Attempt to Summarize new Texas CHL Laws

[TheEgg]

Was perusing new state laws that take effect today. Some that might be of interest to board members:

NOTE: This is my untutored, non-lawyer reading of these new laws -- do not take my word for it! Any lawyers out there that find the following information to be incorrect or flawed, are invited to correct!

1. CHL holders may now enter government buildings, including police stations, fire stations, etc. However, courthouses, City Council meetings and commisioners's court meetings remain off-limits. If I understand correctly, this is a "preemption" type bill, over riding local jurisdictions ability to post 30.06 signs.

2. New law makes reciprocity much easier, and looks to me like the only requirement now is that the other state conducts a NICS type check to be recognized by Texas. Should have a flood of new states that are recognized by Texas, I think.

3. Out-of-staters from states that have no CHL at all can get an out-of-state permit from Texas now. My reading of this is that your home state must be a "no-issue" state for you to be eligible, may-issue or shall-issue states are still left out in the cold.

4. If you move to Texas, there now seems to be a provision that will allow you to "declare your intent" to become a resident and bypass the current 6-month waiting period, but this is kind of murky to me -- not sure I understand it.

5. A bill passed clarifying that if you are living in a motor home even temporarily, this is your home and all rules that apply to the ability to keep weapons in your home apply here as well.

Seems to me that, while not perfect, we made several steps forward and none backward this time!

 

[CleverNickname]

If I understand correctly, this is a "preemption" type bill, over riding local jurisdictions ability to post 30.06 signs.

Not quite. They can still post the signs on their buildings, it's just that the 30.06 signs, in that instance have no force of law. You just have to know that it's a government building. I'm assuming the local governments are hoping that they'll be able to get away with posting 30.06 signs and most CHL licensees won't know of the new provisions, and therefore won't carry.

 

[tyme]

Hypothetical:

What if you go into a government building with metal detectors and they don't know or don't care about the new law? Do you get arrested pending confirmation?

 

[DRC]

A little clarification if I may?

Hello to all,

I'm going to respond in query to keep it simple.

"1. CHL holders may now enter government buildings, including police stations, fire stations, etc. However, courthouses, City Council meetings and commisioners's court meetings remain off-limits. If I understand correctly, this is a "preemption" type bill, over riding local jurisdictions ability to post 30.06 signs."

The September 1st change has required that all government or state facitlities not listed as "restricted" by CHL law is no longer required to post the 30.06 signage and have been state mandated to remove said signs to be in compliance. In otherwords, it was made mandatory that any state or federal government facility put these signs up even if they didn't fall into the "restricted" catagory. After Sept 1st this mandate was over ridden. However; one must always remember a 30.06 sign is still a legal sign regardless of what building it's on. If a facility can present a reasonable case for having the 30.06 sign in place I'm sure that legally they can have the sign and maintain its legality. I recommend not being the test case for this as it could be costly.

"2. New law makes reciprocity much easier, and looks to me like the only requirement now is that the other state conducts a NICS type check to be recognized by Texas. Should have a flood of new states that are recognized by Texas, I think."

Other states must also have a similar training course for potential CHL holders that may be approved for Texas CHL reciprocity and, yes the NICS checks will also be required. Reciprocity will expand over time and will eventually become nationwide (but maybe not in pur lifetime)

"3. Out-of-staters from states that have no CHL at all can get an out-of-state permit from Texas now. My reading of this is that your home state must be a "no-issue" state for you to be eligible, may-issue or shall-issue states are still left out in the cold."

This actually isn't new. This is called a non-resident license. The way it works is if your state of residence offers NO CHL provision at all, residents of that state can come to Texas, take the CHL class and apply for their CHL. Once a non-resident is approved they can then carry concealed in Texas and all states that Texas has reciprocity with but are not allowed to carry in their state of residence (since that, by state law, would be illegal)

"4. If you move to Texas, there now seems to be a provision that will allow you to "declare your intent" to become a resident and bypass the current 6-month waiting period, but this is kind of murky to me -- not sure I understand it."

Yes, if you are moving to Texas and will be establishing residency you are eligible at that time to apply for a CHL without living in Texas for the 6-month time period. If your intention is to live here you do not have to wait for 6 months to apply for a CHL.

"5. A bill passed clarifying that if you are living in a motor home even temporarily, this is your home and all rules that apply to the ability to keep weapons in your home apply here as well."

Yes. Again this is to encompas those travelers who live part or full time in their travel trailers or motorhomes and utilize it as living quarters both temporarily or permanently. This actually falls outside the CHL legalities since non-CHL as well as CHL holders would be allowed to transport and keep firearms in this manner within Texas. I'm not sure how other states would classify this or what the requirements would be but we'll have to wait and see.

I hope that clears up any questions but if not ask and I'll expound on the specifics. FYI, I'm a CHL holder and CHL instructor and just recertified for my instructors license August 25th so it's still pretty fresh on my mind.

Take care,

DRC

 

[CleverNickname]

If a facility can present a reasonable case for having the 30.06 sign in place I'm sure that legally they can have the sign and maintain its legality.

Ok for example, the George R. Brown Convention Center has had 30.06 signs permanently mounted above the entrance for as long as I've known. The way I read the new law, carry is now legal there, sign or not. No way around it, as it's owned or leased by a governmental entity, and is not one of the prohibited places enumerated in the law. I don't see in the new law where it would prevent them from posting a 30.06 sign (and I haven't been to the GRB this month so I don't know if the signs have been removed or not), but whether the sign is there or not really doesn't matter, as it's posted at a government-owned property that's otherwise not prohibited. What basis would they have to assert that the sign prevents legal carry?

 

[DRC]

Hello CleverNickname.

Give it a try and let us know how it turns out.

True these unrestricted areas are supposed to be free from criminal prosecution if one desires to carry in them, sign or not, but a legal sign is still a legal sign whether in a place where it is or is not suppose to be. Personally I wouldn't risk it but to each his own.

DRC

 

[CleverNickname]

Give it a try and let us know how it turns out.

I'm sure I will, as there'll be a gunshow there sooner or later that I will want to attend. I doubt there'll be anything to report though, as I haven't ever yet had a failure to conceal that I know of.

True, it's a legal sign in that there's no law preventing the city from posting it, but is the local DA dumb enough to try to prosecute for something where there's an unambiguous defense to prosecution? From what I know of the Harris County DA, no. It's one thing to be cautious if what you're 'risking' is illegal or in a legal gray area, but it seems to me that this is pretty straightforward.

 

[DigMe]

I'm sure I will, as there'll be a gunshow there sooner or later that I will want to attend. I doubt there'll be anything to report though, as I haven't ever yet had a failure to conceal that I know of.

Most gun shows that I've been to have their own rule that doesn't allow loaded weapons in the show so the George R. Brown rule wouldn't really even matter because it's up to the show people I believe.

brad cook

 

[CleverNickname]

Most gun shows that I've been to have their own rule that doesn't allow loaded weapons in the show so the George R. Brown rule wouldn't really even matter because it's up to the show people I believe.

It may be against the promoter's rules, but it wouldn't be illegal.

 

[DRC]

Hello Clever...

Law is never definitive. You are entitled to make your own choices and that's fine as long as you're willing to accept the consequences thereof. If a gunshow promoter says "No loaded weapons allowed." and you show up with one and are found out you could get into trouble for it.

If the sign is in place and the DA wanted to push the issue you could be found guilty of criminal trespass, whether you feel that you are or are within your right to carry. Don't get me wrong here because I'm with you on this and believe that we should be allowed to carry everywhere and no places should be off limits to concealed carry, but we're talking about law here. Remember the mere "appearence" of impropriety can land you in court and court gets expensive in a hurry. You might win if all were to come around as you see it but you might also be bancrupt at the end of it as well.

Take care and remember I'm on your side but I'm also trying to tell you it isn't always worth the risk.

DRC

 

[DigMe]

Another thing that might make me nervous to test this at this point in time is the atmosphere regarding carry on the City of Houston property right now due to Mayor Moron's attitude and his recent "policy" regarding CHL carriers in city hall.

brad cook