Texas ACLU Saved Handgun Travelling Bill in Texas

The ACLU isn't perfect, neither is the NRA. (The TSRA is pretty close, though!)

Glad to see that at least one of the appendages of the ACLU gets it, even if the central nervous system still doesn't get it in regards to guns.

How did I not hear, until now, about this bill being signed?

Makes me wonder how thoroughly LE agencies are going to inform officers about the change in the law...?

How did I not hear, until now, about this bill being signed?

Click to expand...

No kidding. I knew they 'clarified' the travelling thingy a year or so ago, and that some DAs were still ordering arrests so the courts sould sort it out (in violation of the spirit of the clarification.)

So, this is a brand new one?

The ACLU has had varying policies on guns, but mostly has supported the "collective" interpretation of the Second Amendment (that it applies only to the state militia, not to individuals).

The National ACLU claims to be "neutral" on the gun issue, but in fact they have an official position on the issue, which is basically anti-gun. See:

http://www.aclu.org/police/gen/14523res20020304.html

Their position is that there is no constitutional bar to gun control, even to a complete gun ban. They, like many other supporters of gun control, deliberately misinterpret "Miller".

An organization called Citizens Against Guns once proposed summary execution for gun owners and claimed that the ACLU supported that position; I can find no evidence of that, and it seems contradictory to everything the ACLU claims to stand for.

But then the gun control issue tends to turn everything on its head, with "liberals" (who would normally want "power to the people") demanding total gun bans and Draconian penalties for gun possession, and "conservatives" (who normally would want to "disarm the rabble") supporting gun ownership.

I am somewhat astonished that the Texas ACLU has taken that position. IIRC, when another local ACLU came out with a pro-gun position, they were tossed out of the national, and threatened with a lawsuit if they used the initials or name of the organization.

Jim

Good news, and further proof of the fact that "Politics makes strange bedfellows." I have often wondered what happens on the parking lot thing when the parking lot is shared by numerous businesses. My thinking is that it is pretty unclear just whose parking lot I am parking on. I.e. if an employer wants to prohibit guns in parked cars wouldn't they have to be in complete control of the lot? Just wondering.

I am not sure I would go so far as to say that the ACLU is responsible for this bill getting passed, but it is nice that they supported it and helped it get past one of the hurdles.

The TSRA did a great job this year, I was delighted to send them another check. I'm not about to go pat the ACLU on the back, but at least the Texas chapter did something noteworthy. The article being referred to was a joint venture with the TSRA I believe. I may be wrong about that though.

An organization called Citizens Against Guns once proposed summary execution for gun owners and claimed that the ACLU supported that position; I can find no evidence of that, and it seems contradictory to everything the ACLU claims to stand for.

Click to expand...

The ACLU would support their right to free speech, but not endorse those actions. Much like nambla.

I have often wondered what happens on the parking lot thing when the parking lot is shared by numerous businesses.

Click to expand...

I think those strip malls are usually single-owner and leased out individually, or at least the common area is retained and maintained by the lot owner.

Right now -- at least in Florida -- the businesses are acting outside the law because it is already illegal to fire someone over guns found in a vehicle search, but there is no penalty at the moment, so businesses do as they please. In this case, it wouldn't matter who owned the lot.

Will this law take effect in Sept?

Will this law take effect in Sept?

Click to expand...

September 1, 2007.

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/80R/billtext/html/HB01815F.htm

I am somewhat astonished that the Texas ACLU has taken that position.

Click to expand...

I'm not, but then again, it seems that the Texas ACLU is a different breed than most others. They also assisted in helping refine "traveling" in 2005.

This is why we need to join the ACLU.

How many members does it have?

Remember, the members shape policy.

If 1,000,000 NRA members joined the ACLU, things could get interesting.

Bogie, I love it!

Bogie

Dittto, good idea. Wow, that is good news, but I can hear the car alarms going off on Sept 1.

Bart, I am curious must a person carry the weapon openly or concealed when moving back and forth between the vehicle?

The statute will now read as follows:

(a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun, illegal knife, or club if the person is not:
(1) on the person's own premises or premises under the
person's control; or
(2) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle
that is owned by the person or under the person's control.
(a-1) A person commits an offense if the person
intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or
her person a handgun in a motor vehicle that is owned by the person
or under the person's control at any time in which:
(1) the handgun is in plain view; or
(2) the person is:
(A) engaged in criminal activity, other than a
Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance
regulating traffic;
(B) prohibited by law from possessing a firearm;
or
(C) a member of a criminal street gang, as
defined by Section 71.01.

Click to expand...

I highlighted the relevant parts. (a)(2) is the result of the bill this year; (a-1) is the the same language as the change in 2005 that attempted to allow the carry of handguns in vehicles by defining traveling (an old clause in the law) very broadly. The change this year is even broader--it simply makes it legal to have a handgun in a vehicle under your control.

According to (a-1) it has to be concealed in your vehicle, just as if if were carried under the CHL statute, but (B) does not address whether it must be concealed on the way to or from your vehicle.

If you are carrying it to or from your own vehicle on your own property it should be no problem to have it exposed, as that has always been legal.

My reading (I am definitely not a lawyer) is that it would probably be legal to have it not concealed if carrying it to or from your vehicle if not on your property (eg into a hotel room). It would also be legal to have it concealed, and that is what I would suggest with the general sentiment in Texas being opposition to open carry. Also, if you have a CHL, it would be a separate offense under the CHL statute if it were not concealed.