Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Texas Town Muni Office in temp space - Landlord posts No CHL Guns Allowed - Legal?

  1. #1
    Regular Member HPmatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    1,597

    Texas Town Muni Office in temp space - Landlord posts No CHL Guns Allowed - Legal?

    Went down for a meeting at our Town Government temporary offices today - the Town Hall is being renovated.
    First time I'd been there - they are renting office space inside town limits in a private office building.
    Landlord has prominently displayed sign at the front door stating guns, including CHL permit holders are NOT allowed inside.

    Not a Texas lawyer but what is legal standing here? Texas Law says I can carry into my Town offices, except police area.
    Private landlord says keep guns out of his building?

    Was thinking I would call up the Town attorney and inquire further.
    Looks to me like the Town should have included it in their lease that they allow legal guns on property.
    Will further ask if Police have to disarm before entering building if not responding to a call - looks to me like they violate building owners prohibition.
    “Men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them"
    -Thomas Hobbes 1651

  2. #2
    Regular Member JustaShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    728
    First place to start would be to determine if the sign meets the requirements Texas Penal Code - Section 30.06. If not, well, there you go. If it does, then hopefully someone more familiar with the intricacies of your particular situation will weigh in.
    Christian, Husband, Father
    NRA Life Member
    NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
    NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor

    Anything I post in these forums is my personal opinion formed by my own interpretation of the topic.
    IANAL and anything I say is not intended to be nor should it be taken as legal advice.

  3. #3
    Regular Member rushcreek2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs. CO
    Posts
    924
    TPC Section 46.035 - Unlawful carrying of handgun by license holder.

    (c) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether the handgun is concealed

    AT ANY MEETING OF A GOVERNMENT ENTITY.

    Note that this section says "...at any MEETING....", and NOT - "....at any meeting PLACE....".

  4. #4
    Regular Member HPmatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    1,597
    Well I saw the building notice and left my firearm secured in the car, so dodged the carry of firearm to a government meeting of TPC 46.035 (6)(c).

    Building owner's sign does not comply w 30.06, so guess that is not deemed legal notice.

    Also looks like under TPC 30.06 (3)(e) there is a carve-out that 30.06 does not apply if the property you are on 'is owned or leased by a governmental entity' and isn't a school, court, execution site or government meeting, usw.

    So I guess it is okay to carry to the Town offices to visit with town employees, but not attend town meetings.
    “Men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them"
    -Thomas Hobbes 1651

  5. #5
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Texas law is convoluted.

    (i) Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor was not given effective notice under Section 30.06.
    Advocate freedom please

  6. #6
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    Texas law is convoluted.

    (i) Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor was not given effective notice under Section 30.06.
    And would seem to REQUIRE the carrier to prove that they did not received "effective notice under Sections 30.06" instead of the State proving that the carrier HAD!
    RIGHTS don't exist without RESPONSIBILITY!
    If one is not willing to stand for his rights, he doesn't have any Rights.
    I will strive to stand for the rights of ANY person, even those folks with whom I disagree!
    As said by SVG--- "I am not anti-COP, I am PRO-Citizen" and I'll add, PRO-Constitution.
    If the above makes me a RADICAL or EXTREME--- So be it!

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member GOA
    2nd amendment says.... "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!"

  7. #7
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSparky View Post
    And would seem to REQUIRE the carrier to prove that they did not received "effective notice under Sections 30.06" instead of the State proving that the carrier HAD!
    I take it to mean that it puts those places in the same boat as everywhere else, same boat as every other non-prohibited place. For instance, it'd be the same as walking into Walmart with your concealed handgun. No 30.06 sign? Walk on in. I'm pretty sure the burden of proof would remain, as it should, on the prosecution.
    Advocate freedom please

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •