TexasCHLforum.com

RPB wrote:...if they are not in a location of a school, court or other off-limits location. Though like I said, they might fire you if they find out

Public schools cannot (presumably) post a parking lot, as it is government property, and they don't need to post the buildings, as that is already off-limits.

pbwalker wrote:

JT69 wrote: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???

If I understand the question, the only restriction regarding WHERE the sign is posted, is

PC 30.06(c)(3)(B)(iii) wrote:...is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.

At the entrance to the parking lot would seem to fulfill that requirement.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote: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... )

Oh I believe you. It just runs counter to previously established "board opinion." But this does beg the question..... If you are carrying under under authority of MPA while driving your car—even though you have a CHL—then how can the 30.06 sign at the parking lot entrance apply to you, since it has no force over MPA? ........as in, "yes, I drove past the sign with my gun in my possession, because while I'm driving, MPA supersedes CHL." Not trying to argue, but doesn't that seem like a logical inconsistency to you?

It doesn't apply to you, no inconsistency there. It does apply if you're not driving (or out of your car).

by the way. I should note there is no case law regarding any of this. I am not a lawyer... yada, yada, yada...

JT69 wrote: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!

The Annoyed Man wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote: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... )

The Annoyed Man wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote: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.

The Annoyed Man wrote: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."