Jorg Nysgerrig
Member
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2006
- Messages
- 7,822
I meant Texas.
Jorg Nysgerrig said:I meant Texas.
Ah yes, this tripe again. Texas, the land of oppressive laws preventing you from exercising your firearms rights... The common claim of the ignorant and and intentionally uninformed.
Correct. It's pretty hard to get arrested or prosecuted for criminal trespass unless you're really intent on being a major jerk or unless you've really overstepped the bounds of reasonable behavior. I've talked to a couple of LEOs about this and the usual first step when they arrive on the scene of a criminal trespass complaint is to ask the offender to leave. If the offender complies, that's the end of it.As an aside, to date I do not know of any arrest or prosecution of anybody for violating a 30.06 sign.
Actually, on a couple of occasions when I've mentioned to a business owner that a "No Guns" sign is non-compliant, they have replied that they're well aware of that fact and that they have done it because they know that a CHL holder will ignore the non-compliant signage while anti-gunners who don't know the law are placated by the presence of the sign.Maybe he/she feels that gun owners and permit holder are honest law abiding citizens and posting a Non-Compliant sign is a simple way to get his message across without involving Law Enforcement?
In that case, ignoring the sign when carrying concealed would be in accordance with his wishes, wouldn't it?Maybe he/she uses a non-compliant sign to keep the Activists from OCT out of his business while secretly allowing those that carry concealed their right to do so and at the same time, keeping Law Enforcement out of the picture?
Same here. Are you arguing for or against ignoring non-compliant signage? It looks to me like you've presented arguments from both sides...Maybe his/her insurance Co. requires a sign, but he/she does not agree and a non-compliant sign is the least offensive to his/her patrons?
Same here man. I love Texas. Jorg, you can grumple about how nutty things may seem here in Texas. But, let me tell ya...I'm glad I live in Texas, more than ever.
Red Wind said:I'vecarried in both. You don't have to show a CCW in either.
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.46.htm#46.035
Sec. 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER.
...
(b) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether the handgun is concealed, on or about the license holder's person:
...
(4) on the premises of a hospital licensed under Chapter 241, Health and Safety Code, or on the premises of a nursing home licensed under Chapter 242, Health and Safety Code, unless the license holder has written authorization of the hospital or nursing home administration, as appropriate;
(5) in an amusement park; or
(6) on the premises of a church, synagogue, or other established place of religious worship.
(c) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether the handgun is concealed, at any meeting of a governmental entity.
...
(i) Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor was not given effective notice under Section 30.06.
What Art means, is that if you show your CHL at the Texas capital, you get to skip the normal security screening line that all the non-chl folks need to stand in. It's bonus points.
And yet so many say it about California and many more jump on the bandwagon. Vary rarely do you see reactions to people defending CA like you do in this thread.jorg,
Wow! That is downright unfriendly.
chicharrones said:Man, this thread sure is wandering. I sure don't know how we got to Texas vs. the blue states here.
Man, this thread sure is wandering. I sure don't know how we got to Texas vs. the blue states here.
I do still wonder about the distinction of a church with no 30.06 signage and a church with a school in it with no 30.06 signage.
Sec. 46.03. PLACES WEAPONS PROHIBITED. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly possesses or goes with a firearm, illegal knife, club, or prohibited weapon listed in Section 46.05(a):
(1) on the physical premises of a school or educational institution, any grounds or building on which an activity sponsored by a school or educational institution is being conducted, or a passenger transportation vehicle of a school or educational institution, whether the school or educational institution is public or private, unless pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the institution;
And yet so many say it about California and many more jump on the bandwagon. Vary rarely do you see reactions to people defending CA like you do in this thread.
chicharrones,
I interpret that the facility is a school when in session.
Off the cuff, I'd follow the Texas Penal Code, Chapter 46:
You can download and read on page 46, Texas Concealed Handgun Laws,
Thank you for proving my earlier point.Not much to defend about CA; not their politics, economy, or lack of freedoms.
May as well include NY, NJ...heck, most of the northeast.
Eta: NY was home for 22 years and TX for 24 years now. You couldn't pay me enough to go back there to live. There may be better places but TX suits me fine.
Regardless of my personal views on CA, my comment's initial intent was to be a light jab at you once I saw your location. But then I kept typing and it took on the sardonic tone.Thank you for proving my earlier point.