TexasCHLforum.com

This is an importants one. Many people that have thier CHL are disarmed for fear of loosing thier job because they can't store thier gun in thier car.
This fear turns many into part time carriers.

I can't speak for the entire TSRA Legislative Committee, but I believe this may be the flagship bill for 2007. Right behind it, if I have my way, will be a revision to the definition of "premises" and a clarification of what constitutes a school.

Regards,
Chas.

That is a good question.
What is a school?

When I was growing up, I thought I knew.


I don't know any more.

Recently, I drove 20 miles an hour through a School zone. The only thing like a school in the area was a Day Care center. Is a Day Care Center a school?

My kids went to Catholic school. At least once a week they went into the main Church building for services. When I go there on Sundays, is it a school?

What about someone that Home Schools their children?
What if two familys work together. One family teaches math and the other english?

I'd like to see a change that requires places of public accomodation (e.g. businesses, gov facilities, et. al.)posting 30-06 signs, provide secure lockers for licensees to store their weapon whilst in the facility.

This is really neccessary to protect our right to carry... same would need to apply to employers who restrict carry by employees.

FWIW

Chuck

cxm wrote:I'd like to see a change that requires places of public accomodation (e.g. businesses, gov facilities, et. al.)posting 30-06 signs, provide secure lockers for licensees to store their weapon whilst in the facility.

This is really neccessary to protect our right to carry... same would need to apply to employers who restrict carry by employees.

FWIW

Chuck

That makes two people now...

Opps, I remember that thread a while back about this idea...

It is worth it...

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I can't speak for the entire TSRA Legislative Committee, but I believe this may be the flagship bill for 2007. Right behind it, if I have my way, will be a revision to the definition of "premises" and a clarification of what constitutes a school.

Regards,
Chas.

Redefining premises is #1 with me. I'd like to see "premises" expanded to include your personal vehicle. If someone doesn't want me to carry on my person in their building or outside my vehicle on their property, that's their right. I don't like it, but by the same token I'm sure some people wouldn't like that I don't allow certain language or smoking in my house. But it is my property and my right.

However, by limiting my right to carry on my premises (vehicle), they have limited my right to defend myself when I am off their lot.

IMHO, redefining premises to include your vehicle (actually any vehicle you may occupy) is the best balance of protecting my right to carry and their right to control their property.

Gary

Very well said GrillKing.

I have been a big fan of the gun locker idea. That should be added to the 30.06 language. If someone wants to keep me out of their store w a gun, so be it, but they need to have a place for me to store it.

I have wondered about CHL's that go to a jail for visitation, etc...

I am thinking of Harris County in particular. As an LEO in plain clothes, I went up and checked my gun at the front desk and he put it in a gun locker and gave me my key. I wonder what the dep would have done if a CHL holder went up and tried to check a gun???

Glenn

I like the idea of this as well.

Defining my vehicle the same as my home should limit the ability of police officers to search it without a warrent.

I consider myself a rights advocate.

tomneal, even if you are given rights in your car that extend rights of your house to your car, a search warrant would not be neccessary if probable cause exists. The reasoning behind it is a car could be miles away from the scene by the time a warrant was obtained.

If search warrants are required for whatever reason, the car and person will be deatained while a warrant is being obtained. That would be a pain.

Believe it or not, I am a huge advicate of 4th Amd rights, however, sometimes getting "more rights" is a hassle. :)

Glenn

search

I should not have mentioned this because I don't have time to explain how much I Despise the current condition of the 4th amendment.

Even in Texas, It is in worse shape than the 2nd is in New York. AND there is no orginization like the NRA out to protected our 4th Amendment rights.

Resisting 4A infringement and having a good attorney are about all you can hope for.

Knowing the limits placed on searches and seizures by the SCOTUS is a big plus. Know what entails a legal Terry stop and frisk, knowing what LEO can and can not do. The biggest issue with 4A rights is that few sh..ple know what they are.

LEO's, do not take offense, please. I respect and admire you guys. You have a tough job.

The ACLU, New Black Panther Party, and LULAC, are very active in supporting 4th Amend rights.

I can not imagine the situation as it is now, being in bad shape. I do not think people understand that if many more constraints are placed on law enforcement, guilty criminals will get away.

I do not think that people understand that an LEO can be charged with a federal crime if a search is ruled illegal. Even if the search was in good faith and turned up fruits of a crime.

Many officers are leaving the profession because of the non-sense that we are subjected to.

CHL holders, I would think, would encourage law enforcement to make good faith efforts to get drugs, illegal guns, and stolen property off the street. I will tell you that many times officers don't even bother any more. The attitude is: If I don't look and don't try and do anything, I can't violate someone's rights. If I do look and I find something, and then it is later ruled unconstitutional, then I can be charged with a crime. Screw it, I ain't gonna look.

That should be scary to law abiding citizens. Many do not know what great condition the 4th Amend is is.

I would like to know of how the 4th Amend is ignored or in bad condition.

Sorry for the long post and sorry if I got off topic.

Glenn

Ouch.

Just like they are trying to help Rush Limbaugh?

GrillKing wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I can't speak for the entire TSRA Legislative Committee, but I believe this may be the flagship bill for 2007. Right behind it, if I have my way, will be a revision to the definition of "premises" and a clarification of what constitutes a school.

Regards,
Chas.

Redefining premises is #1 with me. I'd like to see "premises" expanded to include your personal vehicle. If someone doesn't want me to carry on my person in their building or outside my vehicle on their property, that's their right. I don't like it, but by the same token I'm sure some people wouldn't like that I don't allow certain language or smoking in my house. But it is my property and my right.

However, by limiting my right to carry on my premises (vehicle), they have limited my right to defend myself when I am off their lot.

IMHO, redefining premises to include your vehicle (actually any vehicle you may occupy) is the best balance of protecting my right to carry and their right to control their property.

Gary

This has been the angle I have been touting for years...If an "entity" is going to be allowed to restrict, then we should be allowed to carry to the facility, discretely disarm (as to not alarm to populace), securely store our weapon, conduct our business, then do the opposite on the way out and continue with our day...

If its an issue to provide for that to happen...Then I see it as a better use of revenue to provide for this revision to the "system"...

If the City of Houston can spend 3 million plus dollars on a less than lethal Taser guns for most of its patrol folks, that is being argued to be "more than" less than lethal (Good call COH! /sarcasm) then I think a few storage boxes could be had for way less than that at ALL city facilities, and could be implemented right now! Its not that hard...But they'll make it that way...

I do not go to a facility just so I can be some pain in their arses with my "capability"...Its not about them...It IS about those of us who "choose" to exercise this right...And if there are un-necessary hoops we have to jump through, then maybe some (and eventually all) of those need to be removed...period!

Ya'll got me going early on the headache today... [/i]