I think that GOA got this wrong and you are right as the sign for 30.05 says firearm not handgun. That would therefore include rifles and handguns.Those 30.05 changes are biggest loss for me. Now the sign even covers rifles.
The bill says DPS has to put one on their website, optional to take it.I have read the bill, from top to bottom, many times and did not see any requirement for a safety course.
Where did you see this in the Penal Code?Yes, but this pertains to rifles. There is no law in Texas prohibiting the carrying of a rifle in public. One exception is that it is to be worn on a sling, either across the back or chest carry. The sling can be either a two point or one point sling
This also one of the biggest gotchas. Different rules and penalties depending on how you carry and who you are.You aren’t thinking hard enough. Scenario: 30.05 only posted at a business; LTC open carries inside. What happens next? Why is DtP and not an exception problematic for the LTC holder?
30.06/30.07 posted business. Can a non-LTC legally enter if 30.05 is not posted? Is that person legal?
These are not edge cases.
This also one of the biggest gotchas. Different rules and penalties depending on how you carry and who you are.
Two people enter a posted business,both are caught. The LTC walks out with Class C ticket, the nonLTCwalks out in cuffs and a Class A.
And then there are the non-LEOs LTCs who are mostly exempt like judges DAs etc
Another gotcha that is a poor holdover from the previous LTC law is the intoxication piece. Most of us agree that getting shitfaced and stumbling around public places while armed minimally shows poor ambassadorship from a 2A supporter, and worst case alcohol judgement takes over and one becomes a idiot with a gun. The LEO’s subjective estimation of intoxication has always disturbed me. Wish this was tied to an objective measurement.This also one of the biggest gotchas. Different rules and penalties depending on how you carry and who you are.
Two people enter a posted business,both are caught. The LTC walks out with Class C ticket, the nonLTCwalks out in cuffs and a Class A.
And then there are the non-LEOs LTCs who are mostly exempt like judges DAs etc
I posted the final language Sunday. this linkOnce again, I highly suggest waiting to read the final language and get some legal input before jumping to conclusions...
I posted the final language Sunday. this link
https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=87R&Bill=HB1927
Well aren't we snarky? How do you know I don't have a JD?Yessir...and when you get the law degree needed to fully dissect it, gimme a holler! LOL We complain about the complexity of the language, but as a practical matter it HAS to be to stand up in a court.
Courts have always held homes to have the highest level of privacy. Public spaces, though private property (Wal-Mart, Lowes, &c) have always been held to have a much lower standard of privacy. Just like your vehicle has a lower standard of privacy than your home, person or even cell phone.Not according to quite a few folks on this forum.
Fwiw, most I know LEO's will use their discretion and avoid charging a person with UCW for a PI unless the firearm was directly involved in the PI.Another gotcha that is a poor holdover from the previous LTC law is the intoxication piece. Most of us agree that getting shitfaced and stumbling around public places while armed minimally shows poor ambassadorship from a 2A supporter, and worst case alcohol judgement takes over and one becomes a idiot with a gun. The LEO’s subjective estimation of intoxication has always disturbed me. Wish this was tied to an objective measurement.
I agree totally.rotor,
While a merchant/private property owner has the RIGHT to prohibit bearing arms on their premises, I have the RIGHT to avoid them as if they are giving away free cases of the Plague. = All they have to do to ASSURE that I will NOT go there is post the signs on their property.
FYI, the last time that I bought new tires for the Town Car, I went to a GOODYEAR store that had 3006/3007 signs.
After spending over 600.oo at another vendor, I mailed a copy of the receipt for the tires to the MGR at GOODYEAR, with a note on the receipt that I would never spend another penny at their store UNTIL/UNLESS they STARTED SUPPORTING the 2nd Amendment & allowed firearms.
Two days later, I passed by the GOODYEAR store (on the way to HEB) & the signs were G-O-N-E, GONE.
yours, satx
rotor,
I know ZILCH about the 3005 situation. ========> To ME alone, such a sign means that the merchant doesn't want my business & I will happily go elsewhere to spend my $$$$$$.
yours, satx
Yes. You can't discriminate against a federally (or state) protected class on private property open to the public. Gun owners are not a protected class, so legally I think it's perfectly ok to exclude and discriminate.There is a difference between private property like your home and private property open to the public.
Yessir...and when you get the law degree needed to fully dissect it, gimme a holler! LOL We complain about the complexity of the language, but as a practical matter it HAS to be to stand up in a court.