AG Opinion on CHL in multiple use government buldings

As the name indicates, this is the place for gun-related political discussions. It is not open to other political topics.

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

User avatar

mojo84
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 9044
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 4:07 pm
Location: Boerne, TX (Kendall County)

Re: AG Opinion on CHL in multiple use government buldings

#1

Post by mojo84 »

Seemed so obvious to me. It's a shame some government entities and officials want to ignore or circumvent the law.
Note: Me sharing a link and information published by others does not constitute my endorsement, agreement, disagreement, my opinion or publishing by me. If you do not like what is contained at a link I share, take it up with the author or publisher of the content.
User avatar

ELB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 8128
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 9:34 pm
Location: Seguin

Re: AG Opinion on CHL in multiple use government buldings

#2

Post by ELB »

Thanks for the posting. AG Paxton and his staff have been busy little beavers!
USAF 1982-2005
____________

roadkill
Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 166
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2015 3:48 pm

Re: AG Opinion on CHL in multiple use government buldings

#3

Post by roadkill »

And Nueces county just went ahead and posted its county buildings including the courthouse. :banghead:

http://www.kristv.com/story/30801208/nu ... courthouse
User avatar

Glockster
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:48 am
Location: Kingwood, TX

Re: AG Opinion on CHL in multiple use government buldings

#4

Post by Glockster »

Seems pretty straight forward, and a clear validation of what everyone here has long since concluded. It will be interesting to see if at some point the AG does clarify exactly what an office "essential" to the court is.
NRA Life Member
My State Rep Hubert won't tell me his position on HB560. How about yours?
User avatar

Glockster
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:48 am
Location: Kingwood, TX

Re: AG Opinion on CHL in multiple use government buldings

#5

Post by Glockster »

timtheteacher wrote:also in the opinion....

"Thus,
any oral notice given by a governmental entity regarding the prohibition of handguns, if given
where handguns are lawful, can serve as an improper exclusion in violation in section 411.209.
And the sign about which you inquire that does not use the statutory language but states that the
Center is a "Weapons Free Zone," if placed in an area where handguns are allowed, would
similarly invoke the enforcement mechanism of section 411.209. "

"Conversely,
a licensee who refuses to relinquish any concealed handgun or refuses to exit the building after
being· given notice by a governmental entity does not commit an offense if the building is not one
from which sections 46.03 and 46.035 prohibit concealed handguns. See id § 30.06(e)."
Yes, thought that was a nice bit as well
NRA Life Member
My State Rep Hubert won't tell me his position on HB560. How about yours?
User avatar

mojo84
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 9044
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 4:07 pm
Location: Boerne, TX (Kendall County)

Re: AG Opinion on CHL in multiple use government buldings

#6

Post by mojo84 »

roadkill wrote:And Nueces county just went ahead and posted its county buildings including the courthouse. :banghead:

http://www.kristv.com/story/30801208/nu ... courthouse

I hope they get hammered with the penalties.
Note: Me sharing a link and information published by others does not constitute my endorsement, agreement, disagreement, my opinion or publishing by me. If you do not like what is contained at a link I share, take it up with the author or publisher of the content.

casp625
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 671
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 9:24 pm

Re: AG Opinion on CHL in multiple use government buldings

#7

Post by casp625 »

Glockster wrote:
timtheteacher wrote:also in the opinion....

"Thus,
any oral notice given by a governmental entity regarding the prohibition of handguns, if given
where handguns are lawful, can serve as an improper exclusion in violation in section 411.209.
And the sign about which you inquire that does not use the statutory language but states that the
Center is a "Weapons Free Zone," if placed in an area where handguns are allowed, would
similarly invoke the enforcement mechanism of section 411.209. "

"Conversely,
a licensee who refuses to relinquish any concealed handgun or refuses to exit the building after
being· given notice by a governmental entity does not commit an offense if the building is not one
from which sections 46.03 and 46.035 prohibit concealed handguns. See id § 30.06(e)."
Yes, thought that was a nice bit as well
It would seem to me that the AG is going to apply 411.209 to 30.07 signs or similar language as well...

Seabear
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 781
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 1:36 pm
Location: Corpus Christi , TX
Contact:

Re: AG Opinion on CHL in multiple use government buldings

#8

Post by Seabear »

mojo84 wrote:
roadkill wrote:And Nueces county just went ahead and posted its county buildings including the courthouse. :banghead:

http://www.kristv.com/story/30801208/nu ... courthouse

I hope they get hammered with the penalties.
Me too, we have several discussions going locally.
Carry safe and carry when and where you can. I'm just sayin'.
User avatar

oljames3
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 5366
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 1:21 pm
Location: Bastrop, Texas
Contact:

Re: AG Opinion on CHL in multiple use government buldings

#9

Post by oljames3 »

KRISTV.com: One day later, Nueces Co. to reverse gun ban at courthouse
http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news/ag ... d-p/nppnx/
O. Lee James, III Captain, US Army (Retired 2012), Honorable Order of St. Barbara
Safety Ministry Director, First Baptist Church Elgin
NRA, NRA Basic Pistol Shooting Instructor, Rangemaster Certified, GOA, TSRA, NAR L1

jb2012
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1055
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 1:12 pm

Re: AG Opinion on CHL in multiple use government buldings

#10

Post by jb2012 »

timtheteacher wrote:It will be interesting to see how Wes Mau is going to handle this. He was the originator of the request for opinion based on what they do in Hays County.
I'm a little new to the CHL game (November 2015), But I live in Hays county, what exactly is going on there?

jb2012
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1055
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 1:12 pm

Re: AG Opinion on CHL in multiple use government buldings

#11

Post by jb2012 »

thanks, somehow I never got wind of this
Post Reply

Return to “Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues”