their licenses. Therefore, it would apply in our cars, homes, sporting events, etc.

Chas.

I believe you took Charles' comments out of context. If you go further back in that thread, you will see that I predicted that companies would try to have their 'non-leased' parking facilities posted 30.06.

My statement was:

It would be easier to lease the parking lot to a new company. That company could then post the parking lot 30.06. Employees could be required to buy a parking pass from the new company if they wished to park there. The employer could even reimburse the employees' parking fees.

Dare you to bet me that this will not happen....................

Charles' response was:

That wouldn't work for at least two reasons. First, TPC §30.06 doesn't apply to a CHL unless they are carrying pursuant to their CHL. Since having a handgun in your car isn't illegal (Motorist Protection Act), you would not be carrying pursuant to your CHL. Also, a person could put the handgun in the truck and it would not be "on or about [their] person" so they wouldn't be "carrying."

I then asked Charles about the need to produce my actual plastic when in my car, if I was carrying under authority of MPA NOT my CHL. Charles responded with the quote you provided. I took his response to mean that you must always display you CHL, when armed, even if not carrying under the protection of your CHL.

[C-dub]

That is possible, but I thought his response indicated that if we were armed we were always carrying under the authority of our CHL. Are you depending on the technicality that when the gun is in the car and we are not the gun is legally in the car under the MPA? If so, wouldn't they only have to wait until you entered the car?

[apostate]

Does not 30.06 only apply to carrying under the authority of you CHL? When entering the garage within your vehicle you are covered under the Motorist Protection Act and the 30.06 posting does not apply. Is my interpretation incorrect ?

Looking at the photo of the sign(s) there's also a generic prohibition on weapons. I believe that is valid 30.05 notice and is meaningful for someone with a rifle or shotgun. Do people agree or disagree?

[C-dub]

Does not 30.06 only apply to carrying under the authority of you CHL? When entering the garage within your vehicle you are covered under the Motorist Protection Act and the 30.06 posting does not apply. Is my interpretation incorrect ?

Looking at the photo of the sign(s) there's also a generic prohibition on weapons. I believe that is valid 30.05 notice and is meaningful for someone with a rifle or shotgun. Do people agree or disagree?

It does look like they have covered their bases.

[chlag01]

I'm not a TSRA member yet. Would they still be open to me sending them an email on the subject?

I'm not sure but there is an easy way to fix it, go ahead and join!

Joined now. I'll send Alice Tripp an email.

[apostate]

This is clearly the opposite of the law's intention.

I'm not so sure. It was a foreseeable consequence of limiting the protection to the employer-employee relationship. As I recall, several members of this forum posited similar scenarios.

[BrianSW99]

That is possible, but I thought his response indicated that if we were armed we were always carrying under the authority of our CHL. Are you depending on the technicality that when the gun is in the car and we are not the gun is legally in the car under the MPA? If so, wouldn't they only have to wait until you entered the car?

I think what he meant was the Government Code requires a person with a CHL to display their license without regard to whether the person is carrying "under the authority" of their CHL. I believe he was very clear in what he said in his response to igodzilla8 that carrying a gun in the car is not carrying under the authority of the CHL, therefore 30.06 does not apply.

Brian

[Heartland Patriot]

Alright, maybe someone can answer this question. I drive a pickup truck. I don't have a trunk. Normally, to satisfy Federal laws, if required when traveling in some other state for instance, I would lock the weapon into a container separated from the ammunition. Does this count as NOT "on or about your person"?