Clarification of postings

[texag06]

Please correct me if I am wrong on either statement:

1)The locations concealed carry is prohibited are where a 51% or 30.06 sign is posted as well as other places outlined in TPC § 46.03. PLACES WEAPONS PROHIBITED.

2)The ghostbuster (circle with slash through it) sign or a NO HANDGUNS ALLOWED sign don't apply to CHL holders.

Thanks in advance.

-Dustin

[Texasdoc]

Yes Sir you are right

300 shooter

[propellerhead]

What if it's company policy?

[Diode]

What if it's company policy?

The company would need to post a 30.06 sign.

[propellerhead]

Even if it's on US Gov't property?

[mschadt]

That would probably change things... Your State issued licence can't authorize you to carry on Federal Property, except I think in the case of a National Forest, or is it a National Park, one or the other will allow you to carry and the other wont.

Here's a post from a while back that might not be so relevant after all. http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_F ... ice&p=9969

[Diode]

That would probably change things...

Here's a post from a while back that might be relevant. http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_F ... ice&p=9969

I was trying to find a thread TX and Chas posted in a few days ago. they explained it there very well.

[mschadt]

I was trying to find a thread TX and Chas posted in a few days ago. they explained it there very well.

It might be one of these:
http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_F ... .php?t=124

http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_F ... php?t=2213

Although none deal with Federal Employees.

[txinvestigator]

What if it's company policy?

If they give notice in a handbook, policy or verbally you are prohibited.

[txinvestigator]

Please correct me if I am wrong on either statement:

1)The locations concealed carry is prohibited are where a 51% or 30.06 sign is posted as well as other places outlined in TPC § 46.03. PLACES WEAPONS PROHIBITED.

2)The ghostbuster (circle with slash through it) sign or a NO HANDGUNS ALLOWED sign don't apply to CHL holders.

Thanks in advance.

-Dustin

1. Don't forget 46.035

2. Generally correct.

[barres]

There is nothing in Texas law barring carrying on Federal property. However, there is ongoing debate about the legality of carrying with a valid CHL on Federal Property according to Federal Law. Most here view CHL qualifying as "other lawful purposes." Most anti's, I'm sure, would not.

Other than the already mentioned Federal property issue, an employer can fire an employee for violating a company policy banning firearms, but criminal trespass charges won't stick unless the requirements of 30.06 are met (properly worded and sized sign, properly worded written notification of the ban, and/or verbal notice that can be proven).

I am not a lawyer, but this is my understanding of the law.

[Kalrog]

What if it's company policy?

If they give notice in a handbook, policy or verbally you are prohibited.

You are only legally prohibited if the written notice conforms to 30.06 wording. Verbal doesn't have to conform to that wording though.

You could be fired for violating the poorly written policy, but you cannot be charged with a crime as none was comitted.

[texag06]

Please correct me if I am wrong on either statement:

1)The locations concealed carry is prohibited are where a 51% or 30.06 sign is posted as well as other places outlined in TPC § 46.03. PLACES WEAPONS PROHIBITED.

2)The ghostbuster (circle with slash through it) sign or a NO HANDGUNS ALLOWED sign don't apply to CHL holders.

Thanks in advance.

-Dustin

1. Don't forget 46.035

2. Generally correct.

txinvestigator: In what instances would my #2 not be correct?

-Dustin

[Charles L. Cotton]

Also, the lack of a 51% sign on a true 51% location does not prevent prosecution and conviction; i.e. it's not a defense.

Chas.

[KBCraig]

There is nothing in Texas law barring carrying on Federal property. However, there is ongoing debate about the legality of carrying with a valid CHL on Federal Property according to Federal Law. Most here view CHL qualifying as "other lawful purposes." Most anti's, I'm sure, would not.

It's indisputable that there is not a blanket prohibition on carrying on federal property. U.S. Forest Service lands are the largest chunk of federal property, and carry in national forests is governed only by assimilated state laws.

I recently camped at an Army Corps of Engineers campground, and I took a moment to read their posted rules. The rules cited a CFR, stating no loaded firearms are allowed. (Except for local, state, or federal LEOs -- I'm covered, so that's cool, but everyone should have the same freedom.)

The sign you see posted at most federal buildings cites a section of the USC. If you read that law, you'll find that the prohibition doesn't apply unless notice is posted.

Of course, most federal agencies believe that all firearms are prohibited. Just like the tax code, they won't bother citing a legal authority... they'll just prosecute anyway.

Kevin