Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Question regarding OC/CC in Texas

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    Please forgive my ignorance on the OC subject, but I have been a CHL holder for over a decade now. I have a question regarding "OC" and its actual legal definition (or at least what is being proposed by the bill being drafted).

    I understand the arguments that OC is a basic right, that 44 other states allow it, and that CC in the TX heat and humidity is hard on equipment and body.

    What I would like to know is how the proposed OC rulas and CC rules will blend so to speak. Say for example if I am wearing jeans and a polo type shirt. If I have my shirt tail untucked and an OWB holster on that CAN be discerned as a handgun by a reasonable person, yet the gun is actually covered....would this be a violation of CC law,...or OC law?

    Is it possible to write legislation that would seamlessly meld the two together? Would it be feasable to enact something along the lines of a "Defensive Handgun Permit" that would allow handgun carry in whatever manner the bearer sees fit?

    just bouncin stuff around in my head....feel free to smack it back my way

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member PrayingForWar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Real World.
    Posts
    1,705

    Post imported post

    The goal is to have unlicensed OC, so even if you print, there is no crime commited. Right now, with a CHL, printing can get you thrown in jail, your gun taken, and license revoked.


    If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training. You will become a minister of death, PRAYING FOR WAR...

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    Would (will) the OC rules require you to carry with your weapon in full view?

  4. #4
    Lone Star Veteran Gator5713's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Aggieland, Texas, USA
    Posts
    593

    Post imported post

    The 'OC' bill does not necessarily carry with it any changes to the current 'CC' law that I could tell, and thus I have been wondering about 'printing' when CCing. Would that still be against the 'CC' rules? Or is that one of those that is going to end up being determined in a courtroom?
    And also the 'partially' concealed... Is it only ok to be partially concealed (shirt tail or jacket covering top of gun) if you have a CCP or would that be a no no alltogether?

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    293

    Post imported post

    Gator5713 wrote:
    The 'OC' bill does not necessarily carry with it any changes to the current 'CC' law that I could tell, and thus I have been wondering about 'printing' when CCing.* Would that still be against the 'CC' rules?* Or is that one of those that is going to end up being determined in a courtroom?
    And also the 'partially' concealed...* Is it only ok to be partially concealed (shirt tail or jacket covering top of gun) if you have a CCP or would that be a no no alltogether?
    Huh? That doesn't make sense. If open carry is legalized (in accordance with the restoration bill,) then Texans with CCWs could carry any way they want - concealed or open, printing or not printing, half concealed/half exposed.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pittsburg, Texas, USA
    Posts
    22

    Post imported post

    OC has always been legal in VA since well I guess forever, passing CC was resisted but passed in 2004. Therefore, got your CC VA then in winter snow with your coat on your legal take it off at the restaurant and you’re still legal. This is not convoluted. Texans are so indoctrinated that OC being illegal is normal... it isn't… it is abnormal. Under the 2nd Amendment bearing arms means slinging your rifle over your shoulder and sticking your pistol in your belt then going on your way. You are over thinking this. The Texas legislature has given itself power it does nothave and that is the prevention of any Texan to bear arms normallyfor self-defense, a basic human right.

  7. #7
    Lone Star Veteran Gator5713's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Aggieland, Texas, USA
    Posts
    593

    Post imported post

    I guess it seems a matter of semantics to me. On the surface it would only seem logical that OC being legal would trump the very specific stipulations on CC, however, without removing those stipulations the law could still be interpreted literally meaning that IF you were carrying concealed, the gun must be completely concealed.
    I may very well be over thinking, but just something that I noticed and thought to bring to light. I have seen too many laws interpreted literally by an LEO on site simply to 'make a point' that were later battled and won/lost in the courtroom.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    293

    Post imported post

    Gator5713 wrote:
    I guess it seems a matter of semantics to me.* On the surface it would only seem logical that OC being legal would trump the very specific stipulations on CC, however, without removing those stipulations the law could still be interpreted literally meaning that IF you were carrying concealed, the gun must be completely concealed.
    This has never been the case in the 40+ states where open carry and concealed carry exist side by side.

    I may very well be over thinking, but just something that I noticed and thought to bring to light.I have seen too many laws interpreted literally by an LEO on site simply to 'make a point' that were later battled and won/lost in the courtroom.
    I don't see Texans being that picayunish when it comes to lifting the prohibition on open carry.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    OK....I'll be the first to stand at the head of the class and say..."I had to look that one up"

    pic·a·yune
    play_w2("P0284700")


    (pk-yn)

    adj.
    1. Of little value or importance; paltry. See Synonyms at trivial.
    2. Petty; mean.
    n.
    1. A Spanish-American half-real piece formerly used in parts of the southern United States.
    2. A five-cent piece.
    3. Something of very little value; a trifle: not worth a picayune.




    pica·yunish adj.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pittsburg, Texas, USA
    Posts
    22

    Post imported post

    Please allow me to clarify... the point I was trying to make is even if the completely concealed laws stay in place... if for instance you "completely" remove the "cover" you would still be legal with OC.

    Picayune... my Dad had a tool fixed on an axe handle was 5 or 6 inches long with a small hook on the end. Perfect for rolling firewood. He called it a picayune. When working in the UP of Michigan they had the same tool and called it the same thing. I had never heard the other definition before. Thanks for expanding my horizon.

  11. #11
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Dallas, TX, ,
    Posts
    496

    Post imported post

    TGC 411.171(3) - "Concealed handgun" means a handgun, the presence of which is not openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable person.
    This definition would hold even if OC became legal. At law, a gun is concealed or not concealed; therefore anything not meeting this description is open carry. Anything from identifiable printing to a half-exposed gun to a gun hanging way out in the open is OC.

    CC and OC will likely merge by first and foremost making it not a crime to fail to conceal. If OC is legal, then anything not considered "brandishing" (not a term used in Texas law, but could be synonymous with "carry of a firearm in a manner calculated to alarm") is legal, from your shirttail riding up to you tucking behind the holster.

    Some things that would differentiate the two in practice: current bills I've seen make no mention of changes to the Alcoholic Beverage Code. Unlicensed open carry would be a felony in any establishment licensed by the TABC to sell alcohol, whether at retail or by the drink. However, CHL holders would be able to OC up to the door, then conceal the weapon and walk in to any establishment except a bar.

    Another difference is that "gun-free zone" laws like 30.06 refer only to concealed carry; it's the only thing allowed, so you don't need special restrictions on an action that's illegal in the general case. If 46.02 no longer applied to OC of a handgun, the only statement carrying force of law is a verbal request to leave under 30.05. 30.06 is quite specifically tailored to CHL holders and does not apply to OC at all. Any other "No weapons" signs have never carried force of law in Texas; you weren't trespassing when you went armed in public, you were unlawfully carrying a weapon which was bad enough.On top of that, no weapons signs are both unlikely to come to the attention of a person, and therefore are not effective notice, and also unenforceable because a no trespassing sign applies in general; only authorized personnel, when authorized personnel are a miniscule minority.A no trespassing sign cannot keep out people named Larry; it similarly cannot keep out gun owners.

  12. #12
    Opt-Out Members
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    3

    Post imported post

    PrayingForWar wrote:
    Right now, with a CHL, printing can get you thrown in jail, your gun taken, and license revoked.

    TOTALLY UNTRUE!

    "Intentional Failure to Conceal" will get those actions taken,.....NOT un-intentional printing.
    Get your facts right before spouting this kind of stuff off!

  13. #13
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Ellis County, Texas, USA
    Posts
    275

    Post imported post

    Liko81 wrote:
    Some things that would differentiate the two in practice: current bills I've seen make no mention of changes to the Alcoholic Beverage Code. Unlicensed open carry would be a felony in any establishment licensed by the TABC to sell alcohol, whether at retail or by the drink. However, CHL holders would be able to OC up to the door, then conceal the weapon and walk in to any establishment except a bar.

    Citation please on unlicensed open carry being a felony for places licensed by TABC. I haven't been able to find any such provision in the alcohol beveragecode nor the penal code. It is true that theUnlawful Carry of a Handgun by a License Holdersection of the penal code(46.035) makes carry there a felony but that is CHL-specific. Aside from provisions that impose duties on TABC licensees, I can't find any provisions in the ABC that imposes criminal liability of any type on the carrier.

  14. #14
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Ellis County, Texas, USA
    Posts
    275

    Post imported post

    AEA wrote:
    PrayingForWar wrote:
    Right now, with a CHL, printing can get you thrown in jail, your gun taken, and license revoked.

    TOTALLY UNTRUE!

    "Intentional Failure to Conceal" will get those actions taken,.....NOT un-intentional printing.
    Get your facts right before spouting this kind of stuff off!
    +1! I see this said frequently . Thank you for the correction. I was going to post one if you hadn't.

    There have been many reports of CHL holders who have accidentally revealed their weapon (wind blowing their jacket open, reaching up to get something on a shelf and theirshirt riding up, etc.) and the police response has been 1) detained, 2) show CHL, 3) maybe a lecture about better concealment. I'm not familiar with ANY case where an arrest has taken place much less where a charge has been filed and a conviction sustained after the whole legal process has occurred.

    As restrictive as Texas law is, let's be accurate about it and not discourage CHL-holders from carrying based on unnecessary fears of printing and arrest.

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Dallas, TX, ,
    Posts
    496

    Post imported post

    § 61.11. WARNING SIGN REQUIRED. (a) Each holder of a
    license who is not otherwise required to display a sign under
    Section 411.204, Government Code, shall display in a prominent
    place on the license holder's premises a sign giving notice that it
    is unlawful for a person to carrya weaponon the premises unless
    the weaponis a concealed handgun of the same category the person is
    licensed to carry under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code.

    (b) The sign must be at least 6 inches high and 14 inches
    wide, must appear in contrasting colors, and shall be displayed in a
    conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public. The commission or
    administrator may require the holder of the license to also display
    the sign in a language other than English if it can be observed or
    determined that a substantial portion of the expected customers
    speak the other language as their familiar language.

  16. #16
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Ellis County, Texas, USA
    Posts
    275

    Post imported post

    Liko81 wrote:
    § 61.11. WARNING SIGN REQUIRED. (a) Each holder of a
    license who is not otherwise required to display a sign under
    Section 411.204, Government Code, shall display in a prominent
    place on the license holder's premises a sign giving notice that it
    is unlawful for a person to carrya weaponon the premises unless
    the weaponis a concealed handgun of the same category the person is
    licensed to carry under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code.

    (b) The sign must be at least 6 inches high and 14 inches
    wide, must appear in contrasting colors, and shall be displayed in a
    conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public. The commission or
    administrator may require the holder of the license to also display
    the sign in a language other than English if it can be observed or
    determined that a substantial portion of the expected customers
    speak the other language as their familiar language.
    True, this is a requirement for signage (as I mentioned, an obligation on the licensee) that says what you highlighted. The real question is what law makes it "unlawful for a person to carry a weapon on the premises unless ...".

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Dallas, TX, ,
    Posts
    496

    Post imported post

    SA-TX wrote:
    True, this is a requirement for signage (as I mentioned, an obligation on the licensee) that says what you highlighted. The real question is what law makes it "unlawful for a person to carry a weapon on the premises unless ...".

    You'reright. Other than the provisions of the signage itself, I can find no law in the Penal Code or AB Code that actually prohibits the action and prescribes a punishment :?. Doesn't mean it can't exist, but it means there's something missing from the online Statutes.

    You could logically argue that a law requiring a business to notify patrons that an action is illegal does in fact make the act illegal.Actions such as trespassing require the person to have been given notice in order for it to actually be trespassing; this gives the person notice, and if they fail to heed it it is a crime.However the signagelaw does not prescribe a punishment for failure to heed the sign. The signs generally say it's a state jail felony ($10,000 fine and 6 months imprisonment) but I cannot find any provision specifically making it so. Moreover, trespassing (which I'd think would be the most applicable section)is never a state jail felony even if the trespasser has a weapon; the most it can be is a Class A misdemeanor. Yet another wonderful quirk of Texas State law.

    You may be right that ignoring the sign is totally unenforceable. However, I would not want to be the test case just in case there is some suchprovision buried deep in the Statutes. If nothing else, you are told that entry with a weapon is forbidden; that is notice sufficient to put you in violation of 30.05, felony or not.


  18. #18
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Dallas, TX, ,
    Posts
    496

    Post imported post

    STOP THE PRESSES!

    ... I found it . Right there in front of me, in the most oft-read (by gun owners)section of the Penal Code. TPC 46.02 states that it isillegal tocarry a handgun, exceptconcealed while holding a valid CHL. It says other things, but this is what's relevant.Now take a look at subsectionC:
    (c) An offense under this section is a felony of the third
    degree if the offense is committed on any premises licensed or
    issued a permit by this state for the sale of alcoholic beverages.
    There you are. It is illegal to carry a gun, and normally a Class A misdemeanor, but if you do so on the grounds of a business licensed to sell alcohol you are a felon. However, none of this applies to the owner of that property or to a CHL holder. According to the letter of the law, you are also not prohibited from carrying a long gun into a liquor store, and if Mike's OC bill becomes law it will no longer be an offense to OC a handgun into an alcohol-selling business as it will only apply to carry of a concealed handgun.

  19. #19
    Lone Star Veteran Gator5713's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Aggieland, Texas, USA
    Posts
    593

    Post imported post

    Liko81: "This definition would hold even if OC became legal. At law, a gun is concealed or not concealed; therefore anything not meeting this description is open carry. Anything from identifiable printing to a half-exposed gun to a gun hanging way out in the open is OC."

    I do not believe that 'identifiable printing' would qualify as legal OC. I also do not thing that accidental (and thus temporary) printing or exposure will you much more than a lecture, but, if you are CCing, it needs to be Concealed, if you are OCing it needs to be open. I believe that some (many?) of the states have a definition of what is 'open' and how much can be 'concealed' IE: the end of a clip poking through your shirt is not 'open' as it is not easily and readily identifiable....
    I believe that 'intent' will likely become the argueing point of that; as in, did you 'Intend' to carry Open or Concealed. The set of rules that you would be required to follow would be based on that intent.
    That is not to say that you couldn't switch from one to the other at will so long as you possess a CHL. IE: Holster on your belt (OC) its cold so you put on a jacket and it covers (CC)...

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2

    Post imported post

    Liko81 wrote:
    § 61.11. WARNING SIGN REQUIRED. (a) Each holder of a
    license who is not otherwise required to display a sign under
    Section 411.204, Government Code, shall display in a prominent
    place on the license holder's premises a sign giving notice that it
    is unlawful for a person to carrya weaponon the premises unless
    the weaponis a concealed handgun of the same category the person is
    licensed to carry under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code.

    (b) The sign must be at least 6 inches high and 14 inches
    wide, must appear in contrasting colors, and shall be displayed in a
    conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public. The commission or
    administrator may require the holder of the license to also display
    the sign in a language other than English if it can be observed or
    determined that a substantial portion of the expected customers
    speak the other language as their familiar language.
    I think the law to pay special attention to with regards to CC and signage is in the Texas Penal Code commonly referred to as 30.06. It says:

    Code:
    § 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED 
    HANDGUN.  (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license 
    holder:
    (1)  carries a handgun under the authority of 
    Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another 
    without effective consent;  and
    (2)  received notice that:                                                    
    (A)  entry on the property by a license holder 
    with a concealed handgun was forbidden;  or
    (B)  remaining on the property with a concealed 
    handgun was forbidden and failed to depart.
    (b)  For purposes of this section, a person receives notice 
    if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to 
    act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written 
    communication.
    (c)  In this section:                                                          
    (1)  "Entry" has the meaning assigned by Section 
    30.05(b).                  
    (2)  "License holder" has the meaning assigned by 
    Section 46.035(f).        
    (3)  "Written communication" means:                                           
    (A)  a card or other document on which is written 
    language identical to the following:  "Pursuant to Section 30.06, 
    Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed 
    handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, 
    Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this 
    property with a concealed handgun";  or
    (B)  a sign posted on the property that:                                     
    (i)  includes the language described by 
    Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
    (ii)  appears in contrasting colors with 
    block letters at least one inch in height;  and
    (iii)  is displayed in a conspicuous manner 
    clearly visible to the public.
    (d)  An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.                   
    (e)  It is an exception to the application of this section 
    that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is 
    owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or 
    other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying 
    the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.
    A sign of this type would be a very large sign, a minimum of ~24" x 24". For whatever reason the editing for changing colors or text size doesn't seem to be working, therefore here is the main part of the code that I was trying to highlight:

    (B) a sign posted on the property that:
    (i) includes the language described by
    Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
    (ii) appears in contrasting colors with
    block letters at least one inch in height

  21. #21
    Lone Star Veteran Gator5713's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Aggieland, Texas, USA
    Posts
    593

    Post imported post

    Tim,
    Welcome to OCDO.
    I am curious as to why you chose to revisit an almost 2 month old thread to post something that has already been posted within the same thread and also many many many other times throughout this entire forum as your first post...
    Is there a question or some new unique view on this that I somehow missed?
    Not trying to be abrasive, just not necessarily the best way to introduce yourself..
    Please feel free to browse through the rest of the forum, and most specifically our current campaign for Open Carry in Texas and add your insight there! Valid opinions, comments, supported arguments weather for or against are always welcome!


  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2

    Post imported post

    Gator5713 wrote:
    Tim,
    Welcome to OCDO.
    I am curious as to why you chose to revisit an almost 2 month old thread to post something that has already been posted within the same thread and also many many many other times throughout this entire forum as your first post...
    Is there a question or some new unique view on this that I somehow missed?
    Not trying to be abrasive, just not necessarily the best way to introduce yourself..
    Please feel free to browse through the rest of the forum, and most specifically our current campaign for Open Carry in Texas and add your insight there! Valid opinions, comments, supported arguments weather for or against are always welcome
    Gator, thanks for the welcome.

    To be honest, I wasn't trying to introduce myself. I had not even heard about OC until I heard an interview on KTSA. That got me to come to the website and then to the forum.

    I saw a Texas forum, went in there to look around, saw this thread and responded to it. The part that I brought up I did not see in this thread. The only thing I saw with regards to the law was:

    § 61.11. WARNING SIGN REQUIRED.
    <snip>
    (b) The sign must be at least 6 inches high and 14 inches
    wide, must appear in contrasting colors, and shall be displayed in a
    conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.


    There are a LOT of posts here. If I was curious about whether the issue of the 30.06 was posted before I would have searched for it. I was merely responding to this thread. Regardless of the age I think the information is pertinent. If I had seen it here then I probably would not have responded.

    As I get a chance to peruse all the threads I am certain I will have more to add. Thanks for the welcome.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    301

    Post imported post

    PrayingForWar wrote:
    The goal is to have unlicensed OC, so even if you print, there is no crime commited. Right now, with a CHL, printing can get you thrown in jail, your gun taken, and license revoked.

    This got me to thinking and remembering what was taught in the class I attended to get my Tx permit....and I checked just now with a tech at the DPS Licensing division...she said that printing or an accidental flashing can be treated as Unlawfully Carrying a Weapon...the officer can, if he sees it, arrest you, take the weapon and license, and, under PC42:01...then you could lose your license...the process would be outside the carry permit rules...because, if he spots it, even printing...you have an unconcealed weapon...

    This isn't a big problem, I've carried with benefit of law or without, since I was 14-and never been spotted....you can learn to be careful....but it surely would be wonderful if the OC law would remove the possibility of the above happening...




Posting Permissions

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