HB 2164 - civil and criminal penalties for prohibiting LEO carry

[Papa_Tiger]

https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/Hi ... ill=HB2164

You commit a crime (Class C misdemeanor) if you tell a LEO or special investigator that they cannot carry into your establishment that is open to the public. The AG can sue you for $1000 for each time you prohibit a LEO from carrying. This just adds teeth to something that you can't do already.

[apostate]

"Rights for me but none for thee" is becoming the common refrain of our new rulers.

[Flightmare]

I would have fewer issues with this law if it only applied to LEO who were on-duty at the time. But I do not see that limitation. The current law states;

Art. 2.1305. CARRYING WEAPON ON CERTAIN PREMISES. (a) An establishment serving the public may not prohibit or otherwise restrict a peace officer or special investigator from carrying on the establishment's premises a weapon that the peace officer or special investigator is otherwise authorized to carry, regardless of whether the peace officer or special investigator is engaged in the actual discharge of the officer's or investigator's duties while carrying the weapon.

Perhaps someone can help me understand. Does this mean that a LEO can never be prevented from carrying, even while off duty? Or does it mean that only while on-duty but not necessarily an active call (ie. a lunch break).

[Jusme]

I would have fewer issues with this law if it only applied to LEO who were on-duty at the time. But I do not see that limitation. The current law states;

Art. 2.1305. CARRYING WEAPON ON CERTAIN PREMISES. (a) An establishment serving the public may not prohibit or otherwise restrict a peace officer or special investigator from carrying on the establishment's premises a weapon that the peace officer or special investigator is otherwise authorized to carry, regardless of whether the peace officer or special investigator is engaged in the actual discharge of the officer's or investigator's duties while carrying the weapon.

Perhaps someone can help me understand. Does this mean that a LEO can never be prevented from carrying, even while off duty? Or does it mean that only while on-duty but not necessarily an active call (ie. a lunch break).

It means on duty, off duty, out of jurisdiction, 24/7. I could walk in to any bar, restaurant, courthouse, school, sporting event etc. when I was a LEO. If they had security, I just showed my badge and bypassed metal detectors.

This is why I have been so adamant about getting laws passed, to allow LTC holders, to carry anywhere LEO can.

[Scott Farkus]

It means on duty, off duty, out of jurisdiction, 24/7. I could walk in to any bar, restaurant, courthouse, school, sporting event etc. when I was a LEO. If they had security, I just showed my badge and bypassed metal detectors.

This is why I have been so adamant about getting laws passed, to allow LTC holders, to carry anywhere LEO can.

Would that render 30.06/30.07 postings moot for LTC holders, or just statutorily restricted places and those with 51% signs?

[AnglinTexas]

It means on duty, off duty, out of jurisdiction, 24/7. I could walk in to any bar, restaurant, courthouse, school, sporting event etc. when I was a LEO. If they had security, I just showed my badge and bypassed metal detectors.

This is why I have been so adamant about getting laws passed, to allow LTC holders, to carry anywhere LEO can.

Would that render 30.06/30.07 postings moot for LTC holders, or just statutorily restricted places and those with 51% signs?

That would depend on how said Bill was written, it could be worded either way. But from what I understand it will be hard to pass because of personal property rights.

[ScottDLS]

This could never pass...Texas has a 180 year long tradition of property owners’ absolute dominion over their property . Except for cops, volunteer emergency responders, and corporate parking lots, and utility workers, and respect for common law, and out of state shareholder rights, and common law contracts or lack thereof, and protections against the trial bar........

[jordanmills]

I would have fewer issues with this law if it only applied to LEO who were on-duty at the time. But I do not see that limitation. The current law states;

Art. 2.1305. CARRYING WEAPON ON CERTAIN PREMISES. (a) An establishment serving the public may not prohibit or otherwise restrict a peace officer or special investigator from carrying on the establishment's premises a weapon that the peace officer or special investigator is otherwise authorized to carry, regardless of whether the peace officer or special investigator is engaged in the actual discharge of the officer's or investigator's duties while carrying the weapon.

Perhaps someone can help me understand. Does this mean that a LEO can never be prevented from carrying, even while off duty? Or does it mean that only while on-duty but not necessarily an active call (ie. a lunch break).

It means on duty, off duty, out of jurisdiction, 24/7. I could walk in to any bar, restaurant, courthouse, school, sporting event etc. when I was a LEO. If they had security, I just showed my badge and bypassed metal detectors.

This is why I have been so adamant about getting laws passed, to allow LTC holders, to carry anywhere LEO can.

Yep. The additional restrictions on people who are licensed and vetted by the state, investigated and tracked by the FBI, arguably better trained and likely more knowledgeable about the law, and commit crimes at a much lower rate than LEOs (and that's before considering qualified immunity and the blue wall) is an absurd situation.

[nightmare69]

Only private establishment that I’m aware of that doesn’t allow off-duty LEOs to carry is the House of Blues in Houston. Unless they have metal detectors or security pat downs, they won’t know I’m carrying anyway.

[TxRVer]

I'm assuming this is a response to the few times LEOs have been turned away at fast food restaurants by left minded order takers.

[Flightmare]

I'm assuming this is a response to the few times LEOs have been turned away at fast food restaurants by left minded order takers.

My understanding is this does not prohibit a business from refusing to serve or even requesting a LEO leave. This just prohibits a business open to the public from requiring them to disarm as a condition to entrance.

[KLB]

This is why I have been so adamant about getting laws passed, to allow LTC holders, to carry anywhere LEO can.

That's common sense, but I expect to see it enacted about the same time I see a unicorn.

[TxRVer]

I'm assuming this is a response to the few times LEOs have been turned away at fast food restaurants by left minded order takers.

My understanding is this does not prohibit a business from refusing to serve or even requesting a LEO leave. This just prohibits a business open to the public from requiring them to disarm as a condition to entrance.

Wow! So, what's the point? They have to let you enter, but that's as far as you get. Service is not required?

[KLB]

Wow! So, what's the point? They have to let you enter, but that's as far as you get. Service is not required?

They can't refuse to serve because he's armed, and refusing to serve LEOs generally will lead to a big PR kerfuffle.