LEOs and CHL Rules

[BrassMonkey]

Not from I

Was that a dig?

Yeah, he knows everything...

Me, no way. I have no idea why you act that way, for example.

I dunno, was it from YOU?

[CHL/LEO]

TPC §30.06 only applies to a person carrying pursuant to the authority of their CHL. Since a LEO can carry anywhere, he doesn't need the CHL and thus isn't carrying pursuant to it.

Charles - thanks for the feedback. It makes sense that we are carrying under the authority granted by the Code of Criminal Procedures which authorizes us as Peace Officers, and that would take precedence over the authority granted to a CHL Holder.

Never having been to NYC, do they recognize TX CHL holders right to carry there. It will be interesting to see if HR 218 is challenged in court. This is the first time that I had heard there was any controversy over it but I'm not surprised that it's originating from that part of the country.

Also, I wish LEOs could carry anywhere. I'd love to be able to visit Big Bend National Park and legally carry a gun (as I'm sure that CHL holders would too).

[Venus Pax]

Was that a dig?

Yeah, he knows everything...

Me, no way. I have no idea why you act that way, for example.

I dunno, was it from YOU?

Okay, everyone...

[frankie_the_yankee]

One place that there is a 30.06 type restriction on a LEO is that anyone can deny an off duty LEO access to their property while they are packing. We have a right to insist that an off duty LEO disarm before comming on our property. Although if the LEO lies and claims he has no gun I don't know if there is any repercussions

Actually, I believe that a property owner (not including property that is a "public accommodation") can even deny ON DUTY LEO's, or anyone else access to their property unless: a) The LEO has a valid warrant, b) the LEO has either "reasonable belief" or "probable cause" (not sure which) that there is a felony in progress, or c) in a "emergency" such as a fire, flood, etc.

And this applies whether they are packing or not. If someone comes up to my ranch, and none of the above conditions apply, I believe I am fully within my rights to order them off the property if I want to, no matter who they are or what they are carrying.

[CHL/LEO]

Liberty posted:

One place that there is a 30.06 type restriction on a LEO is that anyone can deny an off duty LEO access to their property while they are packing.

Good point - I remember that Six Flags in Arlington originally had some type of signage up that banned all guns from their property - including off duty LEOs. They changed it to correct that problem.

If you are in Atalanta, GA and you ever attend the World Aquarium, you will notice that they prohibit anyone from carrying a gun into their facility, unless it is an on-duty officer responding to a call for service. Off-duty local, state AND federal officers cannot carry there. Their concern is that an AD could strike the glass which could cause a significant loss of life by flooding.

[CHL/LEO]

F_T_Y posted:

If someone comes up to my ranch, and none of the above conditions apply, I believe I am fully within my rights to order them off the property if I want to, no matter who they are or what they are carrying.

I think you might be correct in some of your assumptions. This was covered in the academy but that was a long time ago. Plus, it's never happened to any LEO that I know of so we've never had the opportunity for follow up on it.

That being said, your statement did get me to thinking about this subject. If I do recall correctly, one of our instructors stated that it didn't apply to Game Wardens (state or federal) as they can claim a right to access ranch and farm land (or anywhere for that matter) if they only have a reasonable suspicion that there might be some violation of a law that they enforce.

At that point in my LE career our instructors were viewed as "all knowing gods" that were never wrong. Now that I know that most LE instructors are fellow LE officers who are sometimes "confused" about things like this, I tend to think that just might have been one of those "urban LE myths" that are often contributed to Game Wardens and Texas Rangers.

[txinvestigator]

A LEO doe not lose places he can carry, or get more restrictive on where he can carry, by getting a CHL. A LEO is exempt from many places restricted by CHL, such a 46.035, 30.06, etc.

As a Texas LEO you carry under your authority as a LEO. IMO, the importance of a CHL for a LEO is the purchase of weapons, and maintaining the ability to carry is suspended or otherwise NOT able to carry under your LEO authority.

To address 30.06 specifically, it reads "if a license holder carries under the authority of a CHL""

As a cop, you carry under THAT authority.

It is the same for me when I am working as a PPO and encounter a 30.06. I have a CHL, but during that time I am carrying under the authority of my PPO Authorization, not the CHL, and I can legally ignore the sign.

One place that there is a 30.06 type restriction on a LEO is that anyone can deny an off duty LEO access to their property while they are packing. We have a right to insist that an off duty LEO disarm before comming on our property. Although if the LEO lies and claims he has no gun I don't know if there is any repercussions

More to the point than "if he lies" is 'how would you know to begin with?" :)

[txinvestigator]

Not from I

Was that a dig?

Yeah, he knows everything...

Me, no way. I have no idea why you act that way, for example.

I dunno, was it from YOU?

Me either.

[txinvestigator]

TPC §30.06 only applies to a person carrying pursuant to the authority of their CHL. Since a LEO can carry anywhere, he doesn't need the CHL and thus isn't carrying pursuant to it.

Charles - thanks for the feedback. It makes sense that we are carrying under the authority granted by the Code of Criminal Procedures which authorizes us as Peace Officers, and that would take precedence over the authority granted to a CHL Holder.

Never having been to NYC, do they recognize TX CHL holders right to carry there.

HECK NO!

Here is a list of Texas' reciprocity;

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administra ... rocity.htm


Note that NY licenses are valid here, but Texas is not in NY.

[Liberty]

More to the point than "if he lies" is 'how would you know to begin with?" :)

The same way that anyone would know if a CHL carries into a 30.06 labeled property.

Its the same if I tell someone they can't bring illegal drugs, alcohol, or weapons onto my property. If they lie, I'll never get a trespassing conviction. Whether it a cop or not it doesn't matter. Whether its a gun or not doesn't matter. its a verbal condition that would be hard to prove. Even if they were caught lying.

[srothstein]

Well, Charles already pointed out that the wording to 30.06 says it only applies to people carrying under the authority of the CHL, so a cop can still enter under his authority as a cop, so I wanted to point out that the other idea, banning a cop with a gun when he is off-duty is not possible.

As a general rule, the criminal trespass laws apply to cops, either on or off duty. There is the obvious exception for people using a warrant, even though this is not stated in the law. But there are cases in Texas that have ruled that an officer is still bound by the criminal trespass laws, most notably a drug case where the officers used the open fields exception that the feds recognize. By crossing a fence line, the officers committed criminal trespass and lost the drug case.

BUT, you also cannot deny entrance by a cop, on or off duty, based on his being in possession of a firearm. 30.05 has a section (g) added a couple years ago that makes it non-applicable for this reason.

You can still tell a cop to leave your property for other reasons, but not just because he has a gun and you do not allow guns.

I am interested in what will happen now when there is a disturbance and one person tells the officer to get off his property when the other says he can stay. Based on the Supreme Court ruling last year, it appears to me that this would constitute criminal trespass unless the officer could come up with a very good reason for staying. The case I am referring to said that if a husband and wife disagree on a consent to search and both are present, the consent does not exist.

[frankie_the_yankee]

That being said, your statement did get me to thinking about this subject. If I do recall correctly, one of our instructors stated that it didn't apply to Game Wardens (state or federal) as they can claim a right to access ranch and farm land (or anywhere for that matter) if they only have a reasonable suspicion that there might be some violation of a law that they enforce.

I believe you're correct about that. That was another exemption I had not thought of.

[frankie_the_yankee]

TPC §30.06 only applies to a person carrying pursuant to the authority of their CHL. Since a LEO can carry anywhere, he doesn't need the CHL and thus isn't carrying pursuant to it.

Charles - thanks for the feedback. It makes sense that we are carrying under the authority granted by the Code of Criminal Procedures which authorizes us as Peace Officers, and that would take precedence over the authority granted to a CHL Holder.

Never having been to NYC, do they recognize TX CHL holders right to carry there.

HECK NO!

Here is a list of Texas' reciprocity;

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administra ... rocity.htm


Note that NY licenses are valid here, but Texas is not in NY.

But can't TX LEO's, even retired ones, (with or without CHL's) carry in NYC by virtue of their status as LEO's and the federal law?

[jimlongley]

Never having been to NYC, do they recognize TX CHL holders right to carry there. It will be interesting to see if HR 218 is challenged in court. This is the first time that I had heard there was any controversy over it but I'm not surprised that it's originating from that part of the country.

NY City does not recognize the FOPA that was implemented to prevent places like NY City from arresting people merely passing through on the way from a place where they could legally own a gun to another place where they could legally own a gun. NY City routinely arrests people they catch passing through, such as airline passengers who have had to retrieve and recheck baggage for one reason or another, and even in one case out on Long Island where they arrested someone who was waiting for the Port Jefferson, NY to Bridgeport, CT, ferry because he was not "making a continuous trip" (this per the NY State Rifle and Pistol Assn. web site.

I am a Life Member of the NYSR&PA and get notices with horror stories about this kind of abuse regularly.

But can't TX LEO's, even retired ones, (with or without CHL's) carry in NYC by virtue of their status as LEO's and the federal law?

Not according to NY City, and Long Island is right up there. I wouldn't trust any metropolitan area in the whole state.

[tomc]

I agree with Jim regarding NYC cops attitude to out of state LEOs carrying per the 218 law. I do not recall any LEO getting thrown in jail, but I have heard they were disarmed and escorted out of the city. I also recall there was a police chief from Nevada, I believe, visiting NYC and was checking his firearm for the return flight and was harrassed by the Port Authority cops. I recall he gave them a very big piece of his mind and the NY cops left him alone due to his position. It was kinda funny.