Re: property you control
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:36 pm
Legal terms like that are usually defined in the code. I would guess that if it isn't specifically defined in the code somewhere that it has been defined through case law.
The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://mail.texaschlforum.com/
This is more than likely due to "property under one's control" not being clearly defined in the law. That and the lack of case law of a similar situation that would give an idea one way or the other.canvasbck wrote:Lot's of very knowledgable people on this forum and not one definitive response.
My point exactly, it's a complex issue that the combined knowledge on this board has not been able to provide a definitive answer for. A random LEO will more than likely not be able to determine the legallity of it either. A CHL would remove the ambiguity of the situation.C-dub wrote:This is more than likely due to "property under one's control" not being clearly defined in the law. That and the lack of case law of a similar situation that would give an idea one way or the other.canvasbck wrote:Lot's of very knowledgable people on this forum and not one definitive response.
canvasbck wrote:My point exactly, it's a complex issue that the combined knowledge on this board has not been able to provide a definitive answer for. A random LEO will more than likely not be able to determine the legallity of it either. A CHL would remove the ambiguity of the situation.C-dub wrote:This is more than likely due to "property under one's control" not being clearly defined in the law. That and the lack of case law of a similar situation that would give an idea one way or the other.canvasbck wrote:Lot's of very knowledgable people on this forum and not one definitive response.
RV's are specifically included in the MPA:chasfm11 wrote:Not to either hijack the thread or to throw mud into water that already wasn't very clear from the beginning but we have the same issue with RV. In some cases, like the Texas open container law, the house portion of RVs is specifically exempted. For seat belts, there is no clear exemption for the house portion though there would be in a charter bus or school buss of the same length. The reason that I bring this up is that the Texas State Parks honor CHL carry but I've always wondered what would happen if I had to use the gun defensively. With the BG inside the RV itself, I would think that it would be a little easier, just like in the case of the OP in the house sitting scenario.
Catching a BG in the "act" of breaking in, would get a little more dicey, I fear. Keep in mind that in many RV situations, dialing 911 isn't an option because we often don't have a good cell phone signal. If condition yellow alerts me to something that is about to happen, I really don't want to wait until I'm in close quarters to deal with it but legally, that might be the only option that doesn't result in more problems.
In RVs, like in third party house situations, the path is not very clear, at least to me.
Right. I understand that. Perhaps I need some more education but from reading the other posts, it seemed that once you have a CHL, MPA was more or less out the window.. By that I mean that I can not mix and match between MPA and CHL application of laws. If I'm wrong about that, I hope that some will help me to clear it up. So while I can use the MPA provision of an RV before I get the CHL (and I've sort have been doing that for years without truly understanding why), having the CHL changes that game.canvasbck wrote: (a-2) For purposes of this section, "premises" includes real property
and a recreational vehicle that is being used as living quarters, regardless
of whether that use is temporary or permanent. In this subsection,
"recreational vehicle" means a motor vehicle primarily designed as
temporary living quarters or a vehicle that contains temporary living
quarters and is designed to be towed by a motor vehicle. The term
includes a travel trailer, camping trailer, truck camper, motor home,
and horse trailer with living quarters.
A better parallel for your situation might be someone renting an apartment. The inside of their unit is under their control, but the shared hallways, pool, gym, laundry room, etc. are not.chasfm11 wrote:The interior of the RV is under my control. I would say "always" with that. The site the I rent to park it is less clear. While the property surrounding my house is under my control, I'm not sure that anyone/everyone would agree that the ground around my RV site is under my control, just as with the OP and her watching someone else's property. Neither of us are going to take responsibility for any legal actions against that property.
If a robber exits your RV after having stolen from it, and you walk upon them at that time (would be a crazy coincidence) then I would simply construe it as an aggressive act. I don't know if I'd draw right away, but I would for sure be ready and give an ultimatum, stating to stop lie on the ground etc. etc. call the police and then go on from there. If the robber became aggressive, then draw and shoot, if the robber runs, give a good description to the police.chasfm11 wrote:Not to either hijack the thread or to throw mud into water that already wasn't very clear from the beginning but we have the same issue with RV. In some cases, like the Texas open container law, the house portion of RVs is specifically exempted. For seat belts, there is no clear exemption for the house portion though there would be in a charter bus or school buss of the same length. The reason that I bring this up is that the Texas State Parks honor CHL carry but I've always wondered what would happen if I had to use the gun defensively. With the BG inside the RV itself, I would think that it would be a little easier, just like in the case of the OP in the house sitting scenario.
Catching a BG in the "act" of breaking in, would get a little more dicey, I fear. Keep in mind that in many RV situations, dialing 911 isn't an option because we often don't have a good cell phone signal. If condition yellow alerts me to something that is about to happen, I really don't want to wait until I'm in close quarters to deal with it but legally, that might be the only option that doesn't result in more problems.
In RVs, like in third party house situations, the path is not very clear, at least to me.
I'm honestly not worried about a robber stealing things. We don't take much along with us in the RV that would fight for my life over. What I'm thinking about is a break-in for the purpose of stealing things while we are in the RV. There may be no quick way to determine the purpose of the break-in and the further outside of the RV I could have a confrontation,the better. Things are pretty tight once you are inside. We keep the doors and windows locked so I'm assuming that I've been alerted because of the noise during the break-in attempt.Pinkycatcher wrote: If a robber exits your RV after having stolen from it, and you walk upon them at that time (would be a crazy coincidence) then I would simply construe it as an aggressive act. I don't know if I'd draw right away, but I would for sure be ready and give an ultimatum, stating to stop lie on the ground etc. etc. call the police and then go on from there. If the robber became aggressive, then draw and shoot, if the robber runs, give a good description to the police.
I think there would be very little question in that instance that it was a justified shooting, once they are inside it is extremely close quarters and that's a very high risk situation.chasfm11 wrote: I'm honestly not worried about a robber stealing things. We don't take much along with us in the RV that would fight for my life over. What I'm thinking about is a break-in for the purpose of stealing things while we are in the RV. There may be no quick way to determine the purpose of the break-in and the further outside of the RV I could have a confrontation,the better. Things are pretty tight once you are inside. We keep the doors and windows locked so I'm assuming that I've been alerted because of the noise during the break-in attempt.
Frankly, this isn't about what I might do at the time of the incident. I figure that my instincts will guide me. It is about what happens afterwards. I'm trying to understand the potential for winning the battle with the BG at the moment and loosing the war in court afterwards, over a "property I control" issue.