30. 06 Signe at the wor place!

[JT69]

Hello! I've been doing some research an haven't had much luck yet. My employer has had the signes on the building and that's fine, but now has added theme to the entrance's to the property that we park on!!! Can they do this? The.30 06 signes ? The little info I've found says yes if it's private and no if venders & customers can come in to parking lot to. Considered public!! I won't to have the right to carry back an forth from work because that's the biggest part of being out an about!! Right?? But don't wont to get fired either!! Thanks for any info on this. Forgive my spelling

[The Annoyed Man]

First, I am not a lawyer....

30.06 applies to "premises." AFAIK, the definition of premises in the law includes buildings or parts of buildings, but does not include parking lots. Furthermore, the parking lot bill was supposed to give employees the right to secure their weapon in their car.

§ 46.03. PLACES WEAPONS PROHIBITED.

• (c) In this section:
  • (1) "Premises" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035.

Sec. 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER.

• (f) In this section:
  • (3) "Premises" means a building or a portion of a building. The term does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area.

It is not clear to me from reading 30.06 whether it could include a parking lot or not, but for sure a 30.06 sign at the parking lot entrance would be irrelevant to someone carrying a firearm under MPA in their vehicle. But I note the following:

Sec. 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUN.

• (e) It is an exception to the application of this section that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.

So 46.035(f)(3) exempts parking lots, and 30.06 says that it is an exemption to the law if it is not a premises prohibited by 46.035. I think that the upshot is....you might be fired, but you won't be prosecuted. And you could claim wrongful termination because the parking lot bill specifically protects CHL holders.....

.....so the bottom line? I don't know.

[Greekguydave]

Sounds like your good to have it in your car unless you work at a school district, private school, chemical plant, gas or oil refinery. And have a CHL.. What you boss doesn't know, won't hurt him. Actually could save him one day.

[sjfcontrol]

First, I am not a lawyer....

30.06 applies to "premises." AFAIK, the definition of premises in the law includes buildings or parts of buildings, but does not include parking lots. Furthermore, the parking lot bill was supposed to give employees the right to secure their weapon in their car.

Actually, the 30.06 SIGN refers to "property", not "premesis".

"PURSUANT TO SECTION 30.06,
PENAL CODE (TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF A LICENSE TO CARRY A CONCEALED HANDGUN)
A PERSON LICENSED UNDER SUBCHAPTER H, CHAPTER 411, GOVERNMENT CODE (CONCEALED HANDGUN LAW), MAY NOT ENTER THIS
PROPERTY WITH A CONCEALED HANDGUN."

[The Annoyed Man]

First, I am not a lawyer....

30.06 applies to "premises." AFAIK, the definition of premises in the law includes buildings or parts of buildings, but does not include parking lots. Furthermore, the parking lot bill was supposed to give employees the right to secure their weapon in their car.

Actually, the 30.06 SIGN refers to "property", not "premesis".

"PURSUANT TO SECTION 30.06,
PENAL CODE (TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF A LICENSE TO CARRY A CONCEALED HANDGUN)
A PERSON LICENSED UNDER SUBCHAPTER H, CHAPTER 411, GOVERNMENT CODE (CONCEALED HANDGUN LAW), MAY NOT ENTER THIS
PROPERTY WITH A CONCEALED HANDGUN."

So what about So 46.035(f)(3) exempting parking lots, and 30.06 saying that it is an exemption to the law if it is not a premises prohibited by 46.035? How does the law reconcile those two things?

[JT69]

Thanks for the replys ! Still unclear to me ! Your not spost to enter were this signe is posted!!! But is this signe legally posted at the entrance!!! Are can people just post theme were ever they please??? Is their guidelines they have to meet to post the 30 06 signe???

[sjfcontrol]

First, I am not a lawyer....

30.06 applies to "premises." AFAIK, the definition of premises in the law includes buildings or parts of buildings, but does not include parking lots. Furthermore, the parking lot bill was supposed to give employees the right to secure their weapon in their car.

Actually, the 30.06 SIGN refers to "property", not "premesis".

"PURSUANT TO SECTION 30.06,
PENAL CODE (TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF A LICENSE TO CARRY A CONCEALED HANDGUN)
A PERSON LICENSED UNDER SUBCHAPTER H, CHAPTER 411, GOVERNMENT CODE (CONCEALED HANDGUN LAW), MAY NOT ENTER THIS
PROPERTY WITH A CONCEALED HANDGUN."

So what about So 46.035(f)(3) exempting parking lots, and 30.06 saying that it is an exemption to the law if it is not a premises prohibited by 46.035? How does the law reconcile those two things?

The premises definition is used for schools. 30.06(e) is simply saying that govt. buildings cannot be posted, unless carrying there is proscribed elsewhere, such as courts, polling places, etc. so a CHL could not claim that he can carry in a courtroom because it's govt. property.

Private property owners CAN post parking lots. Amusement parks do it all the time. Now, that being said, what about MPA? Well, the current thinking is that you're not carrying under your CHL while driving, the CHL exception isn't needed since carrying in you car is not otherwise illegal. So you CAN drive past a 30.06 sign protecting a parking lot, but you cannot then step out of the car with your gun. At that point MPA no longer applies, and the 30.06 sign comes into effect.

[apostate]

So what about So 46.035(f)(3) exempting parking lots,

That's correct for the definition of premises, but 30.05 and 30.06 refer to property (including agricultural land) not to premises.

30.06 saying that it is an exemption to the law if it is not a premises prohibited by 46.035?

Only if the property is "owned or leased by a governmental entity" does that exception come into play.

[The Annoyed Man]

Now, that being said, what about MPA? Well, the current thinking is that you're not carrying under your CHL while driving, the CHL exception isn't needed since carrying in you car is not otherwise illegal. So you CAN drive past a 30.06 sign protecting a parking lot, but you cannot then step out of the car with your gun. At that point MPA no longer applies, and the 30.06 sign comes into effect.

Interesting, the last conversation I was involved in regarding CHL and MPA the consensus was that if you have a CHL, MPA does not apply to you. Ever. And that if you are stopped by police while carrying in your vehicle, they are not going to accept "I was carrying under MPA" if you have a CHL.

So you're saying that this is not the case?

[Greekguydave]

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/RSD/CHL/Le ... lation.htm
This is new legislation that started sep 1st 2011
Senate bill 321

[apostate]

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/RSD/CHL/Le ... lation.htm
This is new legislation that started sep 1st 2011
Senate bill 321

That applies to employees only. It explicitly does not protect customers, visitors, tenants, employees of tenants, etc.

[sjfcontrol]

Now, that being said, what about MPA? Well, the current thinking is that you're not carrying under your CHL while driving, the CHL exception isn't needed since carrying in you car is not otherwise illegal. So you CAN drive past a 30.06 sign protecting a parking lot, but you cannot then step out of the car with your gun. At that point MPA no longer applies, and the 30.06 sign comes into effect.

Interesting, the last conversation I was involved in regarding CHL and MPA the consensus was that if you have a CHL, MPA does not apply to you. Ever. And that if you are stopped by police while carrying in your vehicle, they are not going to accept "I was carrying under MPA" if you have a CHL.

So you're saying that this is not the case?

Yep, that's what I'm saying. Now,regarding a police stop, you are still required to display your CHL license (though there is no penalty if you don't) even though you're carrying under MPA. Why? Because the law that states you have to display says you have to do that if you are licensed, and armed. It does NOT say if you're carrying under its authority. That is what causes many to claim that CHL "trumps" MPA -- it doesn't.

By the way. If you search the archives you'll find that both Charles and srothstein agree with these opinions.

(and I've convinced Keith B of this twice now... )

[C-dub]

I think, IIRC, from discussions on this issue when the parking lot law became effective, that such a sign would be ineffective for employees, but would apply to non-employees of a company that posted like this. However, there was also quite discussion as to whether or not it only applied then if one were to exit their vehicle and be carrying under their CHL. What I mean is that someone with a gun in their vehicle under the MPA might not be affected by this because 30.06 only applies to someone carrying under the authority of a CHL.

When it comes to your level of clarity on this subject, you are not alone. My company, that is "my employer", has not changed one word of their policy regarding weapons on their property and even other parking lots that do not belong to them. I understand that many companies are also waiting to see what, if anything, happens in court regarding this issue since there is no penalty for not complying with our almost 1-year old law.

[JT69]

My work place is a city yard!! Street , water works for utility repairs water & sewer, streets,,
And is it ok to keep replying back an forth on a topic ?? Like I'm doing ! Are do we have to private message back an forth!

[sjfcontrol]

My work place is a city yard!! Street , water works for utility repairs water & sewer, streets,,
And is ok to keep replying back an forth on a topic ?? Like I'm doing ! Are do we have to private message back an forth!

You're doing fine!