TexasCHLforum.com

jimlongley wrote:

JNMAR wrote:Just a thought:

And what about the Federal "within 1,000' except on your own property" prohibition?

CHL is exempt.

The school districts think they can post and enforce and it has not been decided in court, the only solutions are a test case or legislative relief.

Just to clarify Jim's statement, CHL's issued from the state the school is in are in are exempt. Out of state CHL's are NOT exempt. In other words, you must have a Texas CHL to be exempt from the Gun Free School Zone Act on Texas school grounds. You must also follow the state law where you are; some states do not allow you on the school grounds, even with their state's CHL.

This is me and I dont know exsactly what the law is BUT: if i was picking up my kid and they had a sign posted restricting the parking lot from chl I would just pick up my kid and ignore the sign.

Keith B wrote:

jimlongley wrote:

JNMAR wrote:Just a thought:

And what about the Federal "within 1,000' except on your own property" prohibition?

CHL is exempt.

The school districts think they can post and enforce and it has not been decided in court, the only solutions are a test case or legislative relief.

Just to clarify Jim's statement, CHL's issued from the state the school is in are in are exempt. Out of state CHL's are NOT exempt. In other words, you must have a Texas CHL to be exempt from the Gun Free School Zone Act on Texas school grounds. You must also follow the state law where you are; some states do not allow you on the school grounds, even with their state's CHL.

In Case someone wants to know that law:

Within 1000ft of a school unless you have a license/permit issued by the state in which the school is located - US Title 18, Part I, Chapter 44, Subsection 922(q)

I have posted before about my opinion on parking lots, the MPA, and 30.06, but it has never been about a school as I recall. Given that, here is my take on the situation. You can legally drive into the lot but cannot get out of the car with the firearm.

OK, so here is my logic. The sign is valid and applies to the grounds. The exception noted in 30.06 for governmental property was not read quite far enough. Schools are definitely governmental property BUT this exception does not apply to them. CWOOD posted the exception but most of us failed to note the "and" clause. 30.06 is not applicable to anyplace that is:

a. a governmental agency
AND
b. is not a place prohibited under 46.03 or 46.035.

Schools are places prohibited under those sections, so the exception for governmental property does not apply to schools.

This makes the sign valid.

But, it is important to note that 30.06 ONLY applies when you are carrying under the authority of your CHL. A CHL is an exception to the law on unlawfully carrying. For you to be carrying under its authority, it must be illegal to carry normally. It is not illegal to carry in your car concealed so you are not under the authority of your CHL.

This means you can carry in your car while driving past this sign. But the minute you get out of the car, it is illegal to carry normally and you would be carrying under the authority of the CHL. A valid sign combined with the authority to carry coming from the CHL means 30.06 applies.

Of course, I strongly recommend avoiding being the test case AND checking my logic with your defense attorney. He is the one who will be representing you and may disagree with my interpretations.

srothstein wrote:I have posted before about my opinion on parking lots, the MPA, and 30.06, but it has never been about a school as I recall. Given that, here is my take on the situation. You can legally drive into the lot but cannot get out of the car with the firearm.

OK, so here is my logic. The sign is valid and applies to the grounds. The exception noted in 30.06 for governmental property was not read quite far enough. Schools are definitely governmental property BUT this exception does not apply to them. CWOOD posted the exception but most of us failed to note the "and" clause. 30.06 is not applicable to anyplace that is:

a. a governmental agency
AND
b. is not a place prohibited under 46.03 or 46.035.

Schools are places prohibited under those sections, so the exception for governmental property does not apply to schools.

This makes the sign valid.

But, it is important to note that 30.06 ONLY applies when you are carrying under the authority of your CHL. A CHL is an exception to the law on unlawfully carrying. For you to be carrying under its authority, it must be illegal to carry normally. It is not illegal to carry in your car concealed so you are not under the authority of your CHL.

This means you can carry in your car while driving past this sign. But the minute you get out of the car, it is illegal to carry normally and you would be carrying under the authority of the CHL. A valid sign combined with the authority to carry coming from the CHL means 30.06 applies.

Of course, I strongly recommend avoiding being the test case AND checking my logic with your defense attorney. He is the one who will be representing you and may disagree with my interpretations.

Steve, I don't think that school "parking lots" are a "place prohibited under 46.03 or 46.035", as both sections define "premises" as:

(3) "Premises" means a building or a portion of a building. The term does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area.

Therefore I don't think the 30.06 notice applies to a school owned by a governmental entity, where you exit your car but remain outside the "premises".

-Scott

ScottDLS wrote:

srothstein wrote:I have posted before about my opinion on parking lots, the MPA, and 30.06, but it has never been about a school as I recall. Given that, here is my take on the situation. You can legally drive into the lot but cannot get out of the car with the firearm.

OK, so here is my logic. The sign is valid and applies to the grounds. The exception noted in 30.06 for governmental property was not read quite far enough. Schools are definitely governmental property BUT this exception does not apply to them. CWOOD posted the exception but most of us failed to note the "and" clause. 30.06 is not applicable to anyplace that is:

a. a governmental agency
AND
b. is not a place prohibited under 46.03 or 46.035.

Schools are places prohibited under those sections, so the exception for governmental property does not apply to schools.

This makes the sign valid.

But, it is important to note that 30.06 ONLY applies when you are carrying under the authority of your CHL. A CHL is an exception to the law on unlawfully carrying. For you to be carrying under its authority, it must be illegal to carry normally. It is not illegal to carry in your car concealed so you are not under the authority of your CHL.

This means you can carry in your car while driving past this sign. But the minute you get out of the car, it is illegal to carry normally and you would be carrying under the authority of the CHL. A valid sign combined with the authority to carry coming from the CHL means 30.06 applies.

Of course, I strongly recommend avoiding being the test case AND checking my logic with your defense attorney. He is the one who will be representing you and may disagree with my interpretations.

Steve, I don't think that school "parking lots" are a "place prohibited under 46.03 or 46.035", as both sections define "premises" as:

(3) "Premises" means a building or a portion of a building. The term does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area.

Therefore I don't think the 30.06 notice applies to a school owned by a governmental entity, where you exit your car but remain outside the "premises".

-Scott

Correct. The exception to the exception in TPC §30.06(e) applies only to a "premises" or "place" that is already off-limits to a CHL. It does not render the entire real estate off-limits. Here is the operative language, "(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."

Only the buildings or grounds where a school sponsored activity is ongoing are off limits. Therefore, the 30.06 signs are meaningless. The "premises" is already off-limits so the 30.06 signs add nothing.

Private schools are a different matter. They can do as they wish.

Chas.

Chas.

Thanks everyone for all the thoughtful input. Everything I've read leads me to believe that "premises" as defined is the key here. This same point was driven home last night while I was reading "The Texas Gun Owners Guide" and it defined "premises" the way Charles did.

As I am reading, it seems to be down to a bit of grey area in the law. You can be legally carrying under the Texas Dept of Public Safety rules, but if an incident occurs, it is on you to go through the legal system and proclaim your innocence, which could cost you some money.

That being said, I made the commitment to myself and my family that I was going to be carrying everwhere it was legal for me to do so. I don't frequent bars (ever), and will not carry where I am prohibited. No one should know that I am carrying regardless.

If, god forbid, something happens, I have the rule of law to back me up. If you play by the rules, and are considered as one of the "good guys" you will generally fair ok. It may cost you a few Durka Durka's along the way though.

Comes down to this I guess....are you willing to be in the right even if it costs you some time and money to be in the right?

I, for one, will be legal and armed no matter the cost. You never know when you will need to defend you or your family. Saving my kids or my wife is worth more than money to me. I guess I all comes down to personal decision.

Sorry if I am getting too long winded or or Phil-il-sofical......it will pass.

Isn't violating 30.06 just a trespassing charge? As in, you'll most likely just be asked to leave if you're around long enough for an officer to show up?

I could be wrong, but I wouldn't worry about the sign.

Fangs wrote:Isn't violating 30.06 just a trespassing charge? As in, you'll most likely just be asked to leave if you're around long enough for an officer to show up?

I could be wrong, but I wouldn't worry about the sign.

Violating a valid 30.06 is criminal trespass, which is a Class A misdemeanor if it is a habitation or Class B if not a habitation, and you will lose your CHL if convicted.

Keith B wrote:

Fangs wrote:Isn't violating 30.06 just a trespassing charge? As in, you'll most likely just be asked to leave if you're around long enough for an officer to show up?

I could be wrong, but I wouldn't worry about the sign.

Violating a valid 30.06 is criminal trespass, which is a Class A misdemeanor if it is a habitation or Class B if not a habitation, and you will lose your CHL if convicted.

It's always a Class A if you're carrying; see PC 30.05(d)(3)(B).

chabouk wrote:

Keith B wrote:

Fangs wrote:Isn't violating 30.06 just a trespassing charge? As in, you'll most likely just be asked to leave if you're around long enough for an officer to show up?

I could be wrong, but I wouldn't worry about the sign.

Violating a valid 30.06 is criminal trespass, which is a Class A misdemeanor if it is a habitation or Class B if not a habitation, and you will lose your CHL if convicted.

It's always a Class A if you're carrying; see PC 30.05(d)(3)(B).

Oops, correct.

chabouk wrote:

Keith B wrote:

Fangs wrote:Isn't violating 30.06 just a trespassing charge? As in, you'll most likely just be asked to leave if you're around long enough for an officer to show up?

I could be wrong, but I wouldn't worry about the sign.

Violating a valid 30.06 is criminal trespass, which is a Class A misdemeanor if it is a habitation or Class B if not a habitation, and you will lose your CHL if convicted.

It's always a Class A if you're carrying; see PC 30.05(d)(3)(B).

Or 30.06(d) if you were carrying under the authority of your CHL and the other elements of the statute were met.

Charles L. Cotton wrote: Only the buildings or grounds where a school sponsored activity is ongoing are off limits.

To beat it further with speculation, what if there is a marching band practicing in the parking lot a few hundred yards away? Does that make the whole parking lot off-limits?

karl wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote: Only the buildings or grounds where a school sponsored activity is ongoing are off limits.

To beat it further with speculation, what if there is a marching band practicing in the parking lot a few hundred yards away? Does that make the whole parking lot off-limits?

A few hundred yards away...? Y'all must have some pretty big school parking lots in Houston.

Then again, where I live the middle school cross country team jogs on a sidewalk that continues for close to 5 miles. I hope the whole sidewalk isn't off limits while they're on it.