Open Carry while on Property

[txinvestigator]

Apparently you people just don't get it. The law you cite contains within it of phrase that is open to interpretation enough to allow one open carry a handgun at one's friend's or family's place of residence. If you can't read or understand English properly, there's nothing more I have to say to you.

Please enlighten all us dumb people with the phrase to which you refer. Quote it and splain it to us lowley folks.

You are just incorrect here, bud.

I may not be an attorney either, but I guarantee you I'm a lot more used to having to interpret the law than you. I'm also not on some public forum telling everyone with confidence that something is in fact illegal when it is actually in fact quite open to interpretation.

Anyone with basic comprehension skills can tell with this there is no need to interpret. The law is clear.

And to insist you have more experience doing anythin than someone else who you know nothing about shows a pretty flawed logic, making everything you write on here suspect.

Provide a case where someone was prosecuted, let alone arrested under this law for open carrying at a family members or friend's residence. That won't happen because that is not the reason for which that law was written or is used.

That argument is poor lawyering. That a person may not have been charged with an offense does not mean such an offense does not exist. But you know that.

Thanks for playing in the bonus round. Sorry you have no points. We have no parting gifts for you.

 

[11B Combat Vet]

Hey smart guys, do you think it would be illegal for me to carry an assault rifle on a sling at the low ready? According to your logic, it must be illegal because the law does not specifically give me permission to do this. Am I wrong in my suspicion?

The law does briefly describe one's acceptable disposition while carrying a rifle in public, but is not specific in this regard. In this scenario, my weapon is technically slung. I have a feeling yall will think its most definitely illegal, and your justification being that the law does not specifically give you permission to do this, therefore it is illegal.

I guess I'm technically hijacking this thread at this point, so I apologize to the OP. That's all I have.

To the rest... get down with your paranoid selves, lmfao.

 

[alexrex20]

My friends do not have control over my property.

Well that is open to interpretation. What exactly do you mean by "my friends"? Do you own them? Do you have control over them?

 

[Bithabus]

Hey smart guys, do you think it would be illegal for me to carry an assault rifle on a sling at the low ready? According to your logic, it must be illegal because the law does not specifically give me permission to do this. Am I wrong in my suspicion?

The law does briefly describe one's acceptable disposition while carrying a rifle in public, but is not specific in this regard. In this scenario, my weapon is technically slung. I have a feeling yall will think its most definitely illegal, and your justification being that the law does not specifically give you permission to do this, therefore it is illegal.

I guess I'm technically hijacking this thread at this point, so I apologize to the OP. That's all I have.

To the rest... get down with your paranoid selves, lmfao.

Carrying rifles in Texas is not prohibited by statute except in some limited circumstances. As long as you do not intend to cause alarm by carrying low ready you are not engaging in unlawful activity.

Carrying handguns is generally prohibited by statute in Texas. Unless you fit into one of the circumstances that have been carved out to allow legality, you are in violation. Your friend's permission is not one of these circumstances.

 

[11B Combat Vet]

Please enlighten all us dumb people with the phrase to which you refer. Quote it and splain it to us lowley folks.

You are just incorrect here, bud.
Anyone with basic comprehension skills can tell with this there is no need to interpret. The law is clear.

And to insist you have more experience doing anythin than someone else who you know nothing about shows a pretty flawed logic, making everything you write on here suspect.

That argument is poor lawyering. That a person may not have been charged with an offense does not mean such an offense does not exist. But you know that.

Thanks for playing in the bonus round. Sorry you have no points. We have no parting gifts for you.

LMFAO

Ok, Jesus, the phrase was, "in control of the premises". That alone is so freakin' open to interpretation it's ridiculous.

Don't you suppose it's possible to be in control of the premises jointly?.... say, I don't know, with the owner of the premises? This obviously covers renters, but who is to say it doesn't cover me over at my parents place where I grew up? My parents consider that old place my home regardless of what the deed to the land says. So who says it doesn't cover me? You?

I admit I haven't gone and found in the law what constitutes "control of the premises", but judging from your posts and all other in this thread, no one else has either.

Now, if there is a definition in law as to what constitutes "control of the premises", by all means, enlighten me with it. Again, if I missed this somewhere and there is in fact a definition in law stating one cannot be in "control of the premises", unless one is listed on a mortgage, a lease, a deed, etc., then I stand corrected. But so far as I can tell with the very limited amount of time I've spent on this it seems that one who is "in control of the premises" is seriously open to interpretation. Could be the owner, could be the renter, could be a guest staying overnight, or for an hour.

And let’s not forget that as soon as you draw your handgun, you are no longer "carrying concealed". So all that crap I posted earlier about all of us having the right to defend 3rd parties and 3rd party's property makes a valid case to have a handgun in the open in order to defend yourself or 3rd parties at a private residence other that your own (and no, I am not likening this to drawing in public to defend a 3rd party from CC mode and obviously puting the weapon into the open somehow makes it ok under the law to OC in public, I'm only speaking about the law regarding OC on private property).... so really, even if you can come up with a definition of "in control of the premises" that would prohibit one from OC in a friend’s house, even after either having a discussion about permission prior or it being implied (like in a case where you are visiting your family), a person arrested for this "offense" would have a serious chance of having the case dismissed.

Now, of course you won't believe that, but nevertheless, feel free to show me this definition or explanation of the phrase in question that makes this law as written so crystal clear for you and I will certainly apologize for my ignorance, sir.

By the way, as stated earlier by me (you obvoiusly didn't read everything), there is a difference between OCing at Walmart, shopping malls and any other privately owned business.... a big one. Those are establishments that by design are there to service the public and therefore are considered public regardless of their private ownership in many cases, but especially as it related to OC........ oh, and bad lawyering????, lmao, as compared to what, the last courtroom drama you watched or your own aweome internet lawyering practise??, LOL

Try to read the whole post before you attempt to tear it to pieces.

Thank you.

Maybe you can begin to see the flaw in your logic.

 

[11B Combat Vet]

Carrying rifles in Texas is not prohibited by statute except in some limited circumstances. As long as you do not intend to cause alarm by carrying low ready you are not engaging in unlawful activity.

Carrying handguns is generally prohibited by statute in Texas. Unless you fit into one of the circumstances that have been carved out to allow legality, you are in violation. Your friend's permission is not one of these circumstances.

Hey! Your right about something! Damn, lol. Ok, but what happens when the old lady down the street calls the police and tells them a menacing looking guy is carrying an "AK-47" down her neighborhood road, and that it looked like I was about to shoot something because I had it slung across my chest?

Uh oh, now were into interpretations again, aren't we.

And "my friend" might have had a legally binding verbal discussion with me that I would be responsible for the protection and security of his residence.... or if it was my mother, the discussion and decision to have me be "in control of the premises" could easily be implied. You still think I wouldn't be in control of the premises for technical and legal purposes at that point?

 

[Bithabus]

Hey! Your right about something! Damn, lol. Ok, but what happens when the old lady down the street calls the police and tells them a menacing looking guy is carrying an "AK-47" down her neighborhood road, and that it looked like I was about to shoot something because I had it slung across my chest?

You'd almost certainly be detained, and maybe arrested, depending on what you said and how you acted. That does not mean your conduct was unlawful.

Uh oh, now were into interpretations again, aren't we.

Don't be a jackass.

And "my friend" might have had a legally binding verbal discussion with me that I would be responsible for the protection and security of his residence.... or if it was my mother, the discussion and decision to have me be "in control of the premises" could easily be implied. You still think I wouldn't be in control of the premises for technical and legal purposes at that point?

If someone gives you control then you have control. Want your friends to have control? Give them a key and make a verbal contract. If you are staying overnight it counts as your premises and you can OC anyway.

Nobody claims that a person can never have control over a friend's or family member's property. But to assume control when there is no evidence, as you have done, is a failure.

 

[11B Combat Vet]

I think in the end, here's my point.....

I'm not saying the legality of OCing in private in someone else's residence or on private property owned by someone other than yourself that the public has a line of sight to is crystal clear.... but I'm also saying it's illegality is equally in question, given the law as written, the spirit of the law, and the fact it is obviously not enforced in the way a few of you seem to think it ought to be, or could be should a police officer choose to. I don't know why some of you can't seem to understand that the law (especially in Texas) tends to be less than clear, if not convoluted in a great many cases... and that sometimes, this is done with a purpose even.

I'm also saying, given logic and reason, the intent of the law is not to keep law abiding citizens from having a handgun in full view of others in a household were the citizen is known, welcome, and trusted, nor is it to shield the poor sheeple in the public from ruining their virgin eyes by seeing a guy carry a handgun on property where he is welcome, trusted, and known.

I submit a police officer, a knowledgeable one, would elect to avoid an arrest where he needed to cite this law, and a less knowledgeable one will arrest you whether you've broken any law or not base on the information he has prior to showing up at your house anyway.

 

[11B Combat Vet]

You'd almost certainly be detained, and maybe arrested, depending on what you said and how you acted. That does not mean your conduct was unlawful.



Don't be a jackass.



If someone gives you control then you have control. Want your friends to have control? Give them a key and make a verbal contract. If you are staying overnight it counts as your premises and you can OC anyway.

Nobody claims that a person can never have control over a friend's or family member's property. But to assume control when there is no evidence, as you have done, is a failure.

Dude, wasn't being a jackass, just making a point.

It seems you and I actually agree then on most of this. That's all I ever really said..... you can in fact be "in control of the premises" while on the property of a friend or family member.... and that this could be the case whether you're staying the night or not. (Unless of course there is some definition in law of this phrase that contradicts)

If one has friends or family they believe would not back them up in an instant where the legality of their OC situation was being looked at by law enforcement, one wouldn’t want to mess with it . It seems obvious to me that you would want to be crystal clear of the feelings of your friend or family member before OCing at their residence anyway, regardless of legality, if only to be courteous. If you weren't on the same page as your friend or family member, you could not rely on "implied consent" to be "in control of the premises" at that point, but realistically, it seems we agree.

 

[chris211]

Like my running buddy says, I can arrest you just to prove I can.

 

[11B Combat Vet]

Like my running buddy says, I can arrest you just to prove I can.

And I think I just said that..... but of course, only a police officer with a less than desirable conscience would do such a thing. I'm sure you would never think of doing that yourself. The cop buddies I have aren't so unprofessional as to do shit like that either.

 

[alexrex20]

I think in the end

You sure about that?

 

[11B Combat Vet]

You sure about that?

I wouldn't say it if I wasn't.

 

[11B Combat Vet]

You sure about that?

Let me tell you something, sir. I've witnessed the justice system in Texas look the other way when they should have freakin' thrown the book at folks, and do it at extreme risk to law abiding citizens. If this law was in fact crystal clear (and it by no means is by any stretch of the imagination), there's nothing to convince me that a cop would do his freakin' job and arrest the offending person anyhow.... unless he caught the guy red-fucking-handed, pistol in hand, finger on the trigger.

It takes an act of God to get the help of law enforcement in Texas, and even more than that to get the DA to back it up on the rare occasion a cop does his job in the first place.

 

[alexrex20]

Let me tell you something, sir: IDGAF.

It's your right to interpret the law however you want, no matter how incorrect.

 

[winchster]

Let me tell you something, sir. I've witnessed the justice system in Texas look the other way when they should have freakin' thrown the book at folks, and do it at extreme risk to law abiding citizens. If this law was in fact crystal clear (and it by no means is by any stretch of the imagination), there's nothing to convince me that a cop would do his freakin' job and arrest the offending person anyhow.... unless he caught the guy red-fucking-handed, pistol in hand, finger on the trigger.

It takes an act of God to get the help of law enforcement in Texas, and even more than that to get the DA to back it up on the rare occasion a cop does his job in the first place.

Just an FYI, you've picked the wrong gun board to go bashing LEO's on. Just sayin...

 

[11B Combat Vet]

Just an FYI, you've picked the wrong gun board to go bashing LEO's on. Just sayin...

Truth hurts sometimes, I know.

 

[11B Combat Vet]

Let me tell you something, sir: IDGAF.

It's your right to interpret the law however you want, no matter how incorrect.

Good, then we agree on something too.

 

[11B Combat Vet]

Just an FYI, you've picked the wrong gun board to go bashing LEO's on. Just sayin...

Btw, I'm sure the LEOs on here can stick up for themselves if they feel something I've said resembles them.... just sayin'...

 

[alexrex20]

This guy cracks me up.