Inadequate signage, CHL TX

As of 2003 according to the attorney for the CHL Unit of the Texas Department of Public Safety, there had been no case law on that matter or any matter concerning a licensee carrying in an unauthorized location. This is because no licensee had been arrested for carrying in any of the places excluded by the law. This may have changed in the last three years but if so, no mention of it occured in the instructors recertification school.

ready4shtf said:

So the question is... Ovbiously they cant restrict CHL because they dont have 30.06 posted. I'm prob just going to "deep conceal" the G26, but I wanted to get opinions first...... Technically I dont think they can even legally charge you with criminal trespass if they dont have the sign, right?

Click to expand...

Wrong.

They can't charge you for violating the state law because their sign doesn't satisfy the legal requirement. However, just as if you are asked to leave any private property and refuse to do so after being asked, you can be charged with trespass ... in this case the employee manual has explicitely informed you that your gun is neither welcome nor allowed. Therefore, if you willfully carry onto their premises you are refusing a specific request that was delivered directly to you. I don't know under if Texas law this constitutes "criminal" trespass or only simple trespass, but it is trespass and you can be charged.

Nitrogen said:

If you recieve WRITTEN notice that guns are not allowed, to be charged with criminal tresspass by CHL holder, the written notice MUST BE in the format specified by 30.06.

Click to expand...

That is what the statute says; but who wants to be the one to stand in front of a judge and say "Well, the language in the employee handbook made me aware that carrying a concealed handgun was prohibited; but since it didn't use the format specified by 30.06, I ignored it."

My guess is that even in Texas, that would not be a winning argument. Of course it would also require the company to file "Criminal Trespass" charges and the local prosecutor to pursue those charges. Neither of those strike me as a likely proposition unless you did something that would likely get you charged with a crime anyway.

Maybe This?

Someone might be able to make some sort of case out of this:

Texas Corporate Law:

Art. 2.02. General Powers

B. Nothing in this Article grants any authority to officers or directors of a corporation for the exercise of any of the foregoing powers, inconsistent with limitations on any of the same which may be expressly set forth in this Act or in the articles of incorporation or in any other laws of this State. Authority of officers and directors to act beyond the scope of the purpose or purposes of a corporation is not granted by any provision of this Article.

Click to expand...

Note what I put in bold and compare it to the following from the Texas "Bill of Rights" in it's constitution which would certainly be considered "other laws of this State."

Section 29 - PROVISIONS OF BILL OF RIGHTS EXCEPTED FROM POWERS OF GOVERNMENT; TO FOREVER REMAIN INVIOLATE

To guard against transgressions of the high powers herein delegated, we declare that everything in this "Bill of Rights" is excepted out of the general powers of government, and shall forever remain inviolate, and all laws contrary thereto, or to the following provisions, shall be void.

Section 23 - RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS

Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defense of himself or the State; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime.

Click to expand...

Everyone in Texas has the right to keep and bear arms, and only the Legislature shall have power to regulate the wearing of arms solely with "a view to prevent crime".

Bottom line, the State of Texas Legislature cannot delegate power to any corporation inconsistent with the Texas "Bill of Rights".

Even that provision - "with a view to prevent crime" - seems rather senseless, too. What law could possibly be written to that end?

"Criminals shall not carry or use arms in the commission of any crime."

Ah, but the way I would read that is everyone who wears an arm should be well trained in the use of arms for the prevention of crime, but I digress.

I believe a good lawyer could make something out of this.

Woody

"The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the 'High Powers' delegated directly to the citizen by the United States Constitution, Amendment II....A law cannot be passed to infringe upon it or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the law-making power." - Texas Supreme Court Decision, Cockrum vs State of Texas, ---- 1859.

Don't tell me that the states never considered the Second Amendment applicable to them. And at this point in time, there was no Fourteenth Amendment!

Easy don't take the job.

Probably wouldn't have any trouble with the company unless you start bandying around your coworkers that you carry in spite of 'em. Then it's a maybe... or if a customer sees your gun and panics, that could be a problem. Keep it hidden and don't say you carry there, if you end up deciding to carry.
Not likely to have problems unless you scare employees, customers, or have your gun go off by accident in the office.
Otherwise, the company probably wouldn't give a damn. Might fire you, but would likely consider criminal charges (except in lieu of other violations of rules) a waste of their time and lawyer fees.