TexasCHLforum.com

I have a friend that has an office, for his private practice, in a 3006 posted building. He has a CHL. Can he carry in his office, or be armed in his office in this building?

The only question that I can think of is does he have a direct access to his office to the outside without going through any building comman areas?

If not then I would think that he cannot carry inside. Although he has control of his office, he does not have control of any comman areas in route to his office and he is not in control of those areas. Therfore he would be carrying illegally.

IANAL and this is just my .02

I would think that if he was carrying from his vehicle directly to his office and then from his office directly back to his vehicle then the CHL would not come into play and as long as he doesn't cross any no gun signs other than the 30.06. On the other hand, he may be considered to have an easement for a route to his office since he has control over his office, I think an attorney is required to get an actual answer on this one, and even then it won't be definitive until someone has case law on the issue, or the law as written is changed to add a provision for this type of situation.

I am curious if the lease he signed has any verbiage in it about guns and if it would be enforceable. IOW could the lease limit his rights because he agreed to it?

That's a good question about the lease, but that might be a civil matter for breach of lease.

If there is nothing in the lease then he should be good to carry in the office suite under his control. But in his shoes I wouldn't want to be caught carrying in the lobby or hallways. He might want to check with his lawyer but I think a locked briefcase is not on your person. If nothng else, the lock makes it tough to get caught.

recaffeination wrote: He might want to check with his lawyer but I think a locked briefcase is not on your person. If nothng else, the lock makes it tough to get caught.

The lock may make it harder to get caught, but IMHO anything in care/custody/control is indeed "on" your person.

I'd consider buying a new gun for the office. Transport it unloaded from the vehicle to the office. Load and secure it in the office. . . leave it there as the office gun. . . maybe a safe in the office and retrieve it for on-body carry during the day.

In most offices I've seen like this - even the restrooms are in a common area unless he has a large private practice. I wouldn't recommend carrying outside of the actual leased space.

This solution doesn't help you much for conflicts between the office and the car, but it's better than nothing.

All standard non-lawyering disclaimers apply to this post.

fickman wrote:I'd consider buying a new gun for the office. Transport it unloaded from the vehicle to the office. Load and secure it in the office. . . leave it there as the office gun. . . maybe a safe in the office and retrieve it for on-body carry during the day.

In most offices I've seen like this - even the restrooms are in a common area unless he has a large private practice. I wouldn't recommend carrying outside of the actual leased space.

This solution doesn't help you much for conflicts between the office and the car, but it's better than nothing.

All standard non-lawyering disclaimers apply to this post.

Texas law makes no distinction for loaded or unloaded guns. If he is breaking the law carrying a loaded gun, he's also breaking it with an unloaded gun.

sjfcontrol wrote:

fickman wrote:I'd consider buying a new gun for the office. Transport it unloaded from the vehicle to the office. Load and secure it in the office. . . leave it there as the office gun. . . maybe a safe in the office and retrieve it for on-body carry during the day.

In most offices I've seen like this - even the restrooms are in a common area unless he has a large private practice. I wouldn't recommend carrying outside of the actual leased space.

This solution doesn't help you much for conflicts between the office and the car, but it's better than nothing.

All standard non-lawyering disclaimers apply to this post.

Texas law makes no distinction for loaded or unloaded guns. If he is breaking the law carrying a loaded gun, he's also breaking it with an unloaded gun

More specifically, don't you mean it to say, "Texas CHL law makes no distinction?" Also, does CHL law make a provision for on body carry as opposed to off-body carry? I don't think so. My wife has to have a CHL whether she carries on her person or in her purse.........whether or not it is loaded. And I still think that CHL trumps MPA for the CHL holder.

Now, if the OP's friend did not have a CHL, then he would be covered under MPA, and he could carry the concealed and loaded gun between his office and his car.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:

fickman wrote:I'd consider buying a new gun for the office. Transport it unloaded from the vehicle to the office. Load and secure it in the office. . . leave it there as the office gun. . . maybe a safe in the office and retrieve it for on-body carry during the day.

In most offices I've seen like this - even the restrooms are in a common area unless he has a large private practice. I wouldn't recommend carrying outside of the actual leased space.

This solution doesn't help you much for conflicts between the office and the car, but it's better than nothing.

All standard non-lawyering disclaimers apply to this post.

Texas law makes no distinction for loaded or unloaded guns. If he is breaking the law carrying a loaded gun, he's also breaking it with an unloaded gun

More specifically, don't you mean it to say, "Texas CHL law makes no distinction?" Also, does CHL law make a provision for on body carry as opposed to off-body carry? I don't think so. My wife has to have a CHL whether she carries on her person or in her purse.........whether or not it is loaded. And I still think that CHL trumps MPA for the CHL holder.

Now, if the OP's friend did not have a CHL, then he would be covered under MPA, and he could carry the concealed and loaded gun between his office and his car.

Well, if it's not in Texas Law, then it's not in Texas CHL law either.
As for the highlighted part -- we'll just have to agree to disagree.

sjfcontrol wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote: And I still think that CHL trumps MPA for the CHL holder.

Well, if it's not in Texas Law, then it's not in Texas CHL law either.
As for the highlighted part -- we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I just want to clarify...... For me, it's not really a matter of disagreement. I WANT the opposite to be true, but I just think that many LEOs, once they are apprised of your CHL, are not going to be able to see past it to concede your right to carry in and out of the workplace under MPA instead of under the authority of CHL. The problem is that it is one of those areas of the law which is not clearly defined, and authority, being what it is, is not likely to interpret those things in favor of individual liberty.

Thanks for all of your comments. I'll have to ask if he has a private entrance, or not. If not, it really blows, because his office is the very first one about fifteen to twenty feet inside the door past the 30.06.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote: And I still think that CHL trumps MPA for the CHL holder.

Well, if it's not in Texas Law, then it's not in Texas CHL law either.
As for the highlighted part -- we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I just want to clarify...... For me, it's not really a matter of disagreement. I WANT the opposite to be true, but I just think that many LEOs, once they are apprised of your CHL, are not going to be able to see past it to concede your right to carry in and out of the workplace under MPA instead of under the authority of CHL. The problem is that it is one of those areas of the law which is not clearly defined, and authority, being what it is, is not likely to interpret those things in favor of individual liberty.

Hmmm...
So, I now know what you think, and what you want, but what do you believe? "Legally", analyzing the laws as written, and given that there are no precedents to rely on, do you believe that CHL trumps MPA? IOW, If you can't beat the ride, will you still beat the wrap?

MPA? Is he going to drive the car into his office...

What about castle doctrine? Doesn't that extend to the workplace? If you are in your home, are you carrying under CHL authority or castle doctrine?