First time I've been approached

[Renegade]

I’m not going to argue with you. 06 and 07 posted location is for the premise. As per the definition I quoted it doesn’t cover the parking lot.

Again, like yesterday, it is not an argument.

"Premise" is not used in 30.06/07 as I have referenced. If you had ever read the statutes you would not be making all these mistakes. Never mind they are in different chapters.

Maybe @txinvestigator can explain it to you.


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

 

[Tex1961]

Again, like yesterday, it is not an argument.

"Premise" is not used in 30.06/07. If you had ever read the statutes you would not be making all these mistakes.

Maybe @txinvestigator can explain it to you.

You are correct and I agree with you. What I am trying to get across was from the post that @TexasRedneck said “Doubt they own/control the entire parking lot, so good luck w/that.” I was confirming that he was correct as well. I simply quoted the definition in the penal code is all. I am also agreeing with others that we don’t want the store owner deciding to put up signs on the doors.

 

[Renegade]

You are correct and I agree with you. What I am trying to get across was from the post that @TexasRedneck said “Doubt they own/control the entire parking lot, so good luck w/that.” I was confirming that he was correct as well. I simply quoted the definition in the penal code is all. I am also agreeing with others that we don’t want the store owner deciding to put up signs on the doors.

Ok then. While I respect TexasRedNeck choice to politely declined, that choice has consequences from nothing to 06/07 to 911 "man with a gun" being called. So I think OP made the correct call and de-escalated the situation to something he and manager could agree with.

 

[Tex1961]

Ok then. While I respect TexasRedNeck choice to politely declined, that choice has consequences from nothing to 911 "man with a gun" being called. So I think OP made the correct call and de-escalated the situation to something he and manager could agree with.

Again, I am in 100% agreement with you.

 

[digger]

of course there is the fine line of exercising your rights and just being a jerk. If you’re going to carry under LTC, you should be an ambassador for gun owners. Unfortunately and we see it every day in the liberal media, it takes 1 idiot for the rest of us to be judged.

I think this should always be the primary consideration. just my .02

 

[TexasRedneck]

Ok then. While I respect TexasRedNeck choice to politely declined, that choice has consequences from nothing to 06/07 to 911 "man with a gun" being called. So I think OP made the correct call and de-escalated the situation to something he and manager could agree with.

So....if you're in the parking lot next door to the store, you'd also obey their "request"? Why not take the time to educate them on the legalities, and what's involved in having a LTC?

 

[no2gates]

Just like I teach my kids, and they say it almost once a week. I say to them when we see something like that "Most people are" and they reply back "stupid".
I have taught them that most people are not as smart as they are (they are 8 and 9), nor do they have common sense.
Just because something makes sense to you, doesn't mean that all others will see it that way.

 

[Renegade]

So....if you're in the parking lot next door to the store, you'd also obey their "request"? Why not take the time to educate them on the legalities, and what's involved in having a LTC?

If I was on their property I would comply, especially if as it appeared, I was not even patronizing their business. As for educating them, well as you said "if the nervous nellies can't handle it, screw 'em. "

 

[txinvestigator]

I'd have politely declined - I'm a threat to no one, and if the nervous nellies can't handle it, screw 'em.

Why antagonize her and end up getting asked to just leave? For fucks sake some of us are our own worst enemy

 

[txinvestigator]

Correct,
Under Section 46.03 and 46.035 of the Penal Code, “premises” means a building or a portion of a building. The term does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area.

of course there is the fine line of exercising your rights and just being a jerk. If you’re going to carry under LTC, you should be an ambassador for gun owners. Unfortunately and we see it every day in the liberal media, it takes 1 idiot for the rest of us to be judged.

First of all, the Trespass laws don't use the word premises, it uses the word property and does include the parking lot. It is my opinion the police would enforce her request to have him leave.

And as a side note, premises has different definitions in different sections of the law. For example, 46.02 has a less restrictive definition of premises than does 46.03 and 46.035, which are the sections from which you pulled that definition.

 

[txinvestigator]

I was quoting under the definition of what a premise is. I was agreeing with you, 30.06 and .07 signs going up which is not good. But legally the parking lot is not part of the legal definition of premise. That is all I was trying to do.

God, I really hope you don't teach classes. Pretty much everything you write is wrong.

 

[txinvestigator]

You are correct and I agree with you. What I am trying to get across was from the post that @TexasRedneck said “Doubt they own/control the entire parking lot, so good luck w/that.” I was confirming that he was correct as well. I simply quoted the definition in the penal code is all. I am also agreeing with others that we don’t want the store owner deciding to put up signs on the doors.

You need to read the definition of premises in 46.02, and then stop answering questions about Texas law. The ONLY time the definition of premises you quoted applies is in regards to places a person and/or license holder is prohibited from carrying.

It has NOTHING to do with whether a property owner controls his parking lot or can proscribe carry there.

 

[Dred]

My general tactic is to illuminate the actual truth in this circumstance.

If that mgr was agreeable to being quickly engaged ...

Tell her ... possibly, but if a criminal runs in weilding a knife or gun, they will ALL be happy I was here. First ... it never happens when I open carry 'cause bad guys like easy targets. Second, me standing here wearing a weapon displayed openly signals that I have lived a clean life - bad guys lose this right so they hide their weapons to protect their freedoms.

I've talked to scores of regular folks that displayed concern about my firearms. Most of them have been surprised to learn that I've been background checked and demonstrated some degree of marksmanship.

At any rate, this strategy has led to removal of several 30.06/07 signs at places I frequent. When we got open carry, several shops were shocked to learn how long I had been carrying in their establishments. And, none understood what 06/07 actually accomplish - that is stop the good guys while having zero effect on the criminal.

FWIW ... declining compliance can create a valuable teaching opportunity.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[TexasRedneck]

Why antagonize her and end up getting asked to just leave? For fucks sake some of us are our own worst enemy

I've explained my position to more than one nervous owner. In every instance, successfully - and in two specific instances well enough that their 30.06 signs came down.

 

[rotor]

To the OP, you handled it well. You were not asked to leave so you were not trespassing and you were asked to wait in your car and you complied. Until more people open carry people will be nervous. I would not recommend the big teaching moment. Since open carry was legal I have seen only 4 people open carrying aside from myself and that is rare for me to do. The public doesn't understand open carry yet.
No comment on the debates about premises and property.

 

[cycleguy2300]

Correct,
Under Section 46.03 and 46.035 of the Penal Code, “premises” means a building or a portion of a building. The term does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area.

of course there is the fine line of exercising your rights and just being a jerk. If you’re going to carry under LTC, you should be an ambassador for gun owners. Unfortunately and we see it every day in the liberal media, it takes 1 idiot for the rest of us to be judged.

Oh geez...

We are talking about trespass, not premises.
You need to skip down to the "what is notice" part...

If you think you cannot be trespassed from a parking lot, or other privately owned but publicly accessible property, you got another thing coming...

Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk

 

[cycleguy2300]

You are correct and I agree with you. What I am trying to get across was from the post that @TexasRedneck said “Doubt they own/control the entire parking lot, so good luck w/that.” I was confirming that he was correct as well. I simply quoted the definition in the penal code is all. I am also agreeing with others that we don’t want the store owner deciding to put up signs on the doors.

Should I start quoting irrelevant portions of penal code too? All you did was confuse people.

Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk

 

[cycleguy2300]

First ... it never happens when I open carry 'cause bad guys like easy targets.

Open carry MAKES you an easier target. A known opponent is always easier than an unknown.

Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk

 

[Glenn B]

Awww

What the heck does race have to do with it or with answering whether or not she was hot?

 

[oldag]

Sometimes discretion is the better part of valor.