TexasCHLforum.com

PC §30.06
(e) It is an exception to the application of this section that the property
on which the license holder carries a handgun is owned or leased
by a governmental entity and is not a premises or other place on which
the license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under
Section 46.03 or 46.035.

Russell wrote:What I'm wondering is, even if they had metal detectors, the building is city-owned property. Your tax dollars paid for it. The state legislature put a law in place to prohibit cities from telling CHL holders they can't carry if I'm not mistaken (don't know where that law is, that is just heresay until someone shows it to me).

I think you're correct in principle.

Here's the problem: You go there carrying legally. The metal detector beeps. They ask you what you're carrying.

At that point, one of two things happens:

If you tell them none of their business, they refuse to let you in.

If you tell them you're carrying a concealed handgun with a CHL, they refuse to let you in.

In either case, if you don't leave, the cops are going to arrive, and they are almost certainly going to arrest you.

Depending upon who gets the case, you may be charged under city or state law. You may get the case dismissed, but the whole thing is going to be embarrassing, time-consuming, and expensive.

And you still won't get in.

The relevant state law is PC 30.06.

- Jim

[quote="seamusTX]

If they have metal detectors or searches and tell you you can't carry, you're sunk.

- Jim

Like Russell said, as a LEGAL matter, I do not see how telling you (because a metal detector beeped) you can't carry has any more weight than posting a non-enforceable 30.06 sign. Plus, I don't know that the guy Texasgirl got on the phone is current on city ordinances -- the legislature went thru the pre-emption issue a couple years ago, he may not have updated his knowledge, or may not care if even if he did.

Texasgirl, as a PRACTICAL matter, you might have to suffer through a debate with non-LEO security or a "LEO contact" with an SAPD guy who may or may not know the law, or care. That's up to you. You may not want to be a CHL "martyr" , and I wouldn't blame you. On the other hand, it is very aggravating to let the government (city in this case) get away with intimidation because even if they are wrong on the law you will suffer for it. Grrr.

I just realized that I did go to a concert at the Municipal Auditorium a few years ago, and I did carry, and there was no significant security search or metal detectors or what have you. This is not recent experience, I don't recall the exact year I went, but it has been awhile.

This has me curious -- I am going to go see if I can look up the SA ordinances, and review the pre-emption legislation... Seems like we've been down this road before, but would be helpful to me to know I am correct on the law, rather than THINK I am correct.

Good luck either way, hope you enjoy the show.

elb

I think this is what the guy I spoke to is referring to.



CODE OF ORDINANCES
City of
SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS

Codified through
Ord. No. 2007-05-17-0559, adopted May 17, 2007.
(Supplement No. 72)

Sec. 21-157. Carrying of weapons, including concealed handguns, on city-owned premises prohibited; posting of notice.
(a) It is the intent of the city council to prohibit any person other than a commissioned security officer employed by the city and licensed peace officers from carrying or possessing weapons including concealed handguns on city-owned premises, including city-owned buildings, parking garages, lots, and other parking areas but excluding city-owned or operated public parks, streets and sidewalks.

(c) The city council directs the city manager, or his designee to post the appropriate signs and such other notice, in accordance with Section 30.05 of the Texas Penal Code (the Criminal Trespass Law), to carry out the city council's above-stated intent.

(d) The city manager is authorized to take all steps reasonable and necessary to deny entry or continued presence on city-owned premises to all such persons possessing weapons including concealed handguns, including prosecution of such violators for the offense of criminal trespass.


I found it on http://www.municode.com/

Russell wrote: What I'm wondering is, even if they had metal detectors, the building is city-owned property. Your tax dollars paid for it. The state legislature put a law in place to prohibit cities from telling CHL holders they can't carry if I'm not mistaken (don't know where that law is, that is just heresay until someone shows it to me).

Even if they had metal detectors up, doesn't that STILL violate the law to prohibit someone from carrying into a government-owned building just because they are carrying a licensed concealed handgun (if that law exists)?

Or am I wrong?

The law does exist. You are totally correct. I believe the law was changed in 2005. Not sure of the exact chapter. One of the legal types should be able to cite it.

Basically, what the law says is that state/county/local governments and quasi-government agencies can not prohibit the carrying of guns by CHL's on property they own or control, UNLESS the property is of a type specifically listed in the state statute as a prohibited area.

Speaking of San Antonio, the Tax Assessor/Collector's office for Bexar county has a 30.06 sign posted along with a guard inside. Is this an invalid sign since it's a government entity? I feel like this has been discussed before.

frankie_the_yankee wrote:

Russell wrote: What I'm wondering is, even if they had metal detectors, the building is city-owned property. Your tax dollars paid for it. The state legislature put a law in place to prohibit cities from telling CHL holders they can't carry if I'm not mistaken (don't know where that law is, that is just heresay until someone shows it to me).

Even if they had metal detectors up, doesn't that STILL violate the law to prohibit someone from carrying into a government-owned building just because they are carrying a licensed concealed handgun (if that law exists)?

Or am I wrong?

The law does exist. You are totally correct. I believe the law was changed in 2005. Not sure of the exact chapter. One of the legal types should be able to cite it.

Basically, what the law says is that state/county/local governments and quasi-government agencies can not prohibit the carrying of guns by CHL's on property they own or control, UNLESS the property is of a type specifically listed in the state statute as a prohibited area.

Yes, you are both wrong. There is no such law.

The law makes 30.06 Non-Applicable if govt.owned or leased property. Nothing in the law requires them to let you in. The only folks who can enter property and not be denied based on possession of a gun are Peace Officers, and that protection was added in 2005.

Renegade wrote: Yes, you are both wrong. There is no such law.

The law makes 30.06 Non-Applicable if govt.owned or leased property. Nothing in the law requires them to let you in. The only folks who can enter property and not be denied based on possession of a gun are Peace Officers, and that protection was added in 2005.

That's not how I read it. Can you cite a reference please?

frankie_the_yankee wrote:

Renegade wrote: Yes, you are both wrong. There is no such law.

The law makes 30.06 Non-Applicable if govt.owned or leased property. Nothing in the law requires them to let you in. The only folks who can enter property and not be denied based on possession of a gun are Peace Officers, and that protection was added in 2005.

That's not how I read it. Can you cite a reference please?

What are you reading? There is no law requiring them to let you in, thus it is not referencable. I think that puts the burden on you to show there is a law, that requires them to allow CHL holders onto property.

TexasGirl,

Yes, I found that city code also. Here is the state law pertaining to this (two sections, 30.05 and 30.06):

§ 30.05. CRIMINAL TRESPASS. (a) A person commits an
offense if he enters or remains on or in property, including an
aircraft or other vehicle, of another without effective consent or
he enters or remains in a building of another without effective
consent and he:
(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or
(2) received notice to depart but failed to do
so.


(....intervening paragraphs deleted....)


(f) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that:
(1) the basis on which entry on the property or land or
in the building was forbidden is that entry with a handgun was
forbidden; and
(2) the person was carrying a concealed handgun and a
license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, to
carry a concealed handgun of the same category the person was
carrying.

And...

§ 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED
HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license
holder:
(1) carries a handgun under the authority of
Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another
without effective consent; and
(2) received notice that:
(A) entry on the property by a license holder
with a concealed handgun was forbidden; or
(B) remaining on the property with a concealed
handgun was forbidden and failed to depart.

(... intervening paras deleted...)


(e) It is an exception to the application of this section
that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is
owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or
other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying
the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.

And for Darwood, about the Tax Assessor's office -- Yes I saw that sign and the guard a couple years ago when I renewed my car registration at the Bandera Road office. I ignored it and carried anyway. Of course I didn't wave the gun in the guards face. Charles Cotton has a thread elswhere in the forum for documenting inappropriate signage on government property --- you might want to go post it there. I thought about it, but hadn't been to the office for so long I didn't know if it was still posted.

elb

Renegade wrote:

frankie_the_yankee wrote:

Renegade wrote: Yes, you are both wrong. There is no such law.

The law makes 30.06 Non-Applicable if govt.owned or leased property. Nothing in the law requires them to let you in. The only folks who can enter property and not be denied based on possession of a gun are Peace Officers, and that protection was added in 2005.

That's not how I read it. Can you cite a reference please?

What are you reading? There is no law requiring them to let you in, thus it is not referencable. I think that puts the burden on you to show there is a law, that requires them to allow CHL holders onto property.

Thanks to elb for posting the relevant state law.

In order for them to not let you in to a government owned/leased building that is a public accommodation, they have to have a legal reason to keep you out. Since trespass by reason of having a CHL and a handgun is legally ruled out by the state, what reason could they possibly have?

When a city ordinance is in conflict with a requirement of state law, the ordinance will be rendered null and void when tested.

At least that's the way I see it. May Chas or Stephan might chime in here.

ELB wrote: And for Darwood, about the Tax Assessor's office -- Yes I saw that sign and the guard a couple years ago when I renewed my car registration at the Bandera Road office. I ignored it and carried anyway. Of course I didn't wave the gun in the guards face. Charles Cotton has a thread elswhere in the forum for documenting inappropriate signage on government property --- you might want to go post it there. I thought about it, but hadn't been to the office for so long I didn't know if it was still posted.

elb

Last time I was at the Bandera office was about a year ago when I needed to register my vehicles from out of state. I also don't know if the sign is still there.

Just wanted to let everyone know the the San Antonio Municipal Auditorium was not 30.06 posted anywhere that I saw. Had my ticket scanned, nodded to the nice police officer and went on my merry way to enjoy the concert.

Hmm, but i thought concert events WERE prohibited chl carry events?