TexasCHLforum.com

A friend will be visiting from WA state. He has a WA CCL and I'm trying to determine if TX has reciprocity with WA. Anyone?

We don't have reciprocity, but Texas unilaterally honors WA licenses.

apostate wrote:We don't have reciprocity, but Texas unilaterally honors WA licenses.

Thanks!!!

Now question #2. I know he can carry into the hotel, unless it's posted 30.06, as he is "licensed." But what if it's posted 30.06, can he carry under the MPA into his room? Or, is this a "grey area?"

G26ster wrote:

apostate wrote:We don't have reciprocity, but Texas unilaterally honors WA licenses.

Thanks!!!

Now question #2. I know he can carry into the hotel, unless it's posted 30.06, as he is "licensed." But what if it's posted 30.06, can he carry under the MPA into his room? Or, is this a "grey area?"

The Texas Motorist Protection Act (HB 1815), effective as of September 1, 2007, permits any law-abiding Texas resident the legal right to carry a handgun inside their motor vehicle in Texas without a CHL (Concealed Handgun License) or any other permit.

http://coferlaw.com/4862/is-it-illegal- ... -in-texas/

Grundy1133 wrote:

G26ster wrote:

apostate wrote:We don't have reciprocity, but Texas unilaterally honors WA licenses.

Thanks!!!

Now question #2. I know he can carry into the hotel, unless it's posted 30.06, as he is "licensed." But what if it's posted 30.06, can he carry under the MPA into his room? Or, is this a "grey area?"

The Texas Motorist Protection Act (HB 1815), effective as of September 1, 2007, permits any law-abiding Texas resident the legal right to carry a handgun inside their motor vehicle in Texas without a CHL (Concealed Handgun License) or any other permit.

http://coferlaw.com/4862/is-it-illegal- ... -in-texas/

A non licensee can have a gun in the car and in the room under MPA regardless if the hotel is posted 30.06, but that is not the issue. If a person is "licensed" to carry, and the hotel is posted 30.06 they would be prohibited from carrying in the hotel. The question comes in because I don't think a person "licensed" can pick and choose whether they fall under licensed carry laws or MPA in each given situation. So that is why I asked if it was a "grey" area, or...

G26ster wrote:

Grundy1133 wrote:

G26ster wrote:

apostate wrote:We don't have reciprocity, but Texas unilaterally honors WA licenses.

Thanks!!!

Now question #2. I know he can carry into the hotel, unless it's posted 30.06, as he is "licensed." But what if it's posted 30.06, can he carry under the MPA into his room? Or, is this a "grey area?"

The Texas Motorist Protection Act (HB 1815), effective as of September 1, 2007, permits any law-abiding Texas resident the legal right to carry a handgun inside their motor vehicle in Texas without a CHL (Concealed Handgun License) or any other permit.

http://coferlaw.com/4862/is-it-illegal- ... -in-texas/

A non licensee can have a gun in the car and in the room under MPA regardless if the hotel is posted 30.06, but that is not the issue. If a person is "licensed" to carry, and the hotel is posted 30.06 they would be prohibited from carrying in the hotel. The question comes in because I don't think a person "licensed" can pick and choose whether they fall under licensed carry laws or MPA in each given situation. So that is why I asked if it was a "grey" area, or...

Russell posted this link on another thread about hotel carry.

https://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic ... l#p1191567

On page 9 of the linked paper, it says:

. 9. Hotels, and the hotel exception as a temporary residence

Texas case law states that a "residence" includes
a temporary residence and includes such places as
hotel rooms. A hotel guest who brings a firearm into
his room is therefore by definition not committing a
criminal offense.(33) If the person must pass through
hallways to get to the room the hotel operator’s only
recourse if they wish to ban firearms may be to
exclude the guest from the premises upon discovery of
the firearm.

33 TEX. PENAL CODE § 46.02(a)(1)

From this paper written by a law firm, I understand that your friend would be able to have their handgun in their hotel room. However, (if I understand this passage correctly), if the hotel is posted 30.06/30.07 they would be limited to staying at a motel-like accommodation where you can access the rooms without entering the main building or travelling down hallways.

Even if the hotel is posted, you can legally "transport" the firearm in your luggage (locked case, etc.) to your room.

G26ster wrote:

Grundy1133 wrote:

G26ster wrote:

apostate wrote:We don't have reciprocity, but Texas unilaterally honors WA licenses.

Thanks!!!

Now question #2. I know he can carry into the hotel, unless it's posted 30.06, as he is "licensed." But what if it's posted 30.06, can he carry under the MPA into his room? Or, is this a "grey area?"

The Texas Motorist Protection Act (HB 1815), effective as of September 1, 2007, permits any law-abiding Texas resident the legal right to carry a handgun inside their motor vehicle in Texas without a CHL (Concealed Handgun License) or any other permit.

http://coferlaw.com/4862/is-it-illegal- ... -in-texas/

A non licensee can have a gun in the car and in the room under MPA regardless if the hotel is posted 30.06, but that is not the issue. If a person is "licensed" to carry, and the hotel is posted 30.06 they would be prohibited from carrying in the hotel. The question comes in because I don't think a person "licensed" can pick and choose whether they fall under licensed carry laws or MPA in each given situation. So that is why I asked if it was a "grey" area, or...

I disagree.

If this concern was real, then an off duty police officer could never drop his kid off at school unless he left his gun at home, even if he had an LTC since he couldn't "pick and choose" whether he falls under licensed carry or LEOSA, and the GFSZA applies unless he is licensed by the state. In fact, if the cop lived in most neighborhoods in the Houston area, he probably couldn't even drive to work armed as he may have to go within 1,000 feet of a school just to get out of his neighborhood. Fortunately, there is no case law I know of that suggests a person loses their rights when they obtain an additional authority to carry.

But in the OP's friends' case, there is a more basic problem. I believe that the MPA only applies to Texas residents, not residents of Washington state.

Soccerdad1995 wrote: But in the OP's friends' case, there is a more basic problem. I believe that the MPA only applies to Texas residents, not residents of Washington state.

The statute does not say "Texas resident." It says "person." I see nothing in the statute that says "Texas resident." Where am I going wrong?

Sec. 46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person:

(1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun or club; and

(2) is not:

(A) on the person's own premises or premises under the person's control; or

(B) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control.

(a-1) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun in a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control at any time in which:

(1) the handgun is in plain view, unless the person is licensed to carry a handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and the handgun is carried in a shoulder or belt holster; or

(2) the person is:

(A) engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic or boating;

(B) prohibited by law from possessing a firearm; or

(C) a member of a criminal street gang, as defined by Section 71.01.

(a-2) For purposes of this section, "premises" includes real property and a recreational vehicle that is being used as living quarters, regardless of whether that use is temporary or permanent. In this subsection, "recreational vehicle" means a motor vehicle primarily designed as temporary living quarters or a vehicle that contains temporary living quarters and is designed to be towed by a motor vehicle. The term includes a travel trailer, camping trailer, truck camper, motor home, and horse trailer with living quarters.

(a-3) For purposes of this section, "watercraft" means any boat, motorboat, vessel, or personal watercraft, other than a seaplane on water, used or capable of being used for transportation on water.

(a-4) A person commits an offense if the person:

(1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a location-restricted knife;

(2) is younger than 18 years of age at the time of the offense; and

(3) is not:

(A) on the person's own premises or premises under the person's control;

(B) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control; or

(C) under the direct supervision of a parent or legal guardian of the person.

(b) Except as provided by Subsection (c) or (d), an offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

(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.

(d) An offense under Subsection (a-4) is a Class C misdemeanor.

Soccerdad1995 wrote: But in the OP's friends' case, there is a more basic problem. I believe that the MPA only applies to Texas residents, not residents of Washington state.

The statute does not say "Texas resident." It says "person." I see nothing in the statute that says "Texas resident." Where am I going wrong?

(a-2) For purposes of this section, "premises" includes real property and a recreational vehicle that is being used as living quarters, regardless of whether that use is temporary or permanent. In this subsection, "recreational vehicle" means a motor vehicle primarily designed as temporary living quarters or a vehicle that contains temporary living quarters and is designed to be towed by a motor vehicle. The term includes a travel trailer, camping trailer, truck camper, motor home, and horse trailer with living quarters.

Per the Texas MPA the hotel room itself would be covered, even if the lobby of said hotel isn't. However, nowhere does it say "Texas Resident" as mentioned before but I'd ask someone more knowledgeable just to be 100% sure you and your friend don't unintentionally break any laws... Like they say, Ignorance of the law is not an excuse.

Grundy1133 wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote: But in the OP's friends' case, there is a more basic problem. I believe that the MPA only applies to Texas residents, not residents of Washington state.

The statute does not say "Texas resident." It says "person." I see nothing in the statute that says "Texas resident." Where am I going wrong?

(a-2) For purposes of this section, "premises" includes real property and a recreational vehicle that is being used as living quarters, regardless of whether that use is temporary or permanent. In this subsection, "recreational vehicle" means a motor vehicle primarily designed as temporary living quarters or a vehicle that contains temporary living quarters and is designed to be towed by a motor vehicle. The term includes a travel trailer, camping trailer, truck camper, motor home, and horse trailer with living quarters.

Per the Texas MPA the hotel room itself would be covered, even if the lobby of said hotel isn't. However, nowhere does it say "Texas Resident" as mentioned before but I'd ask someone more knowledgeable just to be 100% sure you and your friend don't unintentionally break any laws... Like they say, Ignorance of the law is not an excuse.

Obviously I'm looking for an answer from the most knowledgeable folks here. The real question is can a "license" holder switch between being covered by the laws governing licensees, and the MPA which covers non-licensees. I believe that the "common areas" of the hotel would be covered by 30.06 for licensees, but the room would be covered by MPA if he has direct access. But I don't want to give my friend bogus info. That's why I asked the question. Does a 30.06 sign "prevent" a licensee from carrying the firearm from his car directly to his room, without passing thru common areas, as the MPA is written for "non-licensees?"

G26ster wrote:

Grundy1133 wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote: But in the OP's friends' case, there is a more basic problem. I believe that the MPA only applies to Texas residents, not residents of Washington state.

The statute does not say "Texas resident." It says "person." I see nothing in the statute that says "Texas resident." Where am I going wrong?

(a-2) For purposes of this section, "premises" includes real property and a recreational vehicle that is being used as living quarters, regardless of whether that use is temporary or permanent. In this subsection, "recreational vehicle" means a motor vehicle primarily designed as temporary living quarters or a vehicle that contains temporary living quarters and is designed to be towed by a motor vehicle. The term includes a travel trailer, camping trailer, truck camper, motor home, and horse trailer with living quarters.

Per the Texas MPA the hotel room itself would be covered, even if the lobby of said hotel isn't. However, nowhere does it say "Texas Resident" as mentioned before but I'd ask someone more knowledgeable just to be 100% sure you and your friend don't unintentionally break any laws... Like they say, Ignorance of the law is not an excuse.

Obviously I'm looking for an answer from the most knowledgeable folks here. The real question is can a "license" holder switch between being covered by the laws governing licensees, and the MPA which covers non-licensees. I believe that the "common areas" of the hotel would be covered by 30.06 for licensees, but the room would be covered by MPA if he has direct access. But I don't want to give my friend bogus info. That's why I asked the question. Does a 30.06 sign "prevent" a licensee from carrying the firearm from his car directly to his room, without passing thru common areas, as the MPA is written for "non-licensees?"

well since your friend has a license I'd assume the non-license laws wouldn't apply to him since he isn't a non-licensed individual. That would make sense.... So if it makes sense it's probably wrong.

Grundy1133 wrote:

G26ster wrote:

apostate wrote:We don't have reciprocity, but Texas unilaterally honors WA licenses.

Thanks!!!

Now question #2. I know he can carry into the hotel, unless it's posted 30.06, as he is "licensed." But what if it's posted 30.06, can he carry under the MPA into his room? Or, is this a "grey area?"

The Texas Motorist Protection Act (HB 1815), effective as of September 1, 2007, permits any law-abiding Texas resident the legal right to carry a handgun inside their motor vehicle in Texas without a CHL (Concealed Handgun License) or any other permit.

http://coferlaw.com/4862/is-it-illegal- ... -in-texas/

I was basing my statement about needing to be a Texas resident on this post from Grundy. Apparently, this is incorrect.

As far as the question of whether an LTC holder loses their rights under the MPA as soon as they get their license, and then magically gets them back if their license expires, then loses them once again if they do a late renewal, etc., etc., I would just examine the text of the MPA and related laws to see if LTC holders, or LEO's, or anyone else is exempted from the legal protections that are granted to all other law abiding people per that piece of legislation.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:
As far as the question of whether an LTC holder loses their rights under the MPA as soon as they get their license, and then magically gets them back if their license expires, then loses them once again if they do a late renewal, etc., etc., I would just examine the text of the MPA and related laws to see if LTC holders, or LEO's, or anyone else is exempted from the legal protections that are granted to all other law abiding people per that piece of legislation.

I'd hate to give my friend advice based solely on my interpretation of the MPA as it relates to "licensees." That is why I'm hoping for a response from folks here that are far more knowledgeable than me.

G26ster wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:
As far as the question of whether an LTC holder loses their rights under the MPA as soon as they get their license, and then magically gets them back if their license expires, then loses them once again if they do a late renewal, etc., etc., I would just examine the text of the MPA and related laws to see if LTC holders, or LEO's, or anyone else is exempted from the legal protections that are granted to all other law abiding people per that piece of legislation.

I'd hate to give my friend advice based solely on my interpretation of the MPA as it relates to "licensees." That is why I'm hoping for a response from folks here that are far more knowledgeable than me.

If you can get Chas to reply he's probably one of the most knowledgeable people on the forum lol.