Alright! SB 299 passed the house & senate. We are getting "imprinting" in Texas!!!!

[GRAYWOLF]

There is also old case law in Texas that allows persons to OC at gun shops.

There it is...that is probably the deal. The retail area is all-in-one, gun shop and range office (or whatever you call it).

This particular range has a dozen or so employees on site (only 2-4 acting as RO), the rest are in the retail area...all open carry, except one female that appears to possibly be too young.

 

[BJG]

Bithabus, if I may ask, what type of personal and/or professional experience do you have regarding the law and/or law enforcement? Not being confrontational, just trying to understand how you've obtained your knowledge.

 

[Bithabus]

Bithabus, if I may ask, what type of personal and/or professional experience do you have regarding the law and/or law enforcement? Not being confrontational, just trying to understand how you've obtained your knowledge.

I just make stuff up on the internet.

 

[Younggun]

Alright! SB 299 passed the house & senate. We are getting "imprinting" in Texas

I just make stuff up on the internet.

LMMFAO.






s

 

[Charlie]

I just re-read some older posts. It appears (to me) that if you're concealed carry gun was inadvertently exposed, an officer would have to know the exposure was inadvertent. How does the officer know it's inadvertent if he doesn't witness someone doing it "on purpose" or make a determination that the person knows it's exposed and then the person fails to conceal? A "print" would be even more difficult for the officer to determine intent. Short of (maybe) IWB with a tiny gun and with a big jersey, etc., things will always print somewhat. Just sayin'............

 

[Charlie]

I just make stuff up on the internet.

Shit! Does that mean that somebody on here actually doesn't make shit up? No waay!!

 

[BJG]

I just make stuff up on the internet.

Ok...so none at all?

 

[Younggun]

Alright! SB 299 passed the house & senate. We are getting "imprinting" in Texas

What experience do you have?

 

[Bithabus]

Ok...so none at all?

No, not none at all. But it doesn't matter. You can take our word for it, or do some of your own research.

 

[txinvestigator]

Range owner cannot allow employees to OC on his property. If the employees are acting as range officers they are participating in a firearm related sporting activity, and may OC. There is also old case law in Texas that allows persons to OC at gun shops.

Yes, but if the employees are in control of the premises, the employee is not restricted by 46.02. in control of the presmises is not defined. I have not seen any case law that contradicts this; if you can control access, who comes and goes, you are in control of the premises.

It is not the range owner's permission to carry that affects 46.02, it is the status of an employee.

 

[BJG]

I mentioned a few pages ago that I'm a former Chief of Detectives from a police department in south Louisiana. I've investigated just about every crime you can imagine, made hundreds of arrests, and have testified numerous times in both criminal and civil courts.

 

[Charlie]

No, not none at all. But it doesn't matter. You can take our word for it, or do some of your own research.

Good suggestion (very novel idea!) since he doesn't give any credence to the answers he is getting from us.

 

[Bithabus]

Yes, but if the employees are in control of the premises, the employee is not restricted by 46.02. in control of the presmises is not defined. I have not seen any case law that contradicts this; if you can control access, who comes and goes, you are in control of the premises.

It is not the range owner's permission to carry that affects 46.02, it is the status of an employee.

I included employees "in control" in another post. We disagree about what "in control" means. I am not aware of the issue ever coming to a head in the courts.

The cashier at Walmart is not in control of Walmart.

 

[Charlie]

I mentioned a few pages ago that I'm a former Chief of Detectives from a police department in south Louisiana. I've investigated just about every crime you can imagine, made hundreds of arrests, and have testified numerous times in both criminal and civil courts.

Are you an attorney? Judge? Your experience in Louisiana surely has some legitimacy regarding police work, etc. but does that make you an expert on Texas law? Or are you just indicating your opinion of what you would do as a police officer in Texas if you saw a bulge on someone's waist? I guessing from your posts you would arrest them for displaying their firearm.

 

[Younggun]

Alright! SB 299 passed the house & senate. We are getting "imprinting" in Texas

I mentioned a few pages ago that I'm a former Chief of Detectives from a police department in south Louisiana. I've investigated just about every crime you can imagine, made hundreds of arrests, and have testified numerous times in both criminal and civil courts.

Then why are you listening to strangers on the Interwebs who may or may not have any experience?

 

[BJG]

Of course I've done some research on the matter. I've come across conflicting information, so that is what has sparked me to enter this discussion. The state's definition of "concealed" in regard to the use of a CHL does not seem to be consistent with some of what I've read on this site.

 

[Younggun]

Alright! SB 299 passed the house & senate. We are getting "imprinting" in Texas

So what is the states definition?

 

[BJG]

So what is the states definition?

TEXAS CONCEALED HANDGUN LAWS 3
CHAPTER 411. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY OF THE STATE OF TEXAS
Subch. H. LICENSE TO CARRY A CONCEALED HANDGUN
GC §411.171. DEFINITIONS.
[FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial]In this subchapter: [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial][/FONT][/FONT](3) "Concealed handgun" means a handgun, the presence of which is not openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable person.

 

[Charlie]

You do have case law involving the cases in Texas charging CHL holders with allowing their weapon to be visible? Right?

 

[Bithabus]

TEXAS CONCEALED HANDGUN LAWS 3
CHAPTER 411. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY OF THE STATE OF TEXAS
Subch. H. LICENSE TO CARRY A CONCEALED HANDGUN
GC §411.171. DEFINITIONS.
In this subchapter:
(3) "Concealed handgun" means a handgun, the presence of which is not openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable person.

I think you are misinterpreting what this means. A bulge under a t-shirt that might be a handgun is not "openly discernible" as a handgun. Maybe it is a phone or a colostomy bag or a snake bite kit. If someone has a shirt so tight (like an Under Armor compression shirt) and is wearing a Glock 20 OWB and ordinary Joe Six Pack can tell just by looking that Mr Tight Shirt is packing, then I agree he could be in violation. But this is a sci-fi example and is not useful to our real world discussion.