Posted on 03/19/2009 11:24:04 PM PDT by Jet Jaguar
Police say he was "testing" the law, but one local gunowner says he was exercising his right to bear arms.
Tuesday evening, witnesses called police after a man with a gun in a holster was spotted walking in the Taco Bell restaurant on Day Drive in Parma.
Although the Taco Bell restaurant did not have any signs prohibiting weapons from being on the property, customers grew nervous.
The gunowner, Bill Carlisle, says as soon as he walked out of the restaurant, he was surrounded by police. "I came, I ate my dinner, I walked out and there the police were. The first thing they asked me was to stay where I was and put my hands on my head," says Carlisle.
Parma police captain Robert De Simone says Carlisle pulled out a tape recorder and then complied with the officers orders.
"An officer would have to be a moron to go up and talk to someone without saying put your hands away from the weapon," says De Simone. After running a background check, Carlisle's gun was returned. He was not arrested or charged.
Unless there a signs prohibiting weapons from being allowed on the property, police say according to Ohio's "open carry" law, any law-abiding citizen is allowed to carry a loaded weapon in public as long as it's not concealed.
AN ACT
relating to the prosecution of certain offenses that involve
carrying weapons on a person’s property or in a person’s vehicle.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Section 46.02, Penal Code, is amended by
amending Subsection (a) and adding Subsections (a-1) and (a-2) to
read as follows:
(a) A person commits an offense if the person [he]
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.
SECTION 2. Section 46.15(b), Penal Code, as amended by
Chapters 1221 and 1261, Acts of the 75th Legislature, Regular
Session, 1997, is reenacted and amended to read as follows:
(b) Section 46.02 does not apply to a person who:
(1) is in the actual discharge of official duties as a
member of the armed forces or state military forces as defined by
Section 431.001, Government Code, or as a guard employed by a penal
institution;
(2) [is on the person’s own premises or premises under
the person’s control unless the person is an employee or agent of
the owner of the premises and the person’s primary responsibility
is to act in the capacity of a security guard to protect persons or
property, in which event the person must comply with Subdivision
(5);
[(3)] is traveling;
(3) [(4)] is engaging in lawful hunting, fishing, or
other sporting activity on the immediate premises where the
activity is conducted, or is en route between the premises and the
actor’s residence or motor vehicle, if the weapon is a type commonly
used in the activity;
(4) [(5)] holds a security officer commission issued
by the Texas [Board of Private Investigators and] Private Security
Board [Agencies], if:
(A) the person is engaged in the performance of
the person’s duties as a security officer or traveling to and from
the person’s place of assignment;
(B) the person is wearing a distinctive uniform;
and
(C) the weapon is in plain view;
(5) [(6)] is carrying a concealed handgun and a valid
license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code
[Article 4413(29ee), Revised Statutes], to carry a concealed
handgun of the same category as the handgun the person is carrying;
(6) [(7)] holds a security officer commission and a
personal protection officer authorization issued by the Texas
[Board of Private Investigators and] Private Security Board
[Agencies] and [who] is providing personal protection under Chapter
1702, Occupations Code [the Private Investigators and Private
Security Agencies Act (Article 4413(29bb), Vernon’s Texas Civil
Statutes)]; or
(7) [(8)] holds an alcoholic beverage permit or
license or is an employee of a holder of an alcoholic beverage
permit or license if the person is supervising the operation of the
permitted or licensed premises.
SECTION 3. The following provisions are repealed:
(1) Section 46.15(h), Penal Code; and
(2) Section 46.15(i), Penal Code, as added by Chapter
288, Acts of the 79th Legislature, Regular Session, 2005.
SECTION 4. The change in law made by this Act applies only
to an offense committed on or after the effective date of this Act.
An offense committed before the effective date of this Act is
governed by the law in effect when the offense was committed, and
the former law is continued in effect for that purpose. For
purposes of this section, an offense was committed before the
effective date of this Act if any element of the offense was
committed before that date.
SECTION 5. This Act takes effect September 1, 2007.
______________________________ ______________________________
President of the Senate Speaker of the House
I certify that H.B. No. 1815 was passed by the House on May
11, 2007, by the following vote: Yeas 137, Nays 0, 2 present, not
voting.
______________________________
Chief Clerk of the House
I certify that H.B. No. 1815 was passed by the Senate on May
23, 2007, by the following vote: Yeas 31, Nays 0.
______________________________
Secretary of the Senate
APPROVED: _____________________
Date
_____________________
Governor
Nothing nullifies your right. But you don't have an absolute right to be on his private property. One right doesn't trump the other. It's that there is no "right" to shop in a given store.
There are a handful of places that post "no carry" signs; malls are usually among them. Your best option is to exercise your right to shop and spend your money elsewhere. A politely worded letter to the owners explaining your decision wouldn't hurt, either.
There is a lot of excellent information about this issue on the Rocky Mountain Gun Owner's website, Merchant Awareness Program(^). Information about what to do, how to approach the business owners, how to react, etc.
Open carry is not legal in Texas. (Or wasn’t until recently; they are attempting to pass a law to permit it.)
No, you can carry a loaded weapon in your vehicle in Texas.
I did the same in Montana and Louisiana.
I find it interesting that some “RIGHTS†are more†absolute that others.. IE: An owner may trump may right to the second amendment claiming his Property rights and my duty to shop elsewhere if I don’t like it. However that same owner is forced to build/maintain a handicapped bathroom, or store access, by the handicappers claiming a “Right” to partake of the same owners wares.
Doesn’t seem to be painted with the same brush
Open carry of *longarms* is legal.
Open carry poll ping
One chooses to carry a gun. One chooses to carry that gun in the open. One may have decided to live in a state where conceal carry is not an option, but living there is a choice. One may be unable to get a conceal carry permit due to previous (often bad) choices. It is, in my opinion, a good choice for individuals to make, but it remains a choice. A right that you choose to exercise.
One does not, it can be assumed, choose to be handicapped. Being handicapped means that without those bathroom stalls and wider doors, they may be completely unable to hold a job, buy food, or even to appear in public. Everyone eats, and needs to earn the means to support themselves. Those are not really choices, as long as one draws breath.
It is a compromise society has been willing to make so that handicapped people can exercise their right to live and earn a living, and to care for themselves with as much self-sufficiency as possible. Stores make reasonable accommodations, and handicapped people have a place to shop, work, and gather. People who are no longer a burden on society benefit us all. I am not necessarily in favor of these laws, but that is the argument for them.
On the other hand, no one is barring you (the gun owner, not the literal "you") from that store. They are barring you from carrying a gun into that store under certain circumstances. If they feel you are a danger, they will ask you to leave. You have a choice: leave the weapon outside or face arrest. You have other choices, as well. You can choose not to shop there ever again. You can choose to protest. You can choose to write letters. You can choose to boycott. You can choose to tell everyone you know how much the store angered you.
But it's not just the property owner's property rights. It's his right to enjoy tranquility, if you are creating a fuss. It's his right to the fruits of his labor, because if someone is scaring away the customers, he won't make any money. You have no right to deprive him of business. You have no right to upset his customers and keep him from feeding his family as a result.
At the end of the day, you do not have any right to trespass. If the owner says "go", then leave. It is that simple. Without the "right" to be there in the first place, you have no way of exercising your other rights on his property.
LOL! Point taken, but since all the Constitutions were written in nothing more complex than 8th grade English, one wouldn't think they were that difficult to understand.
Freeped.
Under the “Open Carry Law” in Ohio, law-abiding citizen are able to carry a loaded gun in public as long as it is not concealed.
Should you be allowed to carry a holstered gun in public?
Absolutely (5106 responses)90.6%
Not Really Sure (102 responses)1.8%
No Way (426 responses)7.6%
5634 total responses
(Results not scientific)
I love Stick Death.
One: No ones rights have been infringed if they feel uncomfortable with someone else exercising their rights. It is just plain ridiculous to say that. If I am carrying a firearm I don't care who else carries one, and those gang bangers are going to be stopped quite often by police and their records checked if they are carrying openly.
Also, so you think gang bangers don't carry now? They simply carry concealed with out regards to permits, the only difference is if they shoot you in Taco Bell you won't know it is coming until it is to late. A feeling of security doesn't mean you really are secure.
One more thing, do you think the uneasiness people feel on seeing gang members not carrying openly, but simply looking scuzzy and dangerous infringes on their rights also? Only a liberal thinks we have the right to not be offended in some way or another, no such right exists.
“While Traveling” language was specifically not included in the Texas Concealed Carry law when it was promulgated. In Texas it had always been legal (?) to carry a handgun in a vehicle when you were “traveling” and was codified in the existing laws. This “while traveling” provision was included when there was circuit riders (preachers on horseback) to give them a legal means to protect themselves even in counties places where carrying a handgun had been outlawed. Over time it had to be tested in the courts as some law officers would simply decide for themselves the definition of “traveling”. Each case was adjudicated separately and the defendant had to “prove”” his innocence. Still, the actual law was never exactly defined.
So, “while traveling” was simply allowed to die with the Concealed carry law.
Your definition of “traveling” is technically correct but the use of “traveling” as a defense is flawed under the old law.
You are absolutely right. I stand corrected. There is no right to feel safe nor is there a right to be safe.
I still prefer my gun concealed. When the bad guys rob a bank, they typically go for the armed security guards first. Why? Because they KNOW they’re armed. Better to wear the sheep’s clothing until the wolf is ready to act.
I would also prefer to carry concealed, and I do, but if I had no other choice I would carry openly. I would rather be armed openly than not be armed at all. According to the constitution I should be able to be armed at all times, openly or concealed without repercussions. Take care, and may you never have to use your firearm in self defense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.