Texas gun laws updates

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by bb1961

This is what you said:

Before I retired I worked in an office building that was a gun free zone. I felt much safer than had guns been allowed in the building.


This is feel good nonsense...if a criminal had wanted to go in your building and start shooting it would have been like I said...shooting fish in a barrel.
That sign says nothing to criminal but OPEN SEASON with no one to defend themselves.
That "gun free zone"sign is nothing but a false sense of security...period.

It is hardly "feel good nonsense". There is a VERY slight possibility that someone could have entered my work building and started opening fire. How often does that happen, and how often in a building of professional white collar workers? Then you balance that out against the possibility of a gun going off by accident or the scenario I described. Management is responsible for protecting their workers while on the job. I believe my management team made the right choice.

I guarantee you without a doubt the majority of workers in this country do not want guns in the workplace. The only data I could find quickly to support that statement regards school teachers:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/poll-o...uns-in-schools

https://www.securitymagazine.com/art...-the-classroom

https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2018...-guns-to-carry

https://www.scarymommy.com/arming-te...horrible-idea/

"So, Should Employers Allow Concealed Carry?

Probably not. There are many reasons not to allow employees with concealed carry permits to bring firearms into the workplace, from increased risk of legal liability, to the practical considerations of maintaining insurance coverage, and the question of the whether the effect will be to stop active shooter incidents or simply prolong them. Moreover, the benefit from permitting concealed carry most likely does not outweigh the risks created, when the threat of such an incident may only be theoretical in nature (please see our previous article on how to prevent such incidents from occurring).'

https://www.fisherphillips.com/resou...ncealed-weapon

https://www.hrci.org/community/blogs...-the-workplace

[eccielover]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

It is hardly "feel good nonsense". There is a VERY slight possibility that someone could have entered my work building and started opening fire. How often does that happen, and how often in a building of professional white collar workers? Then you balance that out against the possibility of a gun going off by accident or the scenario I described. Management is responsible for protecting their workers while on the job. I believe my management team made the right choice.

All I have to ask is did your building have metal detectors and searches or just a sign saying gun free zone.

I have been a consultant for years and if no metal detectors or searches, which are normally government buildings only in my experiences, you would be surprised at how many are defensively carrying. My partner in consulting during my early years always carried and I felt safer for it.

We both had our "safety zones" in our though processes. You coddling the "belief" that you were in a gun free zone and me realizing the reality of sign or policy making little to no difference if an offender was going to attack.

And I also agree with the "how often does it happen" thought process. The whole outrage in manufactured outrage when you actually look at the stats of mass murders, vs mass shootings, vs overall gun killings.

But the faux outrage of the few instances is what drives the media and the left these days.

[bb1961]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

It is hardly "feel good nonsense". There is a VERY slight possibility that someone could have entered my work building and started opening fire. How often does that happen, and how often in a building of professional white collar workers? Then you balance that out against the possibility of a gun going off by accident or the scenario I described. Management is responsible for protecting their workers while on the job. I believe my management team made the right choice.

I guarantee you without a doubt the majority of workers in this country do not want guns in the workplace. The only data I could find quickly to support that statement regards school teachers:

You can't explain how a "gun free zone" sign accomplishes anything. People who are law abiding will respect it and those that aren't won't.

You must not know anything about guns or very little because you say "accidentally go off"...I have a CHL and have owned guns of all types for years. The pistols I have and the ones my friends have can't accidentally discharge(very very rarely)...there must be finger pressure on the trigger for them to go off. The percentage of this is less the 1% on 1% of the time. One of my guns has a safety that locks the trigger and make it immobile.

You as many others that are armchair pontificators come up with the crap that concealed carry people could cause more problems the they solve...this shit has never happens.

The wild west nonsense...it has been proven that people intent on kill other go to great lengths to avoid places they know people might have guns to stop their cowardly actions.

Have a concealed handgun is like insurance...I have it and hope I never need it.

I posted a link about "gun free zone" shooting...since it doesn't fit your templet you ignore it.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by eccielover

All I have to ask is did your building have metal detectors and searches or just a sign saying gun free zone.

I have been a consultant for years and if no metal detectors or searches, which are normally government buildings only in my experiences, you would be surprised at how many are defensively carrying. My partner in consulting during my early years always carried and I felt safer for it.

We both had our "safety zones" in our though processes. You coddling the "belief" that you were in a gun free zone and me realizing the reality of sign or policy making little to no difference if an offender was going to attack.

And I also agree with the "how often does it happen" thought process. The whole outrage in manufactured outrage when you actually look at the stats of mass murders, vs mass shootings, vs overall gun killings.

But the faux outrage of the few instances is what drives the media and the left these days.

No metal detectors. No searches. Just a sign.

People in my building were highly paid and highly educated. I doubt that, even if they would have liked to carry a gun into the building, they would have done so and risk losing their job.

People almost always have options in life. If a worker feels unsafe without carrying a gun into a gun free location then he can either carry it and suffer the risks if caught, or he can choose not to enter.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by bb1961

You can't explain how a "gun free zone" sign accomplishes anything. People who are law abiding will respect it and those that aren't won't.

You must not know anything about guns or very little because you say "accidentally go off"...I have a CHL and have owned guns of all types for years. The pistols I have and the ones my friends have can't accidentally discharge(very very rarely)...there must be finger pressure on the trigger for them to go off. The percentage of this is less the 1% on 1% of the time. One of my guns has a safety that locks the trigger and make it immobile.

You as many others that are armchair pontificators come up with the crap that concealed carry people could cause more problems the they solve...this shit has never happens.

The wild west nonsense...it has been proven that people intent on kill other go to great lengths to avoid places they know people might have guns to stop their cowardly actions.

Have a concealed handgun is like insurance...I have it and hope I never need it.

I posted a link about "gun free zone" shooting...since it doesn't fit your templet you ignore it.

As I said to eccielover, why risk losing a very high-paying job by violating the rules, rules that have been in place for decades with absolutely no problems.

I have no problem with you deciding to have a CHL in order to protect yourself. I don't and I have managed to do the same.

Actually I did some research on your link but didn't get the chance to post my findings yesterday:

"According to the Crime Prevention Research Center, "gun free zones" (areas where guns are prohibited) have been the target of more than 98% of all mass shootings."


Unfortunately the article does not go into any detail to back up that statement so I took it upon myself to look into the claims.

My findings are that there have been 17 deadly mass shooting in 2019, with a "mass shooting" defined as one in which at least 3 people, not including the shooter, died.

When you examine the 17 in detail"

#1 -- Shooting in a bank. Motive unknown.
#2 -- Shooting in a private residence. Not a gun free zone.
#3 -- Domestic dispute. Not a gun free zone.
#4 -- Not in a gun free zone.
#5 -- Not in a gun free zone.
#6 -- Disgruntled employee. Did not choose the location based on whether or not it was a gun free zone.
#7 -- See #3
#8 -- See #3
#9 -- See #3
#10 -- See #6
#11 -- Shootings outside on an Indian reservation
#12 -- See #3
#13 -- See #3
#14 -- See #3
#15 -- See #3
#16 -- The recent El Paso shootings. Nothing to indicate that the killer chose the site because it was a gun free zone but rather because he knew the site would be packed with the people he was focused on killing.
#17 -- Dayton shootings. Occurred on the street. Shooter was very familiar with the location.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/deadly-mas...ry?id=63449799

So of the 17 mass killings in 2019, it is hard to prove that any of the sites were chosen because they were gun free zones. Only 4 of the 17 even had that possibility. The majority were family disputes.

So if you have any source of information that supports the statement that 98% of mass killings have occurred in gun free zones, please cite them.

[eccielover]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

No metal detectors. No searches. Just a sign.

People in my building were highly paid and highly educated. I doubt that, even if they would have liked to carry a gun into the building, they would have done so and risk losing their job.

People almost always have options in life. If a worker feels unsafe without carrying a gun into a gun free location then he can either carry it and suffer the risks if caught, or he can choose not to enter.

And again it's anecdotal from both your side and mine as we have no actual statistics, but without a search policy, you'll never know and neither will I.

You "felt" safe with a sign, I felt safe "knowing" the sign was being ignored, and there was little in the end that could be done about it.

[rexdutchman]

+ Dayton killed his sister first ? outa control domestic ?

+ Springfield MO Walmart ( see post )

The sad part is intelligent people get hammered by the media hysteria,political thuggery and never have both side of and issue and continue the rhetoric ( really not there fault just heard mentality )

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by eccielover

And again it's anecdotal from both your side and mine as we have no actual statistics, but without a search policy, you'll never know and neither will I.

You "felt" safe with a sign, I felt safe "knowing" the sign was being ignored, and there was little in the end that could be done about it.

And how do you know that the signs are being ignored? Would you put a job paying a 6-figure salary in jeopardy by carrying a concealed handgun into the building?

BTW, every year every company employee must sign a note stating that he or she has read the company's Code of Conduct, with it clearly stated in there that carrying any gun into any company building is a violation and the employee will be subject to termination.

[Unique_Carpenter]

I wonder if it would be discriminatory for an outfit to require all new employees to obtain cwc permits and carry?
Perhaps hold company staff meetings at a local range?

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

As I said to eccielover, why risk losing a very high-paying job by violating the rules, rules that have been in place for decades with absolutely no problems.

I have no problem with you deciding to have a CHL in order to protect yourself. I don't and I have managed to do the same.

Actually I did some research on your link but didn't get the chance to post my findings yesterday:

"According to the Crime Prevention Research Center, "gun free zones" (areas where guns are prohibited) have been the target of more than 98% of all mass shootings."


Unfortunately the article does not go into any detail to back up that statement so I took it upon myself to look into the claims.

My findings are that there have been 17 deadly mass shooting in 2019, with a "mass shooting" defined as one in which at least 3 people, not including the shooter, died.

When you examine the 17 in detail"

#1 -- Shooting in a bank. Motive unknown.
#2 -- Shooting in a private residence. Not a gun free zone.
#3 -- Domestic dispute. Not a gun free zone.
#4 -- Not in a gun free zone.
#5 -- Not in a gun free zone.
#6 -- Disgruntled employee. Did not choose the location based on whether or not it was a gun free zone.
#7 -- See #3
#8 -- See #3
#9 -- See #3
#10 -- See #6
#11 -- Shootings outside on an Indian reservation
#12 -- See #3
#13 -- See #3
#14 -- See #3
#15 -- See #3
#16 -- The recent El Paso shootings. Nothing to indicate that the killer chose the site because it was a gun free zone but rather because he knew the site would be packed with the people he was focused on killing.
#17 -- Dayton shootings. Occurred on the street. Shooter was very familiar with the location.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/deadly-mas...ry?id=63449799

So of the 17 mass killings in 2019, it is hard to prove that any of the sites were chosen because they were gun free zones. Only 4 of the 17 even had that possibility. The majority were family disputes.

So if you have any source of information that supports the statement that 98% of mass killings have occurred in gun free zones, please cite them.

You obviously didn't read the El Paso shooter's manifesto. If you did, you choose to lie about what he said or you just don't understand what he said; i.e., he clearly states that he intentionally chose a location he knew would not be defended.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You obviously didn't read the El Paso shooter's manifesto. If you did, you choose to lie about what he said or you just don't understand what he said; i.e., he clearly states that he intentionally chose a location he knew would not be defended.

x
There is a difference between a gun free zone and a location that I know would not be defended. Most establishments I go to in the course of a day are not gun free zones. They are also not defended. Gold's Gym. 7-11. My favorite bakery. Even my bank is not a gun free zone nor has an armed guard. I honestly don't look for the signs that are required in Texas to declare an establishment a gun free zone. I go to Sam's Club rather often and next time I go I'll look for the required signs.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

x
There is a difference between a gun free zone and a location that I know would not be defended. Most establishments I go to in the course of a day are not gun free zones. They are also not defended. Gold's Gym. 7-11. My favorite bakery. Even my bank is not a gun free zone nor has an armed guard. I honestly don't look for the signs that are required in Texas to declare an establishment a gun free zone. I go to Sam's Club rather often and next time I go I'll look for the required signs.

FYI: "gun free" means "not defended".

[the_real_Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

At this point in time there is no evidence to suggest that the individuals who committed these mass killings chose those locations because they were gun free zones. In the El Paso shootings, the killer obviously chose the Walmart because of the number of Mexican people he believed would be there. I doubt he had any idea that the Walmart was a gun free zone.

The shooter in Aurora movie theater testified that is exactly why he chose that theater.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

I do not search out the sign that must be posted to make an establishment a gun free zone. Each to his/her own.

What's your point? #1 ... you've already disclosed you are not a "gun" owner, and #2 ... places that can post signs already have, if they want to do so.

Sec. 46.03. PLACES WEAPONS PROHIBITED. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly possesses or goes with a firearm, location-restricted knife, club, or prohibited weapon listed in Section 46.05(a):

(1) on the physical premises of a school or educational institution, any grounds or building on which an activity sponsored by a school or educational institution is being conducted, or a passenger transportation vehicle of a school or educational institution, whether the school or educational institution is public or private, unless:

(A) pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the institution; or

(B) the person possesses or goes with a concealed handgun that the person is licensed to carry under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and no other weapon to which this section applies, on the premises of an institution of higher education or private or independent institution of higher education, on any grounds or building on which an activity sponsored by the institution is being conducted, or in a passenger transportation vehicle of the institution;

(2) on the premises of a polling place on the day of an election or while early voting is in progress;

(3) on the premises of any government court or offices utilized by the court, unless pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the court;

(4) on the premises of a racetrack;

(5) in or into a secured area of an airport; or

(6) within 1,000 feet of premises the location of which is designated by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice as a place of execution under Article 43.19, Code of Criminal Procedure, on a day that a sentence of death is set to be imposed on the designated premises and the person received notice that:

(A) going within 1,000 feet of the premises with a weapon listed under this subsection was prohibited; or

(B) possessing a weapon listed under this subsection within 1,000 feet of the premises was prohibited.

(a-1) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly possesses or goes with a location-restricted knife:

(1) on the premises of a business that has a permit or license issued under Chapter 25, 28, 32, 69, or 74, Alcoholic Beverage Code, if the business derives 51 percent or more of its income from the sale or service of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption, as determined by the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission under Section 104.06, Alcoholic Beverage Code;

(2) on the premises where a high school, collegiate, or professional sporting event or interscholastic event is taking place, unless the person is a participant in the event and a location-restricted knife is used in the event;

(3) on the premises of a correctional facility;

(4) on the premises of a hospital licensed under Chapter 241, Health and Safety Code, or on the premises of a nursing facility licensed under Chapter 242, Health and Safety Code, unless the person has written authorization of the hospital or nursing facility administration, as appropriate;

(5) on the premises of a mental hospital, as defined by Section 571.003, Health and Safety Code, unless the person has written authorization of the mental hospital administration;

(6) in an amusement park; or

(7) on the premises of a church, synagogue, or other established place of religious worship.

(b) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsections (a)(1)-(4) that the actor possessed a firearm while in the actual discharge of his official duties as a member of the armed forces or national guard or a guard employed by a penal institution, or an officer of the court.

(c) In this section:

(1) "Institution of higher education" and "private or independent institution of higher education" have the meanings assigned by Section 61.003, Education Code.

(2) "Amusement park" and "premises" have the meanings assigned by Section 46.035.

(3) "Secured area" means an area of an airport terminal building to which access is controlled by the inspection of persons and property under federal law.

(d) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(5) that the actor possessed a firearm or club while traveling to or from the actor's place of assignment or in the actual discharge of duties as:

(1) a member of the armed forces or national guard;

(2) a guard employed by a penal institution; or

(3) a security officer commissioned by the Texas Private Security Board if:

(A) the actor is wearing a distinctive uniform; and

(B) the firearm or club is in plain view; or

(4) a security officer who holds a personal protection authorization under Chapter 1702, Occupations Code, provided that the officer is either:

(A) wearing the uniform of a security officer, including any uniform or apparel described by Section 1702.323(d), Occupations Code, and carrying the officer's firearm in plain view; or

(B) not wearing the uniform of a security officer and carrying the officer's firearm in a concealed manner.

(e) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(5) that the actor checked all firearms as baggage in accordance with federal or state law or regulations before entering a secured area.

(e-1) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(5) that the actor:

(1) possessed, at the screening checkpoint for the secured area, a concealed handgun that the actor was licensed to carry under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code; and

(2) exited the screening checkpoint for the secured area immediately upon completion of the required screening processes and notification that the actor possessed the handgun.

(e-2) A peace officer investigating conduct that may constitute an offense under Subsection (a)(5) and that consists only of an actor's possession of a concealed handgun that the actor is licensed to carry under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, may not arrest the actor for the offense unless:

(1) the officer advises the actor of the defense available under Subsection (e-1) and gives the actor an opportunity to exit the screening checkpoint for the secured area; and

(2) the actor does not immediately exit the checkpoint upon completion of the required screening processes.

(f) Except as provided by Subsection (e-1), it is not a defense to prosecution under this section that the actor possessed a handgun and was licensed to carry a handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code.

(g) Except as provided by Subsection (g-1), an offense under this section is a felony of the third degree.

(g-1) If the weapon that is the subject of the offense is a location-restricted knife, an offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor, except that the offense is a felony of the third degree if the offense is committed under Subsection (a)(1).

(h) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(4) that the actor possessed a firearm or club while traveling to or from the actor's place of assignment or in the actual discharge of duties as a security officer commissioned by the Texas Board of Private Investigators and Private Security Agencies, if:

(1) the actor is wearing a distinctive uniform; and

(2) the firearm or club is in plain view.

(i) It is an exception to the application of Subsection (a)(6) that the actor possessed a firearm or club:

(1) while in a vehicle being driven on a public road; or

(2) at the actor's residence or place of employment.

BTW: I've yet to be in a Walmart or Sam's in the Houston area that hasn't had an armed security officer or peace officer on premises.

Why wasn't there at least one in the El Paso facilities?

[Unique_Carpenter]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

....
BTW: I've yet to be in a Walmart or Sam's in the Houston area that hasn't had an armed security officer or peace officer on premises.

Why wasn't there at least one in the El Paso facilities?

Probably a scheduling issue, or that store hadn't made the decision to do so yet.
Walmart's and other stores that do this usually only use off duty LEO, as they want a real cop to also handle shoplifting, etc, not a rent a security guy.