Private Property Carry (Without LTC)

[Pig Renter]

I touched on this on someone else's thread a few minutes ago but felt it needed its own thread. Plus I don't want to sideline his original question.

I have for a long wondered about the legality of carrying a handgun (open or concealed) on private property without possessing a LTC.

For instance: If I own a barbershop that employees three barbers, can I give them permission to carry a gun to work even if they are not licensed? After all, the business and property are my private property, which in my eyes is no different than my private residence.

Searching through various statutes I come across phrases that state things along the lines as a person may possess a firearm without a LTC if they are on their own property or property under their control.

Does this come into play in my scenario and if so is "property under your control" ever defined in a more precise manner?

And if they are not allowed to open or concealed carry at work even with my permission, does that mean I can't allow people to carry while within my own home? Or in my backyard? Or on my 500 acre ranch?

[ScottDLS]

This has been discussed, but seems like a fair topic for a current thread. Per Texas PC 46.02 you can't carry a handgun except on your own property or property under your control. There is then an exception (a "defense to prosecution" according to court opinion) in Texas PC 46.15 for LTC, police, military, hunting/fishing/SPORTING ACTIVITIES, traveling (whatever that means), etc.

So depending on the meaning of "property under your control", you may NOT be able to grant permission for people to break the law (PC 46.02) and carry a handgun on your property (house, ranch, business, etc.) without an LTC.

[Pig Renter]

So depending on the meaning of "property under your control", you may NOT be able to grant permission for people to break the law (PC 46.02) and carry a handgun on your property (house, ranch, business, etc.) without an LTC.

Wow. What you say makes sense but that just seems incredibly backwards than how it should be in my opinion. What about when me and my friends go out to the pasture to shoot cans or targets? Would the State of Texas view us as lawbreakers if we all are carrying our handguns and only one of us owns the property? Seems silly to me, but I guess it could be worse.

And as far as target shooting goes, would the below statute which you have already referenced relate?

PC §46.15. NON-APPLICABILITY
(b) Section 46.02 does not apply to a person who: is engaging in lawful hunting, fishing, or other sporting activity on the immediate premises where the activity is conducted...if the weapon is a type commonly used in the activity.

Could casual target shooting be considered "other sporting event"? Or are we just not allowed to invite guests to take their pistols down to the ranch/farm/lease/private gun range and target practice without technically breaking the law?

[ScottDLS]

So depending on the meaning of "property under your control", you may NOT be able to grant permission for people to break the law (PC 46.02) and carry a handgun on your property (house, ranch, business, etc.) without an LTC.

Wow. What you say makes sense but that just seems incredibly backwards than how it should be in my opinion. What about when me and my friends go out to the pasture to shoot cans or targets? Would the State of Texas view us as lawbreakers if we all are carrying our handguns and only one of us owns the property? Seems silly to me, but I guess it could be worse.

And as far as target shooting goes, would the below statute which you have already referenced relate?

PC §46.15. NON-APPLICABILITY
(b) Section 46.02 does not apply to a person who: is engaging in lawful hunting, fishing, or other sporting activity on the immediate premises where the activity is conducted...if the weapon is a type commonly used in the activity.

Could casual target shooting be considered "other sporting event"? Or are we just not allowed to invite guests to take their pistols down to the ranch/farm/lease/private gun range and target practice without technically breaking the law?

Target shooting is commonly considered a sporting activity hence how non-LTC can shoot at a range (and carry back and forth to/from loaded as well...)

[TeachMan2016]

So depending on the meaning of "property under your control", you may NOT be able to grant permission for people to break the law (PC 46.02) and carry a handgun on your property (house, ranch, business, etc.) without an LTC.

Wow. What you say makes sense but that just seems incredibly backwards than how it should be in my opinion. What about when me and my friends go out to the pasture to shoot cans or targets? Would the State of Texas view us as lawbreakers if we all are carrying our handguns and only one of us owns the property? Seems silly to me, but I guess it could be worse.

And as far as target shooting goes, would the below statute which you have already referenced relate?

PC §46.15. NON-APPLICABILITY
(b) Section 46.02 does not apply to a person who: is engaging in lawful hunting, fishing, or other sporting activity on the immediate premises where the activity is conducted...if the weapon is a type commonly used in the activity.

Could casual target shooting be considered "other sporting event"? Or are we just not allowed to invite guests to take their pistols down to the ranch/farm/lease/private gun range and target practice without technically breaking the law?

Target shooting is commonly considered a sporting activity hence how non-LTC can shoot at a range (and carry back and forth to/from loaded as well...)

These laws is were everything gets murky. What exactly is considered a "sporting activity"? Not only that but what is considered "traveling" if you drive with your gun? Texas laws are kind of in place so they can say we have laws, but they are vague that it is hard to determine what is correct and what is not; and lets not even talk about the cloudy Castle Laws and Stand Your Ground laws....It's kind of sad that you can face jail time based on someones else's opinion of the interpretation of the laws.

[LucasMcCain]

At virtually all of the ranges I have been to, the employees openly carried handguns at all times. Obviously, I'm not just talking about this year. So for this to be legal, the phrase "property under their control" would have to apply to employees of a business who are not prohibited from carrying by the owner. As shooting ranges are popular with law enforcement, active and retired, I can't imagine that this would be so prevalent were it not legal. I realize this is anecdotal evidence, but it is still compelling to my mind, due to the number of instances which I have observed. If this were not legal, I would think it would be easy to find cases where people have been convicted for this as it is so common and obvious. I realize this doesn't apply to guests in someone's home, though. Maybe someone can ask the employees next time they go to the range? Any who have been there longer than six months should be able to answer.

[mr1337]

Even before open carry, the employees at my main gun shop would open carry, presumably under the property you control exclusion.

Of course, I'm no lawyer, and someone may come correct me, but if you have the legal authority to ask someone to leave a property, you probably control it. I don't know if this is defined elsewhere in Texas Penal Code, but my guess is that it is not, and it's up to the court's interpretation. Presumably, they would use the most reasonable interpretation, which would be what I described. I would say that having a key to the place might also be an indication that you control a property.

[Soccerdad1995]

Even before open carry, the employees at my main gun shop would open carry, presumably under the property you control exclusion.

Of course, I'm no lawyer, and someone may come correct me, but if you have the legal authority to ask someone to leave a property, you probably control it. I don't know if this is defined elsewhere in Texas Penal Code, but my guess is that it is not, and it's up to the court's interpretation. Presumably, they would use the most reasonable interpretation, which would be what I described. I would say that having a key to the place might also be an indication that you control a property.

Well the common definition of the word "control" focuses on the ability to direct the use of something and derive benefits from it, so if you can exclude others from using a property (by lawfully ordering them to leave), then it seems like you would be controlling that property. Of course, IANAL.