In TX it could be either, depends on whether you are talking hunting or politics.
Why you shouldn't argue when you've been caught carrying in a posted business...
- Thread starter sanjuro893
- Start Date
In TX it could be either, depends on whether you are talking hunting or politics.
Yeah I wouldn't specifically not do business with a place for having a sign but if there was ever two equal businesses and one had a gun sign and the other did not I'd pick the latter for sure. And if asked to leave for any reason I would just leave. I'm not trying to get in a fight with someone on their own property, especially if it's over my gun!
I'd have assumed the suspicious individual was me and gotten the hell out of there before the cops showed up!
It does not. I think this is just the commonly accepted "worst case" conclusion the community has come up with in discussing this over the years. It's really the same as if you ignored a "shirt and shoes required" sign. There's no law against not wearing a shirt (for men) but if you don't abide by their sign and an agent of the business asks you to leave and you do not you are guilty of trespassing. For what it's worth, I've had dozens of trespassers on the property of my nightclub (people we told to leave and refused) and a couple even escalated into detainment by our security team. Police ALWAYS just showed up and let them go. No fine, no nothing. We could have technically arrested them ourselves, but eh...I see the cops' point. Really we just wanted them to leave and none of them are still there as far as I know so I guess we got our way!
I believe you can technically be arrested for anything you can be ticketed for, but you'd have to be a real a-hole for a cop to take you for jail for trespassing. Based on my experience, you'd most likely be let go unless you also refused to leave for the police officer.
One way or another if you're on someone else's property you're always going to leave eventually so you might as well do it willingly.
Bryan
To the best of my knowledge (I am not an attorney or LEO) neither. However his actions when they arrived and the subsequent search of his person after detainment and arrest revealing the white powdery substance I believe were one or the other. At least that's what the officer indicated.
Then again, based on your question I assume you were asking a question you already knew the answer to.
They found a "white powdery substance" when they searched him after they detained and arrested him for asking odd questions?
Had the same happen at the Liquor Store I habit. Some guy was wandering around outside on his cell talking like he was angry with somebody, came in, asked the clerk (my friend) to use the store phone, grabbed it and walked to the back of the store still talking angry. Told her I wasn't leaving and was armed, then got behind the counter with her. He returned the phone and left, but she was scared. I can't say I didn't have some jitters myself.
But carrying in a posted place isnt a violation of any of those places (1277), it would be violating 1290.22, subsection E (same punishment though, just want to make sure you are citing the correct statute to people). The carrying of a concealed or unconcealed firearm by a person who has been issued a handgun license on property that has signs prohibiting the carrying of firearms shall not be deemed a criminal act but may subject the person to being denied entrance onto the property or removed from the property. If the person refuses to leave the property and a peace officer is summoned, the person may be issued a citation for an amount not to exceed Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250.00).
As far as the LT, good chance I know them, if I dont have their # in my cell. While most are a good resource, I had a Sgt tell me it was a violation to have a loaded pistol in my vehicle even if I had my license. Said it was improper transportation of a firearm, and unlawful carry. I didnt argue as I knew I couldnt convince him, but the off chance I got pulled over by him, I would have been making a call, and made sure his LT straightened him out there on the side of the road.
I just don't understand that type of attitude. As a police officer I would assume you weren't going to shoot me if you told me. I would verify the permit and then be done with it. A really malicious perp would not disclose that, right?
Yep.
I hear you. I only posted that section because of what was said earlier. I know those guys didn't violate any laws just by entering armed. Since $250 is the same fine for criminal trespass, I assumed that's where the fine part of the section would be coming from. Coupled with what my Lt. buddy told me, I figured it would be at least an arrest. Now that I think about it,
I understand he might be mistaken, just get a handful of cops in a room and ask them about blade length and see how many answers you get. He may have been just trying to ease my frustration.
Let me clarify something: I don't believe there should be legal consequences for entering armed into a posted business. I DO believe that if you're told to leave a business and you refuse, (armed or not) you get what you get. And I also believe if you instigate a confrontation while carrying a gun, you're probably too immature and irresponsible to be carrying in the first place.
But here's my main point: So it's NOT a criminal act, so maybe the OSBI won't revoke or suspend your license. I just want everybody to understand that the fine and whether it's a criminal act, suspension, etc is NOT the only issue here. If the legalities of carrying in a posted business are somebody's main concern and that person IGNORES the fact that they're having a confrontation with another pro-2A individual because they can't keep their weapon concealed when they choose to break the rules, there's something else wrong. Either way, those two yo-yos I mentioned earlier will NEVER walk through those doors again, armed or not. They were rude, they were in my face, they tried to use the fact that they were armed as a not-very-subtle intimidation tactic (again, it didn't work), they couldn't give a shinola about anybody else's rights but their own and they're a POOR example of what the pro-2A community is supposed to be. I've been carrying for over 20 years now. All this time if I saw somebody else with a pistol I figured, "nothing to worry about. If something goes down, they're on my side." These two incidents being so close together when so many people are acting like poo-flinging monkeys has me re-thinking that.
One could reasonably assume that they developed probable cause to perform the search. If not, then the search wouldn't hold up in court. Developing reasonable articulable suspicion to detain a person, who caused another person to be fearful, isn't all that difficult.
Similar threads
