TexasCHLforum.com

sjfcontrol wrote:

johnson0317 wrote:I do not believe you have any defense against prosecution if your car breaks down, you do not have a CHL, and you choose to carry your weapon while walking to your house. You are allowed to carry from your house to your car, and back, and to the range and back, and to the gunsmith, and back...but I really do not think you are covered to simply take a hike with it because your car broke down.

RJ

Actually, PC46.02(a)(2) states: [A person commits a crime if carrying a gun, knife or club, if the person is not] "inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control". It says nothing about carrying it back.

Yeah, I remember pondering that when it first became law. I had imagined a car with no place to sit from carrying weapons to the car with no way to carry them back.

apostate wrote:

Dragonfighter wrote:We have discussed ad nauseum how one's vehicle (or vehicle under their control) is private property.

We have also discussed how some employers can and do prohibit firearms in vehicles on their property. (e.g. refineries, schools)

There are some employers that are able to do so by statute (refineries, etc.), otherwise they cannot. And I believe there is a material difference between an employee/employer relationship and one where a person has residence, I.E. If the holder of a mortgage cannot restrict gun ownership, then the holder of a lease should not by extension. If you are permitted on the parking lot as a resident, then the car and to/from the apt are not something the landlords can control.

apostate wrote:

Dragonfighter wrote:We have discussed how a hotel cannot prevent you from keeping a weapon in your room as it is a de facto residence while you are there.

We have discussed how it's (probably) not a crime to keep a weapon in your room because it's your temporary residence. However, if a hotel has a policy against firearms, I haven't seen a compelling argument that they're not allowed to enforce their policies though civil remedies. Granted, the risk of being caught is rather low, but hypothetically speaking...

THAT is my point exactly. It is your residence, they cannot compel you not to keep a weapon on or about you. Civil remedies? P'shaw. I'd like to see that one. I would think the worst that could be done is terminating the lease and maybe forfeiture of the security deposit. But I bet even that fight would bite the property owners.

Okay - I guess I'm missing something.

MPA, Premise Under Control -

Sec. 46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun, illegal knife, or club if the person is not:

(1) on the person's own premises or premises under the person's control; or

(2) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle that is owned by the person or under the person's control.

PC 30.01 wrote:Sec. 30.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:

(1) "Habitation" means a structure or vehicle that is adapted for the overnight accommodation of persons, and includes:

(A) each separately secured or occupied portion of the structure or vehicle; and

(B) each structure appurtenant to or connected with the structure or vehicle.

(2) "Building" means any enclosed structure intended for use or occupation as a habitation or for some purpose of trade, manufacture, ornament, or use.

(3) "Vehicle" includes any device in, on, or by which any person or property is or may be propelled, moved, or drawn in the normal course of commerce or transportation, except such devices as are classified as "habitation."

We have discussed ad nauseum how one's vehicle (or vehicle under their control) is private property. We have discussed how a hotel cannot prevent you from keeping a weapon in your room as it is a de facto residence while you are there. But an apartment can?!? I call "nonsense".