TexasCHLforum.com

The property rights are based on the real property (the land). Thus, the property owner should be able to ban the gun in the car if he so desires.

The way I see it, he can ban it no matter what container you have it in. It could be in your holster, your briefcase, or your car. Either way, the land is his and he can do anything he wants on it.

I strongly believe the way to solve this problem is to clarify the liability issue instead. If there is a reasonably foreseeable chance of harm coming, and he disarms you, he is now responsible for your safety. Make that clear to everyone and I bet the bans drop faster.

As long as we are starting a wish list, I would add that we should work on the definitions to make them more clear. Education institution and sporting events could be clarified, especially the professional part of sporting events. Add in what is meant by premises where a school sponsored event is taking place (zoo with class trip for example) would also help.

I would modify yours to just make the liability laws more clear that they are assuming the liability for anyone they disarm. Without getting into the private property rights arguments, this does seem like a very good compromise and solution to whose rights are more important.

The last law I would like is a penalty for governmental agencies improperly posting 30.06 signs. If not a true criminal penalty, at least a civil suit method to force removal. To help Frankie, we could add in some clarification that property that is owned by the government but leased to a private individual/organization could not be posted.

We made some very big strides in this last session, so short of repealing chapter 46, I think we should take some small steps this year to consolidate and reinforce what we have. 2011 is when we go for big things like open carry, or maybe repeal of Chapter 46 altogether. Well, that last may take a few more years than that.