TexasCHLforum.com

gigag04 wrote:I work an Odj and a local CU.

In Pearland some banks and CU's use local LEO's, Pearland has take home cars so just the presence of a marked unit in front is a deterrent.

As an employee of a local gun store that has automatic weapons as well as suppressors, some of us are required to carry our gun openly as a condition of our employment. The owner's logic being that thugs don't want a victim that fights back, so open carry assures the bad guys they will have a fight on their hands.

That being said, I believe there are pros and cons to the theory.

Pros:

1.Deterent-the best way to win a fight is to avoid a fight.


Cons:

.1 The BG's know who are armed and can plan accordingly.

.2 Not all employess are trained to the level required (if there is such a thing) if a gun fight did ensue. I think of all our customers milling around and their families, this is not a game, these are real live people.

Lastly, I have had my CHL for about 14 years and it took some getting used to carrying it openly.

Carrying openly in a bank would not make me feel better IMHO.

Buddy of mine works on cash count machines at banks, stores, vaults, etc. He likes to tell me about the large vaults, you know, the ones where they move $$,$$$,$$$++ around on pallets with a forklift! He tells me that *EVERYONE* there is openly carrying.

...some here use off-duty officers...some use private security(armed and un-armed)...it's a crap shoot...I've seen the private guards acting professionally and the real police half-asleep on a cell phone with their back to the entrance...but if I owned the bank...I'd have off-duty officer(s) there...armed with whatever they wanted to carry...visible or not...it wouldn't deter a determined robbery team, or stop a drug-crazed one...but I'd say that leaves about 80% who'd find somewhere else to rob...plus the officers would make good PR...

USA1 wrote:Easy fix, combine the two..."First National Bank and Guns".

If you combine the two, they're called pawn shops.

A-R wrote:

Jumping Frog wrote:Wouldn't having armed employees as envisioned above require them to be licensed security officers?

How is an armed bank teller any different than an ordinary grocery store hiring unlicensed people to stand armed guard instead of hiring licensed security officers?

THIS

OCC §1702.161. SECURITY OFFICER COMMISSION REQUIRED.
(a) An individual may not accept employment
as a security officer to carry a firearm in the course
and scope of the individual's duties unless the individual
holds a security officer commission.
(b) An individual employed as a security officer may not
knowingly carry a firearm during the course of performing
duties as a security officer unless the board has issued a
security officer commission to the individual.
(c) A person may not hire or employ an individual as a
security officer to carry a firearm in the course and scope
of the individual's duties unless the individual holds a security
officer commission.

Jumping Frog wrote:Wouldn't having armed employees as envisioned above require them to be licensed security officers?

How is an armed bank teller any different than an ordinary grocery store hiring unlicensed people to stand armed guard instead of hiring licensed security officers?

...yes, and...


...in Texas, both of the latter examples are illegal...but for employees of say a gun store, pawn shop, or other business to be armed for their own protection on business property over which they have been given control (openly or concealed) or be carrying under their CHL is a different story...they are not charged with the security of the business, only themselves...security is not part of their duties...if you're hired to do security work...gotta be licensed...if armed doing so, gotta have a commission card from the state...if you're REQUIRED to carry at work...gotta be trained, licensed, and commissioned...

speedsix wrote:...in Texas, both of the latter examples are illegal...but for employees of say a gun store, pawn shop, or other business to be armed for their own protection on business property over which they have been given control (openly or concealed) or be carrying under their CHL is a different story...they are not charged with the security of the business, only themselves...security is not part of their duties...

Is that your opinion or the law? I don't see open carry or unlicensed concealed carry in 46.02 or 46.15 for employees in general but maybe I missed it.

speedsix wrote:if you're hired to do security work...gotta be licensed...if armed doing so, gotta have a commission card from the state...if you're REQUIRED to carry at work...gotta be trained, licensed, and commissioned...

I'mpretty sure they also need to be in uniform and open carry unless a PPO

That's not just my opinion.
Sec. 46.15. NONAPPLICABILITY.
(b) Section 46.02 does not apply to a person who:
(4) holds a security officer commission issued by the Texas Private Security Board, if the person is engaged in the performance of the person's duties as an officer commissioned under Chapter 1702, Occupations Code, or is traveling to or from the person's place of assignment and is wearing the officer's uniform and carrying the officer's weapon in plain view;

...PC46.02(a)(1) tells you...read it inverted...if it's not forbidden, it's not illegal...if the law forbids it, it is... it would read "a person does NOT commit an offense if the person...IS on the person's own premises or premises under the person's control..." an employee can be given control in many ways...none of which need involve any mention of security duties...

...you're right on the uniform...and I doubt the PPO could get away with guarding a store without uniform...you'd have to study that out of the Security Guard laws...

I apologize for quoting actual law and trying to steer the discussion to facts instead of old wives tales.

I'm done.

boba wrote:If an employee has control of the property so they can carry, it looks like they have control of the property in every legal sense. That could have interesting consequences for the company. LOL!

...nope, control can be as simple as a title, i.e. Manager...keys to the business and authority to lock up or open up...authority to handle the money and make decisions...a stock clerk might not have control, but a supervisor might...a janitor yes or no depending on when he came and went...it's not defined clearly in the law so you'd be at the discretion of a prosecutor...another area where I haven't seen or heard of case law...but it's done often and openly and I'm not aware of any arrests or problems...

Brian Mobley wrote:As an employee of a local gun store ... some of us are required to carry our gun openly as a condition of our employment.

truncated

I'd be very curious how this avoids violating any of the Texas statutes dealing with armed security ... sorry, I don't know the statutes in this area well enough to quote them, but I distinctly remember the DPS Trooper who taught a portion of CHL instructor certification course and oversees the security bureau making very clear that being paid to carry a gun to protect a business is a BIG NO NO without proper security licensing and credentials, etc.

boba wrote:I apologize for quoting actual law and trying to steer the discussion to facts instead of old wives tales.

I'm done.

...don't see what you're poutin' about...I simply answered your question...using the law you quoted...and as for old wives tales, having studied the law in order to earn said security license and commission card, and having been in the position of carrying under the color of PC46.02 for about 12 years with full knowledge of my local PD might be "old wives tales" to you...you're entitled to one of those opinion things, too...based on whatever you want to base it on...

A-R wrote:

Brian Mobley wrote:As an employee of a local gun store ... some of us are required to carry our gun openly as a condition of our employment.

truncated

I'd be very curious how this avoids violating any of the Texas statutes dealing with armed security ... sorry, I don't know the statutes in this area well enough to quote them, but I distinctly remember the DPS Trooper who taught a portion of CHL instructor certification course and oversees the security bureau making very clear that being paid to carry a gun to protect a business is a BIG NO NO without proper security licensing and credentials, etc.

I don't recall that discussion in my CHL instructors course but you may be right, to a degree. My duties are in the training dept with the company but if we had a security problem I would respond, but I am not paid as such. I am also allowed to carry a gun on the property, openly per the owners consent just as other gun ranges, pawn shops etc...

I believe that the law can be interpeted many different ways depending on the person, circumstances, time and place and so on.

stroguy wrote:A few letters come to mind, FDIC. A bank could care less if they are robbed and have a policy coverage for robbery and theft..

FDIC does NOT cover robbery losses. The bank eats the loss.