Computer Video = Oral Notice ???

CHL discussions that do not fit into more specific topics

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

User avatar
seamusTX
Senior Member
Posts: 13551
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:04 pm
Location: Galveston

Re: Computer Video = Oral Notice ???

Post by seamusTX »

Plato wrote:And why the heck the lawmakers put the exact word requirement into the "written communication" requirement but left the "oral" undefined is beyond me.
The elaborate requirements for 30.06 signs were passed into law because they are onerous and few property owners would follow them.

Before that (1997), any "no guns" sign served as legal notice for CHL holders.

As for oral notice, it has been common law for over a thousand years that if a property owner tells you to leave, you must leave, and the property owner can expel you by force if you don't.

Does anyone here seriously think that if your employer calls the police and wants you arrested because you have a firearm at work, that you will be able to talk your way out of the ride?

- Jim
User avatar
boomerang
Senior Member
Posts: 2629
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:06 pm
Contact:

Re: Computer Video = Oral Notice ???

Post by boomerang »

I'm surprised at the people who want to stick around and argue with management after being told to leave the premises. Anyone with the sense God gave a goldfish would be long gone before the police arrive.
"Ees gun! Ees not safe!"
Plato
Member
Posts: 137
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 10:41 am
Location: East TX

Re: Computer Video = Oral Notice ???

Post by Plato »

seamusTX wrote:The elaborate requirements for 30.06 signs were passed into law because they are onerous and few property owners would follow them.
That's what I always figured. Now if we could just get em to do the same for the oral notice part of PC 30.06.

seamusTX wrote:As for oral notice, it has been common law for over a thousand years that if a property owner tells you to leave, you must leave, and the property owner can expel you by force if you don't.

Does anyone here seriously think that if your employer calls the police and wants you arrested because you have a firearm at work, that you will be able to talk your way out of the ride?
I think you've kinda jumbled a few issues together there. I was not questioning whether a property owner (or person acting for the owner/like a manager) could legally tell you leave and have police brought to the scene to force it. But the police typically just arrive on the scene and repeat the command to leave and then your response determines if you get arrested.

As for the second part it would depend on the scenario. If an employer decided one day to search all employees cars and upon doing so found a deer rifle behind the seat of some good ole boy's pickup and promptly fired him and told him to leave -I expect he could then just leave. If the PO'ed employer called the police and wanted that good ole boy arrested I'm sure the police could do it -but I'm not sure why your certain they would ?

My original question was as someone here said -more directed to the legal issue. Does a CHL holder commit an offense if he carries at work after watching a computer video "no firearms" policy. Whether you can get fired is not my question, you can be fired at any time without any reason. You can pretty much be arrested at any time as well -an arrest is not a conviction.
User avatar
seamusTX
Senior Member
Posts: 13551
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:04 pm
Location: Galveston

Re: Computer Video = Oral Notice ???

Post by seamusTX »

Plato wrote:I think you've kinda jumbled a few issues together there. I was not questioning whether a property owner (or person acting for the owner/like a manager) could legally tell you leave and have police brought to the scene to force it. But the police typically just arrive on the scene and repeat the command to leave and then your response determines if you get arrested.
That is what they do for simple 30.05 criminal trespass, like someone loitering in a parking lot.

No one knows what they would do for 30.06, because no one is ever prosecuted for it.
As for the second part it would depend on the scenario. If an employer decided one day to search all employees cars and upon doing so found a deer rifle behind the seat of some good ole boy's pickup and promptly fired him and told him to leave -I expect he could then just leave. If the PO'ed employer called the police and wanted that good ole boy arrested I'm sure the police could do it -but I'm not sure why your certain they would ?
in the first place, this would not be a violation of 30.06, which involves a person with a CHL having a handgun on or about his person.

An employer cannot simply search vehicles in the company parking lot. They can ask employees to consent to a search, and fire those who refuse.

They can also bring in the police with the infamous "drug and gun-sniffing" dogs. That is what happened in the Weyerhaeuser incident in Oklahoma in 2002.

That kind of search brings up some interesting questions. It is not a violation of law to have a firearm in your vehicle in Texas, so no probable cause exists for a search. A smart lawyer could make something of that, but the people who are victims of these activities can't afford to fight them.

For a 30.06 violation to exist, someone with a CHL must be found to be carrying a handgun on or about his person. Some kind of concealment failure or imprudent mouth-running must occur for the employer to find out. In that case, you have an armed person in a place where the property owner or manager does not want him to be. The police would arrest. It's what they do with armed people who are apparently violating the law.
Does a CHL holder commit an offense if he carries at work after watching a computer video "no firearms" policy. Whether you can get fired is not my question, you can be fired at any time without any reason. You can pretty much be arrested at any time as well -an arrest is not a conviction.
It would be up to a judge or jury as the finder of fact. Until that happens, the question can't really be answered. It's like Schrödinger's cat.

Many people have been arrested and convicted, and had their conviction overturned years later by an appeals court. I doubt any of them were thrilled about the process.

- Jim
Plato
Member
Posts: 137
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 10:41 am
Location: East TX

Re: Computer Video = Oral Notice ???

Post by Plato »

seamusTX wrote:...For a 30.06 violation to exist, someone with a CHL must be found to be carrying a handgun on or about his person. Some kind of concealment failure or imprudent mouth-running must occur for the employer to find out. In that case, you have an armed person in a place where the property owner or manager does not want him to be. The police would arrest. It's what they do with armed people who are apparently violating the law...
So the dogs hit on an employee who is carrying concealed on his person, said employee has a valid TX CHL. Police grab him and cuff him while employer is going nuts firing the employee. Boss man tells cops we have a clear "no firearms policy" in our handbook that he read and signed. Perhaps the police arrest, perhaps not -but I figure the employee is just fired when all is said and done.

Now run the same scenario with "handbook" replaced with "computer video" -and you have my question. I think I've got the gist of it now -most say the video = the oral notice of PC 30.06. But we don't know for sure, only that it would cost some tiresome legal fees to figure it out
:grumble
User avatar
seamusTX
Senior Member
Posts: 13551
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:04 pm
Location: Galveston

Re: Computer Video = Oral Notice ???

Post by seamusTX »

Plato wrote:But we don't know for sure, only that it would cost some tiresome legal fees to figure it out
Exactly.

And if one person had charges dismissed or was found not guilty, it would have no bearing on the next incident.

If I know that my employer doesn't want weapons in the office (which I do know), I'm not going to risk my job, freedom, fortune, and the long-term welfare of my family on some fine point of law.

The police are not lawyers. They have limited options for dealing with situations. When a property owner or manager files a complaint about someone who is armed on private property, the police are going to arrest. What else can they do?

- Jim
Plato
Member
Posts: 137
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 10:41 am
Location: East TX

Re: Computer Video = Oral Notice ???

Post by Plato »

seamusTX wrote:...If I know that my employer doesn't want weapons in the office (which I do know), I'm not going to risk my job, freedom, fortune, and the long-term welfare of my family on some fine point of law.
Of course the unspoken risk you willingly accept here is walking the earth unarmed with the one tool most suited for self defense. And for the state to license folks for carry only to have employers say its unacceptable is quite annoying :totap:

seamusTX wrote:The police are not lawyers. They have limited options for dealing with situations. When a property owner or manager files a complaint about someone who is armed on private property, the police are going to arrest. What else can they do?
You need to give more details before I'd say for sure. I could spin off many scenarios where a nervous manager might call the police and the police show up and simply tell a guy to leave.
User avatar
seamusTX
Senior Member
Posts: 13551
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:04 pm
Location: Galveston

Re: Computer Video = Oral Notice ???

Post by seamusTX »

Plato wrote:Of course the unspoken risk you willingly accept here is walking the earth unarmed with the one tool most suited for self defense.
I have other tools.

I dislike the situation as much as anyone, but if you're going to work for a living, you're going to have to put up with such nonsense.

- Jim
Post Reply

Return to “General Texas CHL Discussion”