The difference in this case is how the law reads. Both 30.06 and 30.07 use the wording that they only apply to a person who is carrying a pistol under the authority of his LTC. That is the key point. When are you carrying under the authority of the LTC? That authority is defined in 46.15 as being an exception to the law, i.e. if it would be illegal under 46.02, 46.03(a)(14), or 46.04(a-1) and you are licensed and carrying a pistol then you can do it under that authority. But if it is not illegal, you are not carrying under the authority of the LTC, you are just obeying the law.Tex1961 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 21, 2021 12:15 pm I'm on the side of you NOT legally being able to put your LTC in your car and walk past a .06/.07 under Constitutional Carry... To me it's like being a Doctor, lawyer, police, etc. Just because your degree or badge isn't on you does not mean you are still not certified or licensed... Only if my license were revolked or no longer valid I'm still licensed...
Thus, we have the weird case of it not being illegal for anyone to carry in the location if it does not have a 30.05 sign. This means you are not needing your exception to the law. If it is posted 30.06 and 30.07, you can ignore them because they only apply to people carrying where it would otherwise be illegal. If it is posted 30.05, then there is an exception there that says you can carry if you are licensed, so they need extra signs to ban you because you are then carrying under the authority of your LTC.
Or, to look at it differently, I am an honorably retired peace officer. I have an exception to the law in 46.15 that covers more than the LTC exception. I also have my LTC. Since 30.06/07 only apply to people carrying under the authority of the LTC, do they apply to me? If so, what happens to my authority as a retired police officer? What if I were still an active police officer? As you can see from these situations, there must be some way to determine which authority you are carrying under.
I use, and believe the courts will use, the lowest one which protects me and makes my action legal. You get that same benefit. Look at the law and see if what you are doing is generally illegal. If it is, do you have an exception that allows you to do something? If there is a second point that nullifies the exception, do you have an exception that nullifies that point? Keep going as far as you need til you are legal.
An interesting side note that applies to me an other retired officers. For years, I have been able to ignore 30.06/07 signs because of my retired status. I can no longer do so if there is a 30.05 sign posted also. There is no exception or defense to a 30.05 sign for retired peace officers. So, if I go past it now, it is because I am carrying under my LTC. That means 30.06/07 do apply to me in that case where there are all three signs.
There are two possible reasons for the weird case of needing all three signs. Either it was done deliberately by the bill author because anti-gunners did not think through the law like this, or it was an accident because no one thought it all the way through. Either way, I expect to see it clarified in the next session. There will be enough uproar from the anti-gunners trying to get places to post and trying to get it enforced, that they will be able to force the change. It won't be me setting up the case which causes this because if I see 30.06/07 signs, I do not shop there when I can avoid it. They have expressed their opinion that they don't want me and there are very few places I will force to accept my money. My hope is that enough LTCs do this, even if the signs are not quite 100% right, so as to cause both an economic loss for the anti-gunners and that there are not enough incidents to justify a law change.