Application of Penal Code sections 30.07 and 46.03, relating to the open carry of handguns, to school districts

[dhoobler]

https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/op ... kp0050.pdf

Subsection 46.03(a)(l) of the Penal Code prohibits handguns from places on which a school-sponsored activity is occurring, which places can include grounds otherwise excluded from the definition of "premises" such as public or private driveways, streets, sidewalks or walkways, parking lots, parking
garages, or other parking areas.

[TVegas]

Unfortunately, the AG did not address fieldtrips to non-prohibited locations.

[casp625]

In other words, dropping your kids off is not a school sponsored activity and sidewalks, parking lots, etc. are not prohibited... Unless there is a sponsored activity on that day on that sidewalk, parking lot, etc. Sound about right?

[MeMelYup]

Unfortunately, the AG did not address fieldtrips to non-prohibited locations.

Yes, trips to the zoo, etc..

[Charles L. Cotton]

Unfortunately, the AG did not address fieldtrips to non-prohibited locations.

Yes, trips to the zoo, etc..

Correct, he did not address off-campus activities, but that would have been outside the scope of the requested opinion. The specific question asked by Sen. Whitmire was "2. Does TPC 46.03(a)(1) prohibit the carrying of firearms on the grounds of a school district where educational activity is being conducted to include parking lots, driveways sidewalks or walkways of the school property?" Therefore, the AG's opinion was limited to the scope of the question asked.

However, Gen. Paxton's opinion KP-0047 sheds light on the likely response to a question as to whether the prohibition on carrying on certain activity grounds applies only to property owned by the school. The AG opinion follows the rational and analysis I have argued for years. Since a school can provide written authorization to carry firearms where they would otherwise be prohibited, this necessarily means the prohibition must apply only to property that the school owns and can thus control. For example, if I allow the use of my home for an event sponsored by the Friendswood High School, the school does not have the legal power to authorize anyone to carry firearms on my private property. That decision is up to me.

Gen. Paxton's KP-0047 addresses the question question whether the presence of a court or court office in a multi-use building renders the entire building off-limits. In responding "no," KP-0047, Gen. Paxton uses precisely this analysis I use in determining the scope of the school activity grounds prohibition. The relevant portion of the Opinion is as follows:

• • Further, when considering the statute as a whole, under subsection 46.03(a)(3) a court may issue written regulations or provide authorization concerning the allowance of firearms on its premises. See TEX. PENAL CODE§ 46.03(a)(3) (establishing an offense for carrying a prohibited weapon "on the premises of any government court or offices utilized by the court, unless pursuant to written regulations or authorization of the court"). A court's authority with regard to such regulations or authorization would not include areas of the building that are beyond the operations of the court. This is some indication that the Legislature intended the prohibition in subsection 46.03(a)(3) to have a limited reach.

Gen. Paxton's analysis is correct. When the Legislature renders certain property off-limits to firearms, but empowers a governmental agency or entity to authorize citizens to carry in such locations, the scope of the prohibition must be limited to property the agency or entity can legally control.

Chas.

[blwill]

I understand what Charles is saying but it bothers me that the AG's opinion includes the frequent use of the word "public" in it.

As an example, we still have Christmas parades here in Panola County each year. The big parade in Carthage has bands from three or four school districts marching in it. Since the AG's opinion include "public", "sidewalks", and "streets", could this possibly be construed as restricting open or concealed carry along the parade route?

I'm not trying to argue the point here, just trying to get it clear in my mind.

[locke_n_load]

I understand what Charles is saying but it bothers me that the AG's opinion includes the frequent use of the word "public" in it.

As an example, we still have Christmas parades here in Panola County each year. The big parade in Carthage has bands from three or four school districts marching in it. Since the AG's opinion include "public", "sidewalks", and "streets", could this possibly be construed as restricting open or concealed carry along the parade route?

I'm not trying to argue the point here, just trying to get it clear in my mind.

I actually had this same question and thought of parades as well.
Since the penal code makes a distinction for "sidewalks" and "streets" and "parking lots" and etc., could it be said that if the marching band is on the street and you are on the sidewalk, that you are not on the same grounds as the students?

[ELB]

...

As an example, we still have Christmas parades here in Panola County each year. The big parade in Carthage has bands from three or four school districts marching in it. Since the AG's opinion include "public", "sidewalks", and "streets", could this possibly be construed as restricting open or concealed carry along the parade route?...

Following Mr. Cotton's logic, the question would be "Does the school control the Carthage public street and sidewalks on the parade route? In other words, can the school authorize concealed (or open) carry on that route? I think the answer to both is no, they do not have this control, so restrictions that are only effective on school controlled property do not apply to the parade route.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I understand what Charles is saying but it bothers me that the AG's opinion includes the frequent use of the word "public" in it.

As an example, we still have Christmas parades here in Panola County each year. The big parade in Carthage has bands from three or four school districts marching in it. Since the AG's opinion include "public", "sidewalks", and "streets", could this possibly be construed as restricting open or concealed carry along the parade route?

I'm not trying to argue the point here, just trying to get it clear in my mind.

I actually had this same question and thought of parades as well.
Since the penal code makes a distinction for "sidewalks" and "streets" and "parking lots" and etc., could it be said that if the marching band is on the street and you are on the sidewalk, that you are not on the same grounds as the students?

No. Again, the AG's opinion must be read in context with the question(s) asked. Sen. Whitmire expressly limited his question to school property. ("2. Does TPC 46.03(a)(1) prohibit the carrying of firearms on the grounds of a school district where educational activity is being conducted to include parking lots, driveways sidewalks or walkways of the school property?") Therefore, the AG's opinion was limited to the scope of the question asked.

Remember, any road, sidewalk, etc. built with public funds, as opposed to something like a private gated community, are public roads, sidewalks, etc. The fact that the school can prohibit some people from driving on them for non-school purposes does not change their character. Remember also that the definition of "premises" found in TPC §46.035(f)(3) was part of SB60, the original concealed-carry Bill passed in 1995. It applies not only to primary and secondary schools, but also to colleges and universities. Virtually every college/university has public streets on their campuses, so the clarifying sentence added to the operative language making up the first sentence had to be added.

I again refer folks to the language in AG Opinion KP-0047 as clear and convincing evidence that the boundaries of a prohibited area are limited by the scope of an entity's legal authority to authorize LTC's to engage in conduct that would otherwise violate state law.

Could someone in local government argue otherwise? Sure, the liars connected with the zoo decisions to leave 30.06 signs posted at the Houston, Dallas and Fort Worth zoos are examples. However, this doesn't change Texas law of the extensive legal research and analysis that went into the recently released AG opinions.

Chas.

[cprems]

A quick question or two...

I can still pick my child up from school while carrying,correct? I believe I can as long as I do not enter the building or go under any alcoves that are attached to the building. I can stand in the drive way or on the walkway or wait in my vehicle.

Now, what happens if there is band practice or football practice? My understanding is as long as its not directly going on in the area (same parking lot) that I am still in compliance?

Charles, is this correct? The last thing I want to do is get into hot water.

[BlimBlam]

A quick question or two...

I can still pick my child up from school while carrying,correct? I believe I can as long as I do not enter the building or go under any alcoves that are attached to the building. I can stand in the drive way or on the walkway or wait in my vehicle.

Now, what happens if there is band practice or football practice? My understanding is as long as its not directly going on in the area (same parking lot) that I am still in compliance?

Charles, is this correct? The last thing I want to do is get into hot water.

A quick question or two...

I can still pick my child up from school while carrying,correct? I believe I can as long as I do not enter the building or go under any alcoves that are attached to the building. I can stand in the drive way or on the walkway or wait in my vehicle.

Now, what happens if there is band practice or football practice? My understanding is as long as its not directly going on in the area (same parking lot) that I am still in compliance?

Charles, is this correct? The last thing I want to do is get into hot water.

This is the question I would like an exact answer on please?? Drives, parking lots, and walkways excluding any place that could be considered "part of the building"? We(my kids and I) also walk our dog around several public school parks that are nice. My CHL instructor.. who happens to be an attorney who writes and reviews legal documents, contracts etc.. told me both times I was required to take the class.. that I'm legal in those areas around a school that I mentioned above. Is he 100% correct on this?
Thanks, Jason G