Transporting Firearm to Gunsmith?

[Texan2]

I disagree. The law that case refers to is below;


As you can see, that is an entirely different law than we have today.

Here are the exceptions as they were then;

If you had no interest in this site, it would be worth signing on to watch TXINVESTIGATOR destroy peoples arguments....

I have seen few people post on her that know more about the law and how to instantly look it up....I'm glad he is on our side.....lol!

 

[Renegade]

I disagree. The law that case refers to is below;

Well if not that case then another. There are also dozens more cases like this, I am not going to cite all of them. When I asked a District Judge, that was the answer I was given "Case Law". The laws change wording and section numbering all the time. If such minor changes to the law nullified all case law built on it, then case law would be easily subverted.

I guess the question is out to all cops/DAs, when someone is carrying a handgun on or about their person to/from a gun show, what makes such carry legal?

 

[Renegade]

If you had no interest in this site, it would be worth signing on to watch TXINVESTIGATOR destroy peoples arguments....

I have seen few people post on her that know more about the law and how to instantly look it up....I'm glad he is on our side.....lol!

Well I am new here, so expect plenty of cites from me. If you want 8 years of cites, try ARFCOM. I have been pretty busy over there. TXINVESTIGATOR himself said I am the 2nd most knowledgeable person on that site.

What would really be worth signing on for is folks posting useful information that helps other Texans, but it appears that is asking too much. We really do not need yet another side full of personal attacks and useless quips. But it looks like we got one.

 

[Texan2]

"I guess the question is out to all cops/DAs, when someone is carrying a handgun on or about their person to/from a gun show, what makes such carry legal?"

The question isn't what makes it legal.....but wht makes it illegal. Laws are structured to tell us what we can't do, not what we can do.
As far a most cops are concerned....we use what I refer to as "common sense". when law abiding gun owners are walking across a parking lot and into a gun show, we dont mess with them, we usually have bigger issues to deal with.

 

[Renegade]

"I guess the question is out to all cops/DAs, when someone is carrying a handgun on or about their person to/from a gun show, what makes such carry legal?"

The question isn't what makes it legal.....but wht makes it illegal. Laws are structured to tell us what we can't do, not what we can do.

That one is easy:

Sec. 46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) 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 if the person is not:
(1) on the person's own premises or premises under the person's control; or
(2) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle that is owned by the person or under the person's control.
(a-1) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun in a motor vehicle that is owned by the person or under the person's control at any time in which:
(1) the handgun is in plain view; or
(2) the person is:
(A) engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic;
(B) prohibited by law from possessing a firearm; or
(C) a member of a criminal street gang, as defined by Section 71.01.
(a-2) For purposes of this section, "premises" includes real property and a recreational vehicle that is being used as living quarters, regardless of whether that use is temporary or permanent. In this subsection, "recreational vehicle" means a motor vehicle primarily designed as temporary living quarters or a vehicle that contains temporary living quarters and is designed to be towed by a motor vehicle. The term includes a travel trailer, camping trailer, truck camper, motor home, and horse trailer with living quarters.
(b) Except as provided by Subsection (c), an offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(c) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree if the offense is committed on any premises licensed or issued a permit by this state for the sale of alcoholic beverages.

 

[Renegade]

I don't know if "going to the gunsmith" would be interpreted as a "sporting activity".

...

However, it is a moot point, as Texas Law now does not proscribe the carry of handguns in a vehicle as long as the person does not carry it in plain view, is not a member of a street gang, and is not engaged in criminal ativity (other than traffic violations) at the time.

That only covers you while you are in the car. Once you park & exit the vehicle and head to the store from your vehicle, you are no longer covered. So it is not yet entirely moot, unless it is some kind of drive-in service. My answer is still Case Law.

 

[Renegade]

OK, I found the source of my Case Law post. It came from:

“The Right to Bear Arms in Texas,” 41 Baylor Law Review, 629-88 (1989). By Stephen P. Halbrook.

The prohibition on carrying pistols is so draconian that judicially carved exceptions were inevitable. The constitution (105) provides no legislative power to regulate the keeping on one's premises of commonly possessed arms such as pistols. By implication, on obtaining a pistol, one may carry it home by the nearest practicable route.(219) One may carry a pistol to and from a shop to have it repaired,(220) but the carrying must be without unreasonable delay.(221)

(219). See Kellum v. State, 66 Tex. Crim. 505, 147 S.W. 870 (1912).
(220). See Fitzgerald v. State, 52 Tex. Crim 265, 106 S.W. 365 (1907); Magum v. State, 90 S.W. 31 (Tex. Crim. App. 1905).
(221). See Henson v. State, 158 Tex. Crim. 5, 6, 252 S.W.2d 711 (1952).

Your disagreement is not with me, but with Stephen Halbrook (he can be reached here if anyone wants to argue with him - mailto:[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular]SHalbrook@stephenhalbrook.com[/FONT]). Good luck on that and please let us know when your rebuttal is printed in the Baylor Law Review. :-)

If you had no interest in this site, it would be worth signing on to watch TXINVESTIGATOR destroy peoples arguments....
I have seen few people post on her that know more about the law and how to instantly look it up....I'm glad he is on our side.....lol!

Yeah, let me know when you think you have seen someone destroy Stephen Halbrook's research on firearms laws in Texas.

Personally, I think it is more entertaining to watch me cite expert legal opinion, than someone's internet opinion, but to each his own.

 

[JKTex]

"(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas. Dec. 11, 1907.) Weapons--Carrying Weapons--Carrying Broken Pistol for Repairs.
A person who carries a broken pistol in a useless condition to a blacksmith for repairs, and finds the blacksmith absent, is not guilty of carrying a pistol when he takes it away with him and later returns with it to the blacksmith."


FITZGERALD v. STATE.

>>><<<
Appeal from District Court, Shelby County; James Q. Perkins, Judge.
J. A. Fitzgerald was convicted of carrying a pistol, and appeals. Reversed and remanded.
Bryarly, Carter, Walker & Chamness, for appellant. F. J. McCord, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
DAVIDSON, P. J. Appellant was convicted of carrying a pistol. The state's case is that appellant was in the town of Center, Shelby county, loading his wagon with some purchases he had made from a store, when one of the proprietors observed a pistol in his coat pocket. He took him to one side and called his attention to it. Appellant replied that it was out of repair and he brought it to the shop to be repaired. In support of this statement, himself and his son testified that the pistol was out of repair and could not be used, and that in going to the town of Center he brought the pistol to Shelbyville to a blacksmith, who repaired pistols, for the purpose of having it repaired; that it was broken, and not in a condition to shoot. He proved by the blacksmith that he (appellant) did leave the pistol, and that he repaired it, and that it was practically in a useless condition. It was also shown that in bringing it from his home to Shelbyville, en route to Center, appellant stopped at the blacksmith shop to leave it, but the blacksmith was out of town and could not be found; that he went on to Center, carrying the pistol with him, having it in his wagon among effects carried in the wagon; that when he got ready to leave Center he took it out of the wagon and put it in his pocket, so that he would have it convenient to leave with the blacksmith, and not have to go through the wagon and disturb things to get it out. This is practically the case.
The conviction seems to be predicated upon the theory that appellant had diverted himself from the proper line of travel, and that, therefore, he was guilty of carrying a pistol. Under some circumstances, as decided in Stilly v. State, 27 Tex. App. 445, 11 S.W. 458, 11 Am. St. Rep. 201, this would constitute a violation of the law; but these facts do not bring the case within the rule announced in the Stilly Case. There was no excuse offered by appellant, and none attempted to be shown, in justification of his carrying the pistol, if it had been a pistol as contemplated by the statute. The contention here is sustained by the evidence, as we understand it, that appellant had a broken pistol, out of repair, and that he carried it to the shop for the purpose of having it repaired, and, failing to find the blacksmith at home, carried it on, and returned to the blacksmith shop and did have it repaired. Appellant had a right to have his pistol repaired, and the right to carry it to the party who could do the work. This was not a violation of the law, and, if it was such a pistol as was not prohibited by the statute from being carried, the fact that he may have gone to Center and carried it with him would make no difference. It is only such pistol as is contemplated by the statute that is prohibited from being carried. We are of opinion that the facts do not justify this conviction.
The judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded.
HENDERSON, J., absent.
>>><<<