Governor Perry was busy yesterday

[txinvestigator]

The change from "intentionally fail to conceal" to "intentionally display" is not a significant change. What is significant is that after Sept 1st a CHL will allow people to openly carry handguns at times that conduct would otherwise be illegal. I wonder if sales of NAA minis will increase. hehe

I see. I think it is significant.

 

[Bithabus]

I see. I think it is significant.

They mean the same thing. It is significant when you add the "in view of another" and "public place" language.

 

[txinvestigator]

True that private property can be "a public place"

It's good there are several elements the Govt would need to prove each element
old law
1) prove failed to conceal and 2) prove intent,
new law
prove 1) displayed 2) in a public place 3) in plain view of another 4) intentional

One's bedroom though a private property and normally thought to be a private place
can be a public place... (One Court case ruled a living room in a private residence with an open front door a public place ... )

An Apartment complex in Dallas near Gaston and Abrams had 1 entire bedroom wall that was a glass window facing the street and if you had your curtain open and started mooning people as they walked or drove by...

CHAPTER 42. DISORDERLY CONDUCT AND RELATED OFFENSES

Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT.
(a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:


(10) exposes his anus or genitals in a public place and
is reckless about whether another may be present who will be
offended or alarmed by his act;


(4) abuses or threatens a person in a public place in an obviously offensive manner;

If one stood just inside a doorway of a private residence aiming a shotgun at cars driving by on a public roadway and were seen doing so,
...

plenty of court cases on "public place" as it relates to various situations
I don't claim to understand them all.

but the new law is better, having more elements they'd have to prove, it appears with a backyard privacy fence, a open carry BBQ could be ok maybe... it's the "plain view of another" that might be a problem if there's more than 1 guest .... unless, it's a BBQ for blind people?? but still ... Govt would need to prove each element

Disorderly Conduct can occur at a non public place because of subsection c in 42.01,

(c) For purposes of this section:
(1) an act is deemed to occur in a public place or near a private residence if it produces its offensive or proscribed consequences in the public place or near a private residence;

This new law is not in 42.01, so behavior at a non public place would not constitute an offense as it would under section 42.01.

The ability to prosecute offense under 42.01 occurring at private residences is because of subsection c.

Standing in your open front door exposing your penis to people on the street meets the requirements of 42.01 (c). Standing in your open front door open carrying a handgun is not an offense under 42.01. Therefore, subsection c is meaningless.

Make sense?

 

[txinvestigator]

They mean the same thing. It is significant when you add the "in view of another" and "public place" language.

If the mean the sake thing, why did the legislators change the wording? Why strike out "fail to conceal" and add "display"?

Because the are not the same. Display is a higher standard.

 

[RPB]

Makes perfect sense.
I agree.
However, standing in your own front door pointing a gun at passing cars in a manner calculated to alarm is a different behavior, and as such, different offense than merely displaying/failing to conceal and it would come under 42.01 Disorderly Conduct where standing in a doorway open carrying doesn't, just as I open carry doing yard work and walking to my mailbox on my property daily which is legal under
Sec. 46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS..

The problem could arise if someone called in and lied ... that my gun was being waived around in a manner calculated to alarm ... but it's never happened; I live in a good city where neighbors wave when they see my gun, happy to have it displayed while they are away at work.... so now it would be harder to make a case against me anyway with it being harder to prove more elements, and Display being a higher standard. in case a skittish New Yorker visits my city this Summer and calls it in lol

I've never worried about accidental exposure.

 

[Bithabus]

If the mean the sake thing, why did the legislators change the wording? Why strike out "fail to conceal" and add "display"?

Because the are not the same. Display is a higher standard.

Because lots of people were confused. How many students have voiced concern to you about their shirt or jacket riding up? How many people have come on this forum and stated that printing is illegal, or that they worry about exposing accidentally at the store?

The best result of the change will be we don't have to listen to that shit anymore.

 

[breakingcontact]

Good stuff. Who else thinks this is a step on the path to open carry?

 

[txinvestigator]

Because lots of people were confused. How many students have voiced concern to you about their shirt or jacket riding up? How many people have come on this forum and stated that printing is illegal, or that they worry about exposing accidentally at the store?

The best result of the change will be we don't have to listen to that shit anymore.

So they do mean different things. :P

 

[Bithabus]

So they do mean different things. :P

Only to idiots.

 

[Shorts]

I want to know how it affects a gun being openly carried in holster. From what I'm reading "we" are most excited about OCing at a BBQ at someone elses house. Great. But I don't live my life at a BBQ at someone else's house.

Get into the EDC effects this bill has please. Why do I care about this bill/changing of wording, aside from the damn BBQ?

 

[txinvestigator]

Only to idiots.

Yeah, play nice

 

[txinvestigator]

I want to know how it affects a gun being openly carried in holster. From what I'm reading "we" are most excited about OCing at a BBQ at someone elses house. Great. But I don't live my life at a BBQ at someone else's house.

Get into the EDC effects this bill has please. Why do I care about this bill/changing of wording, aside from the damn BBQ?

It will not not affect your day to day carry.

 

[inceptor]

It will not not affect your day to day carry.

If I am understanding this correctly:

You are shopping and carrying. You reach for something on the top shelf and your gun is momentarily exposed. Since this was not intentional then it is not a crime.

You are walking in the parking lot. Your concealed weapon is under a shirt that is open in the front. The wind kicks your shirt back exposing the firearm. Not a crime.

 

[Mike D Texas]

If I am understanding this correctly:

You are shopping and carrying. You reach for something on the top shelf and your gun is momentarily exposed. Since this was not intentional then it is not a crime.

You are walking in the parking lot. Your concealed weapon is under a shirt that is open in the front. The wind kicks your shirt back exposing the firearm. Not a crime.

This is the way it's always been. Never been a crime to a accidentally expose your gun.


Sent from iPhone/Tapatalk

 

[txinvestigator]

This is the way it's always been. Never been a crime to a accidentally expose your gun.


Sent from iPhone/Tapatalk

This is correct.

 

[Shorts]

It will not not affect your day to day carry.

Finally. That was my point from the beginning. The bill adds nothing to what is known as open carry like the other states that actually have open carry.


If it means anything, I'd like to see OC come to Texas. I'd like to OC. So, I have hopes. This bill just doesn't blow my skirt up like it may do to others. If you like the "baby steps" as I've seen it referred to and you really like the bill, then good for you that you can get some use out of it.

 

[Younggun]

I want open carry also. I would have loved to see it passed this session. Hell, my goal is constitutional carry however you wish.

I also realize the odds of us jumping to that point are pretty damned slim. Even people on this board disagree with it.

This bill is progress and makes something that was illegal before legal now.

 

[Shorts]

No, the significant difference is that after Sept 1 intentional display in a public place in plain view of another will be unlawful. This means that in private places or in public places with nobody around a person may open carry on the authority of 411 H. Currently a CHL holder may never OC on the authority of his CHL. Baby steps I know but it opens the door for full OC.

I'm a bit confused on this part of your comment. In a way it seems like "If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?". Or, if a cop isn't around to see you run the stop sign, did you actually break the law?

Do you think CHLers will actually try to OC in the situation (in bold text)? Or do you think that is just sort of a place holder phrase, maybe so a few years down the road in 2015 it can be said "CHLers could have OCed in public since '13, this bill (let's imagine clear OC language was just proposed or passed) just clarifies that."

 

[Bithabus]

Yeah, play nice

There was a smiley face. Anyway you don't really believe they are different.

I'm a bit confused on this part of your comment. In a way it seems like "If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?". Or, if a cop isn't around to see you run the stop sign, did you actually break the law?

Do you think CHLers will actually try to OC in the situation (in bold text)? Or do you think that is just sort of a place holder phrase, maybe so a few years down the road in 2015 it can be said "CHLers could have OCed in public since '13, this bill (let's imagine clear OC language was just proposed or passed) just clarifies that."

I don't think anybody's carry habits will change. The bill is an academic victory.

 

[Shorts]

There was a smiley face. Anyway you don't really believe they are different.



I don't think anybody's carry habits will change. The bill is an academic victory.

Understood - thanks. That's what I was looking for.