G.C.Montgomery wrote:May be I'm reading this wrong but it seems the non-applicability clause for UCW would cover the employees of the AutoZone as well as employees of any business where the owner or general manager asks his employees to carry a weapon on our about their person if their primary responsibility is something other than that of a security guard.
The exemption is for someone whose primary duty is security, in which case they have to be a commissioned security officer.
===============================================
(b) Section 46.02 does not apply to a person who...
(2) is on the person's own premises or premises under
the person's control unless the person is an employee or agent of
the owner of the premises and the person's primary responsibility
is to act in the capacity of a security guard to protect persons or
property, in which event the person must comply with Subdivision
(5);
[/b]
You already highlighted the the important part: to be exempt from UCW, they must be an employee or agent of the owner, and their primary responsibility is security. But don't forget, it says they also must comply with Subdivision (5), which is:
PC 46.15(b)(5) holds a security officer commission issued by the
Texas Board of Private Investigators and Private Security Agencies,
if:
(A) the person is engaged in the performance of
the person's duties as a security officer or traveling to and from
the person's place of assignment;
(B) the person is wearing a distinctive uniform;
and
(C) the weapon is in plain view;
An employee who doesn't control the premises is UCW when carrying a gun, unless they're a commissioned security guard in uniform and carrying openly.
And of course an employee with a CHL who carried openly would be "UCW by a CHL holder", PC 46.035(a), for intentionally failing to conceal.
Kevin