TexasCHLforum.com

This may be an interesting subject for the purpose of knowing the law but I wouldn't plan on ignoring any signs. The Class C misdemeanor is a serious offense for several reasons.

tex

TexasTornado wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

parabelum wrote:Do not break the law, and please don't push the envelope with this. You will do yourself and other chl'ers great disservice.

If driving to this grocery store, make sure you come to a complete stop at all stop signs, BEHIND THE LINE!! Make sure you set the cruise control to 5 under the posted speed limit just in case your speedometer is off a bit. Signal well in advance of making all lane changes and turns. And wear your seatbelt at all times.

And for the love of all things holy, if you're setting your cruise control to 5 under....stay out of the left hand lane!!!

It is illegal to use the left hand lane unless passing, on most highways. So stay out of the left hand lane regardless of your speed unless you are actively passing another vehicle. As a hint - if someone passes you on your right you have probably violated this law.

This has got to be one of the most common violations I witness (other than speeding).

I'm ignorning this thread because of this:

You ignore the sign and CC anyways.

Just don't.

/thread

treadlightly wrote:

parabelum wrote:Do not break the law, and please don't push the envelope with this. You will do yourself and other chl'ers great disservice.

A potentially valid cause, absolutely the wrong battlefield.

I assume the original question is hypothetical, for information.

If there's a riot in progress and I shelter in a building posted 30.06, I don't think I'd disarm to stay on the right side of 30.06.

Unlawfully entering a building for convenience, not going to do that.

Personally, I'm starting to doubt my notions of property rights and concealed carry. Does a business have a right to refuse entry, please pardon this hideous image, if I discreetly wear a thong? I enter a restaurant with my first amendment intact, regulated in practice by the business's taste and responsibility, but I don't leave the Constitution at the door. If the business doesn't want to see guns (or thongs), they have that right. But concealed? My concealed carry is a foundation garment, for crying out loud!

If there is any validity to that line of thought, the venue to act is via mail, with legislators, not via criminal trespass.

Thing a thong of thixpenth, a pocket full of pyrodexth...

IANAL but in this case (riot, seeking shelter) I think you would be covered under 9.22 Necessity.

Sec. 9.22. NECESSITY. Conduct is justified if:

(1) the actor reasonably believes the conduct is immediately necessary to avoid imminent harm;

(2) the desirability and urgency of avoiding the harm clearly outweigh, according to ordinary standards of reasonableness, the harm sought to be prevented by the law proscribing the conduct; and

(3) a legislative purpose to exclude the justification claimed for the conduct does not otherwise plainly appear.



and also if you had to use deadly force


Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:

(1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and

(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:

(A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or

(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.

(b) The actor's belief under Subsection (a)(2) that the deadly force was immediately necessary as described by that subdivision is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:

(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the deadly force was used:

(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;

(B) unlawfully and with force removed, or was attempting to remove unlawfully and with force, the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment; or

(C) was committing or attempting to commit an offense described by Subsection (a)(2)(B);

(2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used; and

(3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used.

(c) A person who has a right to be present at the location where the deadly force is used, who has not provoked the person against whom the deadly force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the deadly force is used is not required to retreat before using deadly force as described by this section.

(d) For purposes of Subsection (a)(2), in determining whether an actor described by Subsection (c) reasonably believed that the use of deadly force was necessary, a finder of fact may not consider whether the actor failed to retreat.


http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/S ... m/PE.9.htm



So let's say that you carried past 30.06/07 (class C) out of necessity. Then it's a defense against 30.06/07. (is it any class c or is it only related to traffic ordinance?) I would think there are some kind of mitigating circumstances.

My question is it let's say that you intentionally carried past 30.06 (class C) and later was justified in self defense. Then is it still a defense?

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

TexasTornado wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

parabelum wrote:Do not break the law, and please don't push the envelope with this. You will do yourself and other chl'ers great disservice.

If driving to this grocery store, make sure you come to a complete stop at all stop signs, BEHIND THE LINE!! Make sure you set the cruise control to 5 under the posted speed limit just in case your speedometer is off a bit. Signal well in advance of making all lane changes and turns. And wear your seatbelt at all times.

And for the love of all things holy, if you're setting your cruise control to 5 under....stay out of the left hand lane!!!

It is illegal to use the left hand lane unless passing, on most highways. So stay out of the left hand lane regardless of your speed unless you are actively passing another vehicle. As a hint - if someone passes you on your right you have probably violated this law.

This has got to be one of the most common violations I witness (other than speeding).

I'm usually actively passing something or another. Can blame my dad for my lead foot mama always has.

My favorite Topic of the past few days considering all the responses.

carlson1 wrote:Scenerio:

I have been shopping at Jim's Grocery. With all the hype of OC Jim post both legal signs.

You ignore the sign and CC anyways. Your firearm was noticed why reaching to the top shelf. Jim sees it and calls police. They right you up for Class C. You pay the fine everything is okay.

Two weeks go by and off to Joe's Grocery. Signs still there you ignore it. This time you bend down and part of your holster is exposed and Jim calls the police. Same officers again.

What happen now? Another ticket or jail with a Class A
misdemeanor? Or ___________ (fill in the blank).

Note that the OP did not go back to Jim's Grocery after being written up for Class C; he subsequently went to Joe's Grocery. The commonality is that same LEOs show up to Joe's call as did to Jim's call.

Just wanted to level-set the scenario. If I was forced for an opinion, and I have never been a lawyer, it would be a second Class C, analogous to getting clocked at 10-over on different days. But does the law say anything about serial 30.06 Class C violators, all violations at different establishments?

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

parabelum wrote:Do not break the law, and please don't push the envelope with this. You will do yourself and other chl'ers great disservice.

If driving to this grocery store, make sure you come to a complete stop at all stop signs, BEHIND THE LINE!! Make sure you set the cruise control to 5 under the posted speed limit just in case your speedometer is off a bit. Signal well in advance of making all lane changes and turns. And wear your seatbelt at all times.

This may come as a shock to you, but that is what many licensees do. We're the oddballs. We obey all the laws, not pick and choose the ones we want to obey.

I would say that this is a situation that is arguable and would have to be decided by the courts. Here's why:
The wording of both 30.06 and 30.07 is as follows:

(d) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $200, except that the offense is a Class A misdemeanor if it is shown on the trial of the offense that, after entering the property, the license holder was personally given the notice by oral communication described by Subsection (b) and subsequently failed to depart.

So the question is does "subsequently failed to depart refer only to the specific violation? Or to every subsequent violation no matter what the location?

Only a lawyer can answer that, and even then he or she might hold a different opinion than a court.

Skiprr wrote:My favorite Topic of the past few days considering all the responses.

carlson1 wrote:Scenerio:

I have been shopping at Jim's Grocery. With all the hype of OC Jim post both legal signs.

You ignore the sign and CC anyways. Your firearm was noticed why reaching to the top shelf. Jim sees it and calls police. They right you up for Class C. You pay the fine everything is okay.

Two weeks go by and off to Joe's Grocery. Signs still there you ignore it. This time you bend down and part of your holster is exposed and Jim calls the police. Same officers again.

What happen now? Another ticket or jail with a Class A
misdemeanor? Or ___________ (fill in the blank).

Note that the OP did not go back to Jim's Grocery after being written up for Class C; he subsequently went to Joe's Grocery. The commonality is that same LEOs show up to Joe's call as did to Jim's call.

Just wanted to level-set the scenario. If I was forced for an opinion, and I have never been a lawyer, it would be a second Class C, analogous to getting clocked at 10-over on different days. But does the law say anything about serial 30.06 Class C violators, all violations at different establishments?

But carlson1's scenario has Jim calling about someone carrying at Joe's. Why would Jim call about someone carrying who's not on his property, and if he did call, why would the police care if Joe's Grocery isn't posted and it wasn't Joe complaining? No crime would have been committed other than Jim making a false call to the police.

mr1337 wrote:[deleted by me - misread the OP]

That's cheating.

Skiprr wrote:My favorite Topic of the past few days considering all the responses.

carlson1 wrote:Scenerio:

I have been shopping at Jim's Grocery. With all the hype of OC Jim post both legal signs.

You ignore the sign and CC anyways. Your firearm was noticed why reaching to the top shelf. Jim sees it and calls police. They right you up for Class C. You pay the fine everything is okay.

Two weeks go by and off to Joe's Grocery. Signs still there you ignore it. This time you bend down and part of your holster is exposed and Jim calls the police. Same officers again.

What happen now? Another ticket or jail with a Class A
misdemeanor? Or ___________ (fill in the blank).

Note that the OP did not go back to Jim's Grocery after being written up for Class C; he subsequently went to Joe's Grocery. The commonality is that same LEOs show up to Joe's call as did to Jim's call.

Just wanted to level-set the scenario. If I was forced for an opinion, and I have never been a lawyer, it would be a second Class C, analogous to getting clocked at 10-over on different days. But does the law say anything about serial 30.06 Class C violators, all violations at different establishments?

Clever social experiment here.

I agree, still a class C. I think it's the location that is key.

As far as the cops, I bet they wouldn't be so quick to go easy on the guy after numerous calls.

CleverNickname wrote:But carlson1's scenario has Jim calling about someone carrying at Joe's.

Negative. Read it again.

This entire thread is moot. It was started assuming the fact that a valid 30.06 was ignored. We don't do that, and we should not even entertain a hypothetical.

I guess the scenario about being forced into a posted location due to riot is worth discussion in its own thread...