First Watch Restaurants

[rotor]

The key phrase here (30.06) is "A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:
(1) carries a concealed handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,"


Well according to 46.15, YES you do lose your LTC authority if the license is not in your possession:

(6) is carrying:
(A) a license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, to carry a handgun; and
(B) a handgun:
(i) in a concealed manner; or
(ii) in a shoulder or belt holster;

My point would be that you don't have to be carrying under the authority of subchapter H Chapter 411 if you could be carrying under permitless carry and the distinction is not whether your LTC is on your possession. You decide which authority you carry by, but if you carry by LTC it must be in your possession.

 

[toddnjoyce]

If LTC gives you less rights, the PLC law is fundamentally broken and needs to be fixed or repealed ASAP.


The key phrase here (30.06) is "A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:
(1) carries a concealed handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,"


Well according to 46.15, YES you do lose your LTC authority if the license is not in your possession:

(6) is carrying:
(A) a license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, to carry a handgun; and
(B) a handgun:
(i) in a concealed manner; or
(ii) in a shoulder or belt holster;

Normally, I’d say I stand corrected, but there are conflicts. A license holder is defined in 46.03 as a person licensed to carry and 411.205 requires duty to inform by a license holder when carrying a firearm.

 

[Renegade]

Normally, I’d say I stand corrected, but there are conflicts. A license holder is defined in 46.03 as a person licensed to carry and 411.205 requires duty to inform by a license holder when carrying a firearm.

Yes the LTC law is poorly written. Same would be true for a Police Officer with an LTC. They too must show LTC every time they are asked for ID. Doubt that happens.

it seems the only way for an LTC to carry a handgun and not be subject to some portion of the LTC code, is to get it revoked, suspended, or let it expire.

And then there are those that will Clinton parse 411.205:

Sec. 411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY LICENSE. If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder's person when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder's driver's license or identification certificate issued by the department and the license holder's handgun license.

Are you actually a "license holder" if you are not holding the license on your person? Or are you just someone who was issued an license?

 

[Renegade]

My point would be that you don't have to be carrying under the authority of subchapter H Chapter 411 if you could be carrying under permitless carry and the distinction is not whether your LTC is on your possession. You decide which authority you carry by, but if you carry by LTC it must be in your possession.

And my point was how do you get to NOT be carrying under the authority of subchapter H Chapter 411?

 

[rotor]

And my point was how do you get to NOT be carrying under the authority of subchapter H Chapter 411?

By declaring that you are carrying by permitless carry if asked.

 

[Byrd666]

 

[ScottDLS]

And my point was how do you get to NOT be carrying under the authority of subchapter H Chapter 411?

By leaving it on the dresser and carrying concealed if there is a 30.06/7 sign but no 30.05.

 

[Renegade]

By leaving it on the dresser and carrying concealed if there is a 30.06/7 sign but no 30.05.

That is what I wrote. But as I also wrote, you are still subject to other LTC laws.

 

[ScottDLS]

That is what I wrote. But as I also wrote, you are still subject to other LTC laws.

What laws? If you left the license on the dresser and carried concealed where there was no 30.05 notice, what is the circumstance where you could be cited for violating a law?

 

[Byrd666]

Damn, people. If you are having that hard of a time comprehending the laws you bound yourself to when you signed on the dotted line, I would highly suggest you speak with an attorney concerning this matter.

Or maybe even, read the law(s) yourself and make your own determination of the meaning.

Not that hard to do...

 

[ScottDLS]

Damn, people. If you are having that hard of a time comprehending the laws you bound yourself to when you signed on the dotted line, I would highly suggest you speak with an attorney concerning this matter.

Or maybe even, read the law(s) yourself and make your own determination of the meaning.

Not that hard to do...

What dotted line? The one on my voter registration card?

I've read the whole Texas Penal Code Chapters 30, and 46 probably 100 times since 1996.

 

[SARGE67]

That’s your interpretation. I don’t agree with it. In general LTC gives you more rights than permitless carry but because you have an LTC doesn’t mean you have given up your rights to permitless carry.
Today I carry as a permitless carry, tomorrow I carry as LTC. Next day I carry Motorist Protection Act with gun in my glove box. Think about it, store has 06/07 and you have LTC, Joe next to you is carrying permitless. He can go in but you think you can’t?

That is what it seems like depending on who reads it. Looks like having a LTC is a deficit to some...

 

[SARGE67]

Wow.

Tell you what, I’m going to ask you try that out. Put the old LTC on your dresser and open carry into a .06/.07 only place. When the business asks you to leave, tell them to get an LEO involved and stick around for the interaction. Make sure that interaction gets to the point where ID is demanded by the LEO.

Worst case outcome is you get to call legal services plan.

How about not "open-carrying" to begin with and just be part of the shirt tail out crowd.

 

[SARGE67]

Yes the LTC law is poorly written. Same would be true for a Police Officer with an LTC. They too must show LTC every time they are asked for ID. Doubt that happens.

it seems the only way for an LTC to carry a handgun and not be subject to some portion of the LTC code, is to get it revoked, suspended, or let it expire.

And then there are those that will Clinton parse 411.205:

Sec. 411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY LICENSE. If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder's person when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder's driver's license or identification certificate issued by the department and the license holder's handgun license.

Are you actually a "license holder" if you are not holding the license on your person? Or are you just someone who was issued an license?

I only carry my LTC when carrying a firearm. If an LEO pulls you over, when he/she runs your DL it will show you also have a LTC and may ask you about it and if have any firearms with you and where are they? I don't see the need to carry it otherwise.

 

[phathom]

I only read through the first few pages, so I'm sorry if this is a repost.
But I thought I should share since I recently started seeing 30.05 signs and those weren't a thing when I got my LTC, only 30.06 and 30.07.
For those of us with a Texas LTC, a 30.05 sign holds no weight and we can promptly ignore them.

(f) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that:

(1) the basis on which entry on the property or land or in the building was forbidden is that entry with a handgun was forbidden;  and
(2) the person was carrying:
(A) a license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,   1 to carry a handgun;  and
(B) a handgun:
(i) in a concealed manner;  or
(ii) in a shoulder or belt holster.

 

[ScottDLS]

I only read through the first few pages, so I'm sorry if this is a repost.
But I thought I should share since I recently started seeing 30.05 signs and those weren't a thing when I got my LTC, only 30.06 and 30.07.
For those of us with a Texas LTC, a 30.05 sign holds no weight and we can promptly ignore them.

(f) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that:

(1) the basis on which entry on the property or land or in the building was forbidden is that entry with a handgun was forbidden;  and
(2) the person was carrying:
(A) a license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,   1 to carry a handgun;  and
(B) a handgun:
(i) in a concealed manner;  or
(ii) in a shoulder or belt holster.

You are correct. The 30.05 sign, for which the new law now prescribes wording, applies to persons WITHOUT a permit. Unless 30.06/7 (technically all three - 30.05/6/7) areposted, a LTC holder may carry. Another reason to keep a LTC if you have one, or get one if you don't.

 

[1911'S 4 Me]

Before this is settled there will be another legislature session to clarify everyone's different interpretations.'

 

[TxStetson]

I only carry my LTC when carrying a firearm. If an LEO pulls you over, when he/she runs your DL it will show you also have a LTC and may ask you about it and if have any firearms with you and where are they? I don't see the need to carry it otherwise.

So you're saying you intentionally leave your house without a firearm?

 

[Mowingmaniac 24/7]

SARGE,

Please clarify as your statement is a bit off kilter...

 

[toddnjoyce]

And my point was how do you get to NOT be carrying under the authority of subchapter H Chapter 411?

1. When you are not carrying a handgun
2. On your own property/under your control (maybe)
3. MPA (Maybe)

I know that’s not popular, but see my continued reasoning below.

By leaving it on the dresser and carrying concealed if there is a 30.06/7 sign but no 30.05.

Let’s start the scenario with the edge case presented, which is a LTC left at home. Does that mean you are no longer licensed and not subject to .06/.07? In the scenario, the person has a valid LTC (not onthem), is armed with a handgun, the place is posted .06/.0 AND there is no .05 and the person is not in a prohibited place. An LEO is engaged to trespass the license holder. Super edge case and realities aside, let’s just follow what the codes say.

.06 and .07 provide definition of license holder. That is “as defined in 46.03”. 46.03 states “(2) "License holder" means a person licensed to carry a handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code.”

(2) "License holder" means a person licensed to carry a handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code.

It makes no distinction if the license on on your person or not. A search of the various codes returns a few instances of license holder definitions, all of which generally align to a person having been issued a license by the state to do something. A perfect example: driver’s license. Just by being issued a driver’s license doesn’t mean you become unlicensed when you take it out of your wallet.

An LTC license holder is also subject to the pertinent provisions of TGC 411 Subchapter H as a condition of being licensed. One of those provisions is 411.205.

Sec. 411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY LICENSE. If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder's person when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder's driver's license or identification certificate issued by the department and the license holder's handgun license.

From an operation of the law perspective, I do not believe a license holder has a mechanism available to switch from “licensed” to permitless when they have a handgun on their person.

I’m willing to admit I’m missing something here, but give me a code reference, pertinent case law, or an AG opinion so I can better understand it.