Government Buildings

[newlife12176]

Like I said yesterday or the day before......I am new here. Just obtained my CHL recently. Forgive the ignorance, but want to make sure I fully understand the law. I get confused reading so many different opinions and posts. Can I legally carry at government buildings (other than court houses), and does that mean city owned buildings too? Why do I read that Government buildings and City buildings cannot be posted with 30.06 signs? Is that because they are off limits anyway and the sign would be pointless? Thanks for everyone who make this an enjoyable and educational forum...Keep up the good work

[AEA]

In Texas, Government Buildings that do not contain a Courthouse and City Owned Buildings (other than Schools or Municipal Courts) cannot post 30.06 enforceable signs and are not off limits.

[mr.72]

Other than Federal property ... which is always no-guns and does not have to have a 30.06 sign...

[seamusTX]

The Legislature has made a hash out of this over the years, and it's difficult to understand.

First you have to look at PC §46.03 and PC §46.035. They specify

• schools (though the school administration can give you permission)
• "any grounds or building on which an activity sponsored by a school or educational institution is being conducted" (whatever that means)
• school buses
• polling places
• courts or court offices
• bars (which can be on government-owned property)
• "on the premises where a high school, collegiate, or professional sporting event or interscholastic event is taking place"
• jails or prisons
• "any meeting of a governmental entity," though only if posted with a 30.06 sign

Many subdivisions of state government use the courts or meetings clauses to post their buildings, probably contrary to the intent of the Legislature, but the issue has never been sorted out in court.

Even the state senate chamber was (or maybe still is) 30.06 posted.

Many cities have local ordinances that specifically prohibit CHL holders from carrying on city property. These ordinances are probably invalid, but they remain on the books. My town has one.

All of this applies only to property of the state of Texas and its political subdivisions. Nearly all federal government property is off-limits, except for national forests. The public areas of post offices are a perennial source of discussion that, again, has never been decided in court.

Fun, isn't it?

- Jim

[stevie_d_64]

Fun, isn't it?

No...

[newlife12176]

Wow......lots to remember and keep in consideration (if possible). Thanks for all the feedback.

[ErnieP]

The following (long) article describes an officer leaving a gun in a restroom. Thought is to restrict some LEO carry in courthouse. Plan would be for officers to check guns when entering the courthouse. Wouldn't it be nice if they would also allow CHL's to check (if not carry), so we wouldn't have to secure in a vehicle? Doubt we could be so fortunate, but hopefully some CHL people in the right places in government would at least raise the idea, and prevent any CHL from unintentionally carrying when entering a building and suddenly finding "the sign".

QUOTE FROM THE AMERICAN-STATESMAN:
"Saturday, October 11, 2008

The criminal district judges in Travis County and representatives of the sheriff's office, which provides courthouse security, next week will consider banning outside law enforcement officers from bringing guns into the Blackwell-Thurman Criminal Justice Center downtown.

State District Judge Julie Kocurek said she suggested the discussion after an Austin police officer left a loaded gun in a public bathroom outside her courtroom Sept. 24. The gunwas found and secured by a pair of felony defendants, Kocurek said. The gun was safely recovered by the officer, who is now the subject of an internal affairs investigation.

"It could have been very tragic," Kocurek said. "We were very fortunate."

The proposal comes as a man is on trial in Atlanta over a 2005 courthouse shooting that led to debates at courthouses across the nation on the merits of allowing law enforcement to carry guns inside. Brian Nichols is accused of taking a gun from a sheriff's deputy when he was in custody facing rape charges and using it to kill the deputy, a judge and a court reporter.

In an unsettling incident in Travis County this week, officials say members of a murder defendant's family tried to force their way toward the defendant and prosecutors near the judge's bench. No guns were drawn in that incident in state District Judge Wilford Flowers' court, but pepper spray was used by deputies to restore order.

Members of the public are prohibited from bringing guns into the Travis County courthouse and are screened for weapons at the entrance, but law enforcement officers — who visit to testify, to get warrants signed by judges or for other reasons — are allowed to keep their weapons.

Kocurek suggested that the county could institute a system similar to Austin's federal courthouse, where outside law enforcement officers put their guns in lockers by the door. That would leave sheriff's deputies who work in the courts as the only ones carrying guns.

Sheriff's office spokesman Roger Wade said the office is always willing to discuss security improvements with the judges but said it is ultimately the sheriff's call on whether to ban guns.

Wade said the decision on whether to allow guns is made statewide based on each individual courthouse's characteristics. Law enforcement in Hays and Williamson counties are allowed to bring guns into court.

Wuthipong "Tank" Tantaksinanukij, vice president of the Austin Police Association, said that stopping outside law enforcement from bringing guns into the courthouse would be a mistake that would reduce courthouse security.

"The officer (who left his gun in the bathroom) made a mistake and if they do that it's a knee-jerk reaction," he said. Tantaksinanukij said the department is addressing the issue by training officers to better secure their guns.

In the Sept. 24 incident, an Austin officer identified by defense lawyers as Jason Bryant was waiting to testify on the seventh floor of the criminal justice center in a drug possession trial. Police Chief Art Acevedo said the officer removed his gun while going to the bathroom and left it in a stall.

Kocurek said she had a busy docket that morning. She said a defendant facing a drug possession charge in her court found the gun. He did not speak English, though, and pointed it out to another defendant, who was facing a felony charge of driving while intoxication. While the first defendant kept anyone from going near the gun, the other defendant tracked down a sheriff's deputy.

By the time a deputy got to the bathroom, Bryant had realized his gun was gone and returned to the bathroom to retrieve it, Acevedo said.

It was out of his possession for only a few minutes, Acevedo said.

Kocurek said she scolded Bryant for the lapse later that morning when he came to her court to apologize.

"It's frightening," said lawyer Alberto Garcia, who represented the drug defendant who found the gun. "All it takes is for that one fellow who really has it out for a judge or a prosecutor or his own attorney ... to find the gun."

County Court-at-Law Judge Elisabeth Earle recalled that several years ago an Austin officer left his gun in a bathroom in a secured area near her courtroom while he was testifying. Earle did not recall the officer's name but said that he left his gun in a bathroom adjacent to the jury room during a trial. A janitor found the gun and reported it to court personnel, she said.

Earle said she favors limiting the number of people who have guns in the courthouse.

Hector Gomez, the supervisory deputy U.S. marshal in Austin, said that only his officers are allowed to have guns in federal court, something that cuts out any confusion that might arise in an emergency situation.

"We don't know who every officer is. They change their appearance, they transfer," he said, noting that officers don't wear uniforms in federal court. "We need to tell cop from criminal."

State District Judge Bob Perkins said that allowing outside law enforcement made sense before the sheriff's office began to screen people for guns at the courthouse door in the 1990s. "Now," he said, "you already have armed guards there at the door."

Defense lawyer Viktor Olavson, whose client reported the gun left by Bryant to deputies, suggested that even sheriff's deputies should not carry guns, as is the case in some courthouses. That would eliminate the chance of a similar incident as the Atlanta courthouse shooting.

"What is the use of having a gun?" he asked. "If some crazy lunatic grabs one of those guns he can then shoot people. If nobody has a gun what is a crazy lunatic going to do? Beat somebody up? He will be outnumbered in no time and nobody would be shot." "

[Keith B]

The following (long) article describes an officer leaving a gun in a restroom. Thought is to restrict some LEO carry in courthouse. Plan would be for officers to check guns when entering the courthouse. Wouldn't it be nice if they would also allow CHL's to check (if not carry), so we wouldn't have to secure in a vehicle? Doubt we could be so fortunate, but hopefully some CHL people in the right places in government would at least raise the idea, and prevent any CHL from unintentionally carrying when entering a building and suddenly finding "the sign".

QUOTE FROM THE AMERICAN-STATESMAN:
"Saturday, October 11, 2008

The criminal district judges in Travis County and representatives of the sheriff's office, which provides courthouse security, next week will consider banning outside law enforcement officers from bringing guns into the Blackwell-Thurman Criminal Justice Center downtown......"

Thread started here http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_F ... 83&t=19316" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[GrillKing]

In Texas, Government Buildings that do not contain a Courthouse and City Owned Buildings (other than Schools or Municipal Courts) cannot post 30.06 enforceable signs and are not off limits.

30.06 signs posted by governmental entitites are enforceable when applied to meetings occuring within the building. I believe many such entities post the sign with intent to scare away legitimate CHL holders, but if asked why the sign was posted, would say it's only for meetings.

[brianko]

30.06 signs posted by governmental entitites are enforceable when applied to meetings occuring within the building. I believe many such entities post the sign with intent to scare away legitimate CHL holders, but if asked why the sign was posted, would say it's only for meetings.

Interesting...I've never read the regs that way. The Dallas County Appraisal District (DCAD) Bldg has compliant 30.06 signs on all entrances. If I'm meeting with an appraiser, I can carry into the building itself, but I can't show up at the meeting carrying. Which effectively makes the DCAD building off-limits unless you're not going to talk to anyone.

So what constitutes a "meeting"? Does there have to be an agenda? If I talk to an appraiser informally, is this considered a "meeting"?

[seamusTX]

The government code contains a definition of meeting of a government body: http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/do ... 551.001.00" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Although this definition specifies "in this chapter," there is no other definition of meeting that I am aware of.

A citizen meeting with one official is not a meeting of a government body, nor is an ice-cream social or weenie roast.

However, if you fail to conceal, anything can happen.

- Jim

[bryang]

Fun, isn't it?

- Jim

Yes it is Jim and that is an understatement....when I was preparing for my CHL class I must have read the
"Texas Concealed Handgun Laws" at least 50 times and it was just like trying to run through mud.

I ended up exhausted and more confused than I was before I began.

All I can say is thank the Lord for this forum!! And members like you that can explain it to us less fortunate ones.

Thanks,
-geo

[seamusTX]

When I moved to Texas (from Illinois, in 1995), I quickly realized that the penal code was very different. i literally spent a year trying to understand it.

However, I am still not a lawyer,and nothing that i say should be considered legal advice.

- Jim