TexasCHLforum.com

speedsix wrote:
...well, did you want to answer the OP or just argue with the old man???

Well that is a fair point...

I'll go with PA...

- Unlicensed open carry except in Phila, where you must have LTCF to open carry.
- Courthouses have to have a lockbox
- $20 fee, no class
- Bar carry
- Weak criminal trespass
- Concealed carry with a LTCF is completely lawful, not a Defense to Prosecution. Same for open carry w/o a license.
- School carry w/ LTCF. This one is a little shaky, but there is case law.

Probably some western states are better, but I'm more familiar w/ PA so I'll put it out there.

Texas is still a better place to live. When I was in the Navy I decided that when I got out, I would move to Dallas, even though I had never set foot in the state. So I did...20 years ago. Not planning on leaving.

ScottDLS wrote:

speedsix wrote:...in my experience, Texas...more progress to restore our rights made here in the last few years than anywhere else I know about...more professional attitude on the part of LEOs towards the carrying public...have never heard or heard of a Texas lawman showing hostility towards a CHL...glad to be here!!!

Really? I love Texas, but I don't think we're close.

. . .
-Very strict trespass (class A misdemeanor). The 30.06 sign requirements are nice, but there are numerous states where you must be asked to leave before you can be convicted of trespass and its usually the equivalent of a Texas class C.

I've seen this statement on other boards. I've had people call me and tell me the same thing and that we need to change Texas trespass law. However, no one can point me to a state and their trespass statute that support their position.

I agree that a Class A misdemeanor is absurd for merely being armed. If the gun is used unlawfully, there are far more serious charges that can be filed making it unnecessary to make trespass a Class A. However, I seriously doubt that are many, if any, states that require a person to be told to leave property before a trespass charge can be filed. If that were the case, then no trespass takes place unless the owner of the property (or their designee) are physically present. That would leave rural property, vacation homes, unoccupied rental property, etc. open to entry by anyone. I don't believe that's the law in any state, much less a large number of states.

As for the Class C standard, I also doubt there are many, if any, states that don't increase the severity/penalty of a trespass violation if the person is armed.

I suspect people are confusing common police practice with actual requirements of trespass statutes. Most LEO departments of which I am aware follow the practice of asking the property owner/manager to tell someone to leave, then arrest them only if they refuse. If they do leave, it's common for the LEO to give them a written "trespass warning" and that is put into his agency's database. If the person returns to the same location and the trespass warning is still on file, they will arrest without the trespasser being told to leave. Again, this is custom and practice, not a legal requirement.

Chas.

ScottDLS wrote:

speedsix wrote:
...well, did you want to answer the OP or just argue with the old man???

Well that is a fair point...

I'll go with PA...

- Unlicensed open carry except in Phila, where you must have LTCF to open carry.
- Courthouses have to have a lockbox
- $20 fee, no class
- Bar carry
- Weak criminal trespass
- Concealed carry with a LTCF is completely lawful, not a Defense to Prosecution. Same for open carry w/o a license.
- School carry w/ LTCF. This one is a little shaky, but there is case law.

Probably some western states are better, but I'm more familiar w/ PA so I'll put it out there.

Texas is still a better place to live. When I was in the Navy I decided that when I got out, I would move to Dallas, even though I had never set foot in the state. So I did...20 years ago. Not planning on leaving.

PA still has some issues that makes me glad I'm in Texas now. They are trying to fix it with Pennsylvania Castle Doctrine legislation, House Bill 40

There is no presumption in current law that if a criminal breaks into your home he intends to harm you. Castle Doctrine will change the law so that if a criminal invades your home in the middle of the night it will be assumed he is there to do you and your family harm, not deliver fresh-baked cookies. The use of force, even lethal, will be the expected lawful reaction by a homeowner against a home invader.

Current law also requires that as a law-abiding citizen, if you are confronted by a criminal during your own pursuit of happiness, whether you are walking back to your car after shopping or hiking the Appalachian Trail, you have a duty to retreat or surrender your wallet before using lethal force. House Bill 40 will change the law to support a law abiding citizen's right to "stand your ground" and confront the armed criminal with no duty to retreat or surrender.

The third primary correction to the law under this common-sense legislation is to protect law-abiding citizens who use force from civil liability. When a criminal has been stopped by the use of force, the person intended to be the victim should not have to fear a lawsuit being filed by the criminal or his family.

Every state has some type of 'gotcha'.

My original home state of Missouri is VERY firearms friendly. Open carry (except as restricted by local ordinances), their version of MPA and good concealed carry laws.

And, while their CC laws have more restricted locations, the penalties are light. You must be told to leave if caught in one, and if you refuse and a LEO is called, they can fine you $100. If you get caught a second time, then higher fine and 6 month suspension. Etc. Etc. Never a big issue.

HOWEVER, if you are just caught on a bus (not a school bus, but just a bus) with a concealed firearm it is a Class C felony!

Glad I never ride the bus!!!!

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

ScottDLS wrote:

speedsix wrote:...in my experience, Texas...more progress to restore our rights made here in the last few years than anywhere else I know about...more professional attitude on the part of LEOs towards the carrying public...have never heard or heard of a Texas lawman showing hostility towards a CHL...glad to be here!!!

Really? I love Texas, but I don't think we're close.

. . .
-Very strict trespass (class A misdemeanor). The 30.06 sign requirements are nice, but there are numerous states where you must be asked to leave before you can be convicted of trespass and its usually the equivalent of a Texas class C.

I've seen this statement on other boards. I've had people call me and tell me the same thing and that we need to change Texas trespass law. However, no one can point me to a state and their trespass statute that support their position.

I agree that a Class A misdemeanor is absurd for merely being armed. If the gun is used unlawfully, there are far more serious charges that can be filed making it unnecessary to make trespass a Class A. However, I seriously doubt that are many, if any, states that require a person to be told to leave property before a trespass charge can be filed. If that were the case, then no trespass takes place unless the owner of the property (or their designee) are physically present. That would leave rural property, vacation homes, unoccupied rental property, etc. open to entry by anyone. I don't believe that's the law in any state, much less a large number of states.

As for the Class C standard, I also doubt there are many, if any, states that don't increase the severity/penalty of a trespass violation if the person is armed.

I suspect people are confusing common police practice with actual requirements of trespass statutes. Most LEO departments of which I am aware follow the practice of asking the property owner/manager to tell someone to leave, then arrest them only if they refuse. If they do leave, it's common for the LEO to give them a written "trespass warning" and that is put into his agency's database. If the person returns to the same location and the trespass warning is still on file, they will arrest without the trespasser being told to leave. Again, this is custom and practice, not a legal requirement.

Chas.

I think it's more a case of how Texas law is being interpreted, at least as I've seen it discussed here on Texas CHL Forum. Actually, it seems
criminal trespass (30.05) requires lack of effective consent of the owner AND notice, which is then fairly extensively defined. In the case of rural land, not under cultivation, and not posted/marked, I think it may be hard to sustain a trespass charge. Vacation homes, unoccupied rentals, etc. would probably be covered under burglary...but unfenced land or even an open unoccupied commercial building...maybe not.

So the common practice in other states is somewhat supported by the practice in Texas too.

Prior to 30.06, it was argued that a circle/slash/gun sign served as notice that entry was forbidden to anyone carrying a gun (including I assume Peace Officers, since the exception for them was added later). For a business generally open to the public, I found this problematic as it doesn't seem to meet the standard of

a sign or signs posted on the property or at the entrance to the building, reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders, indicating that entry is forbidden;

...Similarly, I never heard of signs barring loitering, smoking, or containing other "rules" being enforced without a prior trespass warning, or a failure to depart after oral notice. For a business open to the public, I argue that you generally have consent of the owner to be on the property until it is specifically withdrawn. I don't think a "sign" does the trick any more than it does in the other states. But I admit I haven't got any example cases to back this up. I understand that the threat of 30.05 prosecutions based on unclear statutory language and lack of case law led to 30.06, which is quite clear and generally an advantage.

My reductio ad absurdum arguments:

No hippies. No "pants on the ground". Circle/Slash/Longhair.
or
In accordance with TXPC 30.05, entry on the premises of Scott's store is prohibited to any male with hair extending beyond shoulder length; or to any person with trousers with the waistband worn below the waistband of such person's undergarment.

-----

Pennsylvania has no trespass enhancement for carrying a weapon. It's generally a summary offense (like a class C).


-Scott

ScottDLS wrote:No hippies

http://imgur.com/tYJ8y?full" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

lkd wrote:Offhand, I'd say New Hampshire, actually.

Legally I'd agree, but it's too close to Massachusetts to be truly gun-friendly. SE NH is being swallowed up by Boston.

tacticool wrote:

ScottDLS wrote:No hippies

http://imgur.com/tYJ8y?full" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

With credit to the Five Man Electrical Band

And the sign said..."Long haired freaky people need not apply..."

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

ScottDLS wrote:-Very strict trespass (class A misdemeanor). The 30.06 sign requirements are nice, but there are numerous states where you must be asked to leave before you can be convicted of trespass and its usually the equivalent of a Texas class C.

I've seen this statement on other boards. I've had people call me and tell me the same thing and that we need to change Texas trespass law. However, no one can point me to a state and their trespass statute that support their position. . . .

As for the Class C standard, I also doubt there are many, if any, states that don't increase the severity/penalty of a trespass violation if the person is armed.

The only other state laws I am familiar with are Ohio's. Dealing first with the severity of the penalty, criminal trespass is a fourth degree misdemeanor per Ohio Revised Code 2923.21.

To put this into perspective, Ohio has misdemeanors of the first, second, third, and fourth degree, as well as minor misdemeanors (non-arrestable offenses, e.g., simple traffic offense, max $150 fine.) A first degree misdemeanor has a maximum jail time of 180 days with maximum fine of $1,000. Fourth degree misdemeanor has a maximum jail time is 30 days with maximum fine of $250.

As far as "increase the severity/penalty of a trespass violation if the person is armed", Ohio law effectively does the opposite. An ordinary criminal trespass ORC 2911.21(A)(4) requires the trespasser to "negligently" fail or refuse to leave. CHL's are covered under ORC 2923.126(C)(3) which increases the standard to "knowingly", as in "a person who knowingly violates a posted prohibition of that nature is guilty of criminal trespass".

One key difference in the trespass statutes between Ohio and Texas is that term "knowingly". With that in mind, hypothetically speaking, they would have to prove you saw the sign. If they can't (and I don't see how they can), then they have to verbally ask you to leave. You're not trespassing unless you refuse to leave at that point.

Also, because of the "knowingly" clause, the police can not arrest you for a criminal trespass violation if they did not witness it. A business owner can ask you to leave, but the only time that counts is when the police witness them ask, and then witness you refusing.

That is because under Ohio law, the only offenses you can be arrested for without the police witnessing the offense are: criminal child enticement, public indecency, domestic violence, violating a protection order, menacing by stalking, aggravated trespass, a theft offense, a felony drug abuse offense, or any offense of violence.

Of course, in Ohio you run into businesses like a shopping mall that posts 25 different "Mall Rules" in tiny white letters on glass, and number 14 on that long list says "No Firearms". "Knowingly" is a valid issue. The big ugly signs that are so brilliantly required here in Texas make the whole "knowingly" aspect a little harder to argue.

If Ohio passes restaurant carry as expected, then it's laws will compare favorably across the board with Texas, except for the 30.06 provisions (I love going everywhere in Texas without seeing posted businesses).

What does anyone think of Florida as being the most friendly RKBA state?

I'm not knowledgable about their CHL laws compared to Texas or other states,
but Florida has to be given high marks for leading the concealed carry movement
many years ago.

Florida LEO's seem to have no problem with CHL's who use their weapons during
"good shoots".

SIA