Just getting some verification

[RetNavy]

Daughter has a UIL completion tomorrow (Wed). Different city, she will be riding the bus over and completion will be held in a church... Before its start they will be having lunch at a McDonald's

She asked me if I can go and watch her. Since it's a school function at the church I know I cannot carry. I am not on hyena list as a parent advisor/aide or whatever, just watching.

While they are eating at McDonald's will I still be okay to carry??

[Hindenburg]

If you're not there as an agent of the school and the McD isn't posted, I don't know any law it violates.

[JP171]

Ret Navy,
first off is the competition sponsored by the school, or is it another entity? how are you restricted by the competition? is it posted and is the property it is taking place on a governmental owned facility?, way too many suppositions and way too many unanswered questions. next thing is are you participating in this competition or there merely as a spectator?

[RetNavy]

Ret Navy,
first off is the competition sponsored by the school, or is it another entity? how are you restricted by the competition? is it posted and is the property it is taking place on a governmental owned facility?, way too many suppositions and way too many unanswered questions. next thing is are you participating in this competition or there merely as a spectator?

it is a school competition this year sponsored by the Atlanta ISD. competition was held at First Baptist Church in Atlanta.... there was six different ISD's represented with three schools from daughters ISD, I was there as a spectator, even though the assembly area was in a church building and did not have a 30.06 posted I did not carry in there due to it was a school sponsored event....

due to mechanical difficulties with the bus from my daughters school,they did not stop at a Mcdonalds on the way there..... which my question was about.... being able to carry inside the restaurant.... it was a planned stop for the kids on the way to the event...

in short.... did not carry at the event and didnt have to worry about Mcdonalds due to they didnt stop


Thanks for the inputs

RetNavy

[n5wd]

FWIW, now that it's after the fact, I would have been comfortable carrying both in the church (assuming that the church had no 30.06 signs posted, which they might have) and at the McDonalds. The prohibition about carrying at school functions deals with school activities inside school facilities or on school grounds.

[mojo84]

FWIW, now that it's after the fact, I would have been comfortable carrying both in the church (assuming that the church had no 30.06 signs posted, which they might have) and at the McDonalds. The prohibition about carrying at school functions deals with school activities inside school facilities or on school grounds.

Not so sure that is correct.

PC §46.03. PLACES WEAPONS PROHIBITED. (a) A person commits an offense
if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly possesses or goes with a
firearm, illegal knife, club, or prohibited weapon listed in Section 46.05(a):
(1) on the physical premises of a school or educational institution, any grounds
or building on which an activity sponsored by a school or educational institution
is being conducted, or a passenger transportation vehicle of a school or
educational institution, whether the school or educational institution is public
or private, unless pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the
institution;

[sjfcontrol]

FWIW, now that it's after the fact, I would have been comfortable carrying both in the church (assuming that the church had no 30.06 signs posted, which they might have) and at the McDonalds. The prohibition about carrying at school functions deals with school activities inside school facilities or on school grounds.

Not so sure that is correct.

PC §46.03. PLACES WEAPONS PROHIBITED. (a) A person commits an offense
if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly possesses or goes with a
firearm, illegal knife, club, or prohibited weapon listed in Section 46.05(a):
(1) on the physical premises of a school or educational institution, any grounds
or building on which an activity sponsored by a school or educational institution
is being conducted, or a passenger transportation vehicle of a school or
educational institution, whether the school or educational institution is public
or private, unless pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the
institution;

Might want to review this thread: viewtopic.php?f=125&t=63106" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
In particular, comments by Charles Cotton.
He has made similar arguments in other threads, too. That was just the first one I found.

[mojo84]

I would want his opinion on this case in particular in light of what the law says. It seems there is a difference in attending and being a spectator at a school sponsored event and just happening to be at the same location where there is a field trip or such and what was mentioned in this thread. If the CHL just happened to be at the church when the school sponsored event took place, I think it would be ok. Since he is attending to be a spectator of the event, I wouldn't carry.

Hopefully, he will see this and chime in. I would be happy to be wrong in this instance.

[sjfcontrol]

I would want his opinion on this case in particular in light of what the law says. It seems there is a difference in attending and being a spectator at a school sponsored event and just happening to be at the same location where there is a field trip or such and what was mentioned in this thread. If the CHL just happened to be at the church when the school sponsored event took place, I think it would be ok. Since he is attending to be a spectator of the event, I wouldn't carry.

Hopefully, he will see this and chime in. I would be happy to be wrong in this instance.

What do you see in the law that differentiates between bystanders, attendees and participants?

Agreed, I'd like to hear what Charles has to say here, too.

[mojo84]

Seems toe like the law is clear it isn't legal to attend an event knowing it's a school sponsored event. I don't see how it could be expected that a chl is to leave a location if a school field trip shows up. I don't have the answer. I just see what is in the CHL-16 and what is in the law. If Charles or you have knowledge of other law or case law addressing it, so be it. I'd be glad to see it.

Let me ask you, other than Charles' comment about a different scenario, what do you know or see in the law that confirms what is of stated in black and white?

[sjfcontrol]

Seems toe like the law is clear it isn't legal to attend an event knowing it's a school sponsored event. I don't see how it could be expected that a chl is to leave a location if a school field trip shows up. I don't have the answer. I just see what is in the CHL-16 and what is in the law. If Charles or you have knowledge of other law or case law addressing it, so be it. I'd be glad to see it.

Let me ask you, other than Charles' comment about a different scenario, what do you know or see in the law that confirms what is of stated in black and white?

OK, here is another thread -- viewtopic.php?f=7&t=15587&p=177070" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As others have mentioned, there is some dispute on what constitutes "grounds." I believe the statute taken as a whole indicates the activity has to be occurring on grounds owned by the school, as all of TPC §46.02(a) deals with schools. The buildings are school buildings, the transportation vehicles are the schools'. (If school children ride a city buss to the zoo, the bus would not be off limits to CHLs because the buss is not "a transportation vehicle of the school, . . .") Further, the statute allows the carrying of firearms in such places, with "written authorization" of the institution. It would be quite a stretch to presume that the Legislature intended the school to have the authority to authorize the carrying of firearms on someone else's property. When read in its entirety, as we are required to do, I believe TPC §46.02(a) applies only to school property and school vehicles.



But as noted, this is a gray area; the cutting edge of the law where many people find themselves bleeding to death.

Chas.

The argument is that the prohibition for "school sponsored events" must only apply on school property, since that is the ONLY place where the school has the authority to authorize somebody to carry. So, even if you were a chaperone for a third grade class visiting a museum, you would not be off-limits carrying. On the other hand, if you were riding there in a school bus, that would be school property, and therefore you could not be carrying on the bus.

[Wolverine]

A "passenger transportation vehicle of a school or educational institution" is listed in the law as off limits for armed citizens.

[mojo84]

Seems toe like the law is clear it isn't legal to attend an event knowing it's a school sponsored event. I don't see how it could be expected that a chl is to leave a location if a school field trip shows up. I don't have the answer. I just see what is in the CHL-16 and what is in the law. If Charles or you have knowledge of other law or case law addressing it, so be it. I'd be glad to see it.

Let me ask you, other than Charles' comment about a different scenario, what do you know or see in the law that confirms what is of stated in black and white?

OK, here is another thread -- viewtopic.php?f=7&t=15587&p=177070" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As others have mentioned, there is some dispute on what constitutes "grounds." I believe the statute taken as a whole indicates the activity has to be occurring on grounds owned by the school, as all of TPC §46.02(a) deals with schools. The buildings are school buildings, the transportation vehicles are the schools'. (If school children ride a city buss to the zoo, the bus would not be off limits to CHLs because the buss is not "a transportation vehicle of the school, . . .") Further, the statute allows the carrying of firearms in such places, with "written authorization" of the institution. It would be quite a stretch to presume that the Legislature intended the school to have the authority to authorize the carrying of firearms on someone else's property. When read in its entirety, as we are required to do, I believe TPC §46.02(a) applies only to school property and school vehicles.



But as noted, this is a gray area; the cutting edge of the law where many people find themselves bleeding to death.

Chas.

The argument is that the prohibition for "school sponsored events" must only apply on school property, since that is the ONLY place where the school has the authority to authorize somebody to carry. So, even if you were a chaperone for a third grade class visiting a museum, you would not be off-limits carrying. On the other hand, if you were riding there in a school bus, that would be school property, and therefore you could not be carrying on the bus.

Notice his last sentence. I openly admit, I am clueless about reading law compared to Charles. However, I still interpret it differently than he did in that comment. I also believe the grammar structure of the sentence using the "or" makes it clear it could be on premises owned by the school or any other where the event is held. That would explain the part about prior authorization.

Here is another comment he made that supports your position. It was in a thread about public library. It's five years old. I wonder if his opinion has changed since.



viewtopic.php?f=7&t=25333" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[sjfcontrol]

I freely admit it is a grey area -- no case law to back it up.
Sorry, what "or" are you talking about?

[mojo84]

(1) on the physical premises of a school or educational institution, any grounds
or building on which an activity sponsored by a school or educational institution
is being conducted, or a passenger transportation vehicle of a school or
educational institution, whether the school or educational institution is public
or private, unless pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the
institution;

I think the "any", " or" and commas effect the meaning.