APOD Firearms

Question about traveling with guns in TX

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Axxe55

    Retiretgtshit stirrer
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 15, 2019
    47,022
    96
    Lost in East Texas Elhart Texas
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but if a person leases land, or has permission to hunt property they don't won from the landowner, the landowner is by extension giving that person permission to openly carry on that property, regardless of whether they have a permit to carry in public.

    If I invite people over to my house to shoot guns in my backyard, by extension, I am giving them permission to openly carry on my property.
    Venture Surplus ad
     

    txinvestigator

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 28, 2008
    14,204
    96
    Ft Worth, TX
    A simple YES or NO would have worked, but let's look at the facts: you believe (how ever wrongly) it would an illegal act to carry with permission, without an LTC. You have a duty to arrest for violations that occur in your presence and to keep the peace. It should be safe to beleive you would ARREST a person for UCW even though they had permission (and by extension, control of the property).

    If carrying with permission in a location was illegal, we should expect, over time, to see both arrests and convictions for the violation.

    I can't prove a negative which is what you are asking for, but I know the law, I know case law and I understand how to articulate an arrest, even nit-picky technical ones, and there is no way I see a person would get convicted of UCW for carrying on property where they have permission to carry. My lawyer friend was in complete agreement and laughed at the thought of someone being arrested for this. All a defendant would need to show is by being given permission to carry there also conveyed, implicitly or explicitly some (any) amount of control over the property. I say being given permission to carry on a property inherently carries with it some level of control over the property.

    You can easily prove it is some how illegal if you would simply dig through the court records of all 254 counties to find a case of it happening.

    I am around a lot of people who beyond the arrests they make, know a lot of folks who make arrests other places in the state. Those I have mentioned the scenario to have never heard of any such arrest, much less a conviction.

    I wouldn't argue with you if I didn't have some respect you...

    Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk

    Your logic is amazingly poor., as if your stetemtb of the law. I have explained it more times than I should have to.

    In Texas, you cannot simply allow a non-licensed person to carry anywhere. There are situations where that person may be legal to carry.

    I'm done unless a new question arises.
     

    txinvestigator

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 28, 2008
    14,204
    96
    Ft Worth, TX
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but if a person leases land, or has permission to hunt property they don't won from the landowner, the landowner is by extension giving that person permission to openly carry on that property, regardless of whether they have a permit to carry in public.

    If I invite people over to my house to shoot guns in my backyard, by extension, I am giving them permission to openly carry on my property.
    Hunting and shooting are listed in 46.15 (b) as making 46.02 non-applicable
     

    Renegade

    SuperOwner
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 5, 2008
    11,749
    96
    Texas
    even though they had permission (and by extension, control of the property).

    This is the flaw in your belief - giving permission does not "by extension" give control of the property, which then gives UCW exemption. There is no "by extension" in the law. That is circular logic fail. Giving permission to do something on your property, just gives permission to do that something. I give two kids permission to come fish in my pond, I give them permission to come fish in my pond. I did not give them control of my property. Nor did I have the authority to give them permission to violate fish and game laws.

    <rest deleted to stay on topic>
     

    cycleguy2300

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Mar 19, 2010
    6,769
    96
    Austin, Texas
    Your logic is amazingly poor., as if your stetemtb of the law. I have explained it more times than I should have to.

    In Texas, you cannot simply allow a non-licensed person to carry anywhere. There are situations where that person may be legal to carry.

    I'm done unless a new question arises.
    My logic > your spelling.

    Remember when you write an affidavit you can't just get to the conclusion, the judge wanted to know HOW you got there. If my logic is so poor, picknit apart. It should be easy. Permission = control = can carry end of story. Any cop who would arrest for UCW under the circumstances is a squirrel at best.

    Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk
     

    jordanmills

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Sep 29, 2009
    5,371
    96
    Pearland, TX
    Interesting that this thread has gotten so far off track, IMHO. OP asked a question and we gave (IMHO) ill fitted answers.
    Assuming:
    1) he lives in apt where he is concerned about theft. Wrong side of town, with others?
    2) travelling with others in their vehicle.
    Lets assume he a student living with others in Lubbock on the way to Galveston on spring break.
    I say leave it at 'home', hidden as best, not under the mattress.
    Without LTC how do you get into the hotel/motel and where do you hide it there?
    Leave it in the car? Keep in luggage?
    What you say now?
    He's traveling? More particularly, crossing county lines on a journey taken less frequently than once per week?

    (b) Section 46.02 does not apply to a person who:
    [...]
    (2) is traveling;

    I don't feel like taking the time to find the citation for the specific details of "traveling", but that's along the lines of what I recall. Sounds like he's covered as long as he is traveling.
     
    Top Bottom