TexasCHLforum.com

txyaloo wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Open-carry is fine and even HB308 has some life left in it. Srnewby is correct, something is working so watch the horizon. Since we know the opposition reads the Forum, and that there are even moles among us, I can't say more at this point. I spent the day in Austin today.

Chas.

Is campus carry also part of the discussions or is it now on the back burner for this session?

As Charles said, the opposition reads this forum. It may be impolitic at this moment to discuss it in public.

Vol Texan wrote:NOBODY wants this!

Absolute statements are always wrong.

Correct.

treadlightly wrote:

Scenario: You walk into a store that has 30.06 posted but for whatever reason you didn't see it. First of all if you are concealed carrying what are the odds someone will know. If you're open carrying and someone tells you that it's not allowed you just leave. The only way it would be a problem is if you don't leave and they call the police, or the police were in the store and saw you. If you leave and they call the police you'll more than likely be long gone by the time they get there. The last time I checked store owners can't issue tickets. I seriously doubt this is going to be a common occurrence. I've never been asked if I was carrying while in any business. I usually frequent the same businesses so know if they're posted or not. If it's a place I've never been before I make sure to look. I feel this amendment basically protects the CHL from being arrested and losing their license due to inadvertent or accidentally entering a posted premises.

The problem I see is that when you walk past a 30.06 sign you failed to see, you have still been presented with effective notice. You just didn't recognize it. You can lead a horse to a 30.06 sign, but you can't assume that makes him disarm, I guess.

As far as tickets, citations, or charges filed, I'm pretty sure you don't have to remain at the scene of the crime. Burgle and run, and a burgler can still get charged, tried, and convicted.

What you're not including in your mix is that 30.06 doesn't have to be posted at the entrances. The current relevant wording of 30.06 says:

• (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:
  
  • (1) carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and
    
    (2) received notice that:
    
    • (A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was forbidden; or
      
      (B) remaining on the property with a concealed handgun was forbidden and failed to depart.
  (b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.
  
  (c) In this section:
  
  • (1) "Entry" has the meaning assigned by Section 30.05(b).
    
    (2) "License holder" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035(f).
    
    (3) "Written communication" means:
    
    • (A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of 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"; or
      
      (B) a sign posted on the property that:
      
      • (i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
        
        (ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and
        
        (iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.

"Entrance" is not part of the language of the law.......only that it be displayed in a "conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public". That means that if it is conspicuously posted on the inside rear wall of the establishment, such that you can't see it until after you've entered, you're still in violation, even though you did not receive notice until after you entered.

Personally, I would want 30.06/30.07 to be amended to specify that compliant signage must be posted at ALL entrances without exception (this would necessarily include freight doors on loading docks, etc.). Because as long as there remains a reasonable possibility that someone could enter in good faith without having to actually walk past a sign, then that person is placed into a legal jeopardy which he has no way of discerning so as to avoid it. You can't comply with something that you don't know exists, and the blanket response that "ignorance of the law is no excuse" does not apply in this case. If a city creates a speed trap by lowering the speed limit from 45 mph to 25 mph along a given stretch of road, but the city fails to place a sign at the point where the reduction occurs, notifying drivers that the speed limit has been reduced at that point, then drivers who unknowingly violate that zone and are ticketed for it will beat that ticket all day long and twice on Sundays. It is a simple principle to understand, and it is beyond me why that kind of language was not written into 30.06 from the beginning.

viking1000 wrote:Amendment number 9 to HB 910 that was approved says any city over 750000 population can regulate open carry ...
That covers Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston and San Antonio .. The way I read it .. Anyone see it different..?

That amendment was tabled and not added to the bill.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

locke_n_load wrote:Interesting thought. HB910 states that each entrance must be posted with 30.07 in order to bar open carry. The 30.06 code does not say "each entrance". Therefore, if 30.07 is not posted at every entrance to an establishment, could you technically walk past a valid 30.07 sign and not be in violation of the law?

Another question. The amendment says "after entering the property". So if the business just posts the signs past the door, let's say on the indoor wall, you have been given effective notice after "entering" the property, and it is therefor a class A?
I really wish they had said verbally and that would have made it very clear. Walk past sign = class C. Given verbal notice and stick around = class A.

If you see the sign and don't leave, then it would be a Class A.

Chas.

Charles, what I'm still not clear on is whether HB910 created a 30.07 sign for openly carried handguns, or does 30.06 now apply to both OC and CC?

Nevermind.... I just went and read the text of the bill. It does create 30.07 for OC. But the. That begs the question: does the change in penalties apply only to 30.06, or to both 30.06 and 30.07?

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

TVGuy wrote:Charles,

Do you think this will this get through the Senate with the last amendment added?

I don't think there will be a problem because of the amendment. The overall feud between the House and Senate could be a problem, but probably not on this gun bill.

Chas.

Charles, what feud is that? I didn't know there was one.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I love Phillips taking Stickland down!!!

Chas.

yep.

I also just noticed that Stickland was wearing a blingy AR15 lapel pin.

jerry_r60 wrote:So the amendment to change 30.06 passed, does that by default also change 30.07?

The amendment's author only mentioned 30.06, not open carry. So if HB910 passes with this amendment, 30.06 will still apply to CC, but with a somewhat lesser penalty, and no mention of how it applies to OC.

mojo84 wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:Who is this idiot Stickland, and what kind of idiots elected him?

OCT member and mouthpiece.

OK, that explains it. Thanks.

Who is this idiot Stickland, and what kind of idiots elected him?

My question is, isn't there a point at which the opportunity to offer amendments is shut down?

Whole lotta shuffling and crap going on over local control. I don't like that at ALL.