TexasCHLforum.com

Would a city official be exempt from the prohibition to carry in a government meeting?

Would the mayors argument that this was just a pellet gun change anything?

Would you ever admit you carried a pellet gun for self defense?

http://www.khou.com/news/local/Pasadena ... 54951.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Trying to find the words...

RJGold wrote:Would a city official be exempt from the prohibition to carry in a government meeting?

Would the mayors argument that this was just a pellet gun change anything?

Would you ever admit you carried a pellet gun for self defense?

http://www.khou.com/news/local/Pasadena ... 54951.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There really isn't a prohibition against carrying a handgun at a government meeting. Penal Code 46.035(i) says it is only an offense if 30.06 notice is given. If the news article is accurate the sign is not notice. He the Mayor does not have a CHL, that is different.

jbarn wrote:

RJGold wrote:Would a city official be exempt from the prohibition to carry in a government meeting?

Would the mayors argument that this was just a pellet gun change anything?

Would you ever admit you carried a pellet gun for self defense?

http://www.khou.com/news/local/Pasadena ... 54951.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There really isn't a prohibition against carrying a handgun at a government meeting. Penal Code 46.035(i) says it is only an offense if 30.06 notice is given. If the news article is accurate the sign is not notice. He the Mayor does not have a CHL, that is different.

That's what I was thinking. If the only sign is one that says "No Firearms Allowed" that is not sufficient notice for a CHL holder.

However, no, I would not admit I carried a pellet gun for self defense.

He is guilty of idiocy. If he is not licensed, then he is an idiot. If he is carrying a pellet gun for self defense, then he is an idiot. If he is carrying without an adequate and safe holster, then he is an idiot.

Did I mention he is an idiot?

Jumping Frog wrote:He is guilty of idiocy. If he is not licensed, then he is an idiot. If he is carrying a pellet gun for self defense, then he is an idiot. If he is carrying without an adequate and safe holster, then he is an idiot.

Those are the words I was trying to find.

jbarn wrote:

RJGold wrote:Would a city official be exempt from the prohibition to carry in a government meeting?

Would the mayors argument that this was just a pellet gun change anything?

Would you ever admit you carried a pellet gun for self defense?

http://www.khou.com/news/local/Pasadena ... 54951.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There really isn't a prohibition against carrying a handgun at a government meeting. Penal Code 46.035(i) says it is only an offense if 30.06 notice is given. If the news article is accurate the sign is not notice. He the Mayor does not have a CHL, that is different.

I wasn't clear about the 30.06 notification.

On the news story last night the sign did not look 30.06 compliant.

The news story did not say whether he had a CHL or not.

Thanks for the clarification.

Jumping Frog wrote:He is guilty of idiocy. If he is not licensed, then he is an idiot. If he is carrying a pellet gun for self defense, then he is an idiot. If he is carrying without an adequate and safe holster, then he is an idiot.

Did I mention he is an idiot?

Tell us what you really mean.

But is he really breaking state law by having a pellet gun? Comments?

"Firearm means any device designed, made, or adapted to
expel a projectile through a barrel by using the energy generated by an
explosion or burning substance or any device readily convertible to
that use. Firearm does not include a firearm that may have, as an integral
part, a folding knife blade or other characteristics of weapons
made illegal by this chapter

Handgun means any firearmthat is designed. made, or
adapted to be fired with one hand.

A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly
carries on or about his or her person a handgun, illegal knife, or club

RJGold wrote:
Would you ever admit you carried a pellet gun for self defense?

I'd wager that he wasn't carrying a pellet gun but it was some sort of statement to make the reporter go away.

howdy wrote:But is he really breaking state law by having a pellet gun? Comments?

"Firearm means any device designed, made, or adapted to
expel a projectile through a barrel by using the energy generated by an
explosion or burning substance or any device readily convertible to
that use. Firearm does not include a firearm that may have, as an integral
part, a folding knife blade or other characteristics of weapons
made illegal by this chapter

Handgun means any firearmthat is designed. made, or
adapted to be fired with one hand.

A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly
carries on or about his or her person a handgun, illegal knife, or club

The sign states "No weapons" and doesn't mention firearms. The entrance to City Hall is not posted during regular business hours, but I'm not sure if it is during meeting, I'm going to go next Tuesday to see if there's a proper posting during the meeting. Unfortunately Pasadena has a proclivity for making it's own rules and ignoring statutes regularly. All parking lots at schools, stadiums, arenas, the school admin buildings are posted with 30.06 signs at their entrances. The police station used to be posted, but they finally corrected that. I don't know if Mayor Johnny is a CHL holder but I would wager he was carrying the real article and not a pellet gun. Sad thing is he's stupid enough to think people will believe that. For those of you unfamiliar with Pasadena, several of our past mayors have spent time in our prison system. The previous mayor was using city gasoline in his private vehicle. He didn't know he couldn't do that . Old habits die hard.

jmra wrote:Trying to find the words...

There are none....

Please correct me if I'm wrong, Carrying in a government building is a big no-no for a CHL holder right? Polling places, sporting events, and govt buildings - am I wrong?

baseballguy2001 wrote:Please correct me if I'm wrong, Carrying in a government building is a big no-no for a CHL holder right? Polling places, sporting events, and govt buildings - am I wrong?

On the government building issue in Texas, yes, you are mostly incorrect. There are exceptions for things like courts, but otherwise, most government buildings are not strictly prohibited. If there is a meeting in progress the meeting must have a proper 30.06 in order to prohibit a CHL holder from carrying inside the meeting, but the entire building is not off limits. There are a few other exceptions, but since this was a city council meeting I just thought I'd limit it to that. We can even carry in the Texas State Capital and have a special line we an use to speed things up a bit.

Now, a federal building, ... NO NO NO.

baseballguy2001 wrote:Please correct me if I'm wrong, Carrying in a government building is a big no-no for a CHL holder right? Polling places, sporting events, and govt buildings - am I wrong?

Yes you are, but it's a common mistake:

PC §46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER.

<snip>

(c) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether the handgun is concealed, at any meeting of a governmental entity.

<snip> (You have to keep reading down to...

(i) Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor was not given effective notice under Section 30.06.

So, it's only unlawful if they post a 30.06 sign.

Edit: As C-dub said, this does not apply to federal buildings.