open carry

Don’t Take Your Guns to Town, by Robert Pelton (past president)

If Wild Bill Hickok was walking down the streets of Houston or Abilene or any other place in Texas with his guns, he would probably be approached by the police and arrested. Wild Bill has a concealed handgun license but Wild Bill doesn’t carry his pistols in a holster, he carries them stuck in a sash wrapped a gun totin round his waist. Too bad he didn’t understand the nuances of the new open carry law, but then, who does?

Several months have passed since the law was signed giving law enforcement time to study and prepare for a freedom not allowed in Texas since after the War Between the States. But there is significant controversy about the new open carry law.

Growing up in Abilene we all watched John Wayne, Audie Murphy, Lash Larue and other war and cowboy movies, where the good guys fought for noble causes and always won the day. And once again we are returning to the days of wearing a holster on our hip. But it turns out carrying a gun is more dangerous than “The Duke” may have led us to believe. When real bullets fly real lives are impacted in ways not illustrated on the silver screen.

Guns sales are at an all time high. The murder rate has escalated in Texas and many other places. There were 283 murders in Houston in 2015; the last one was in a hotel on the north side of town. Today, citizens are fearful about where our communities are headed. We all want to feel safe in our homes and when out in public. As a result, many law abiding citizens are choosing to carry guns for protection.

Every gun owner should know the power they have to do either good or harm with the weapon they carry, and the risk they take by carrying. Unless a person has been in the military or worked in law enforcement, they may not be properly trained on how to defend themselves or use a firearm. And they likely have not truly grasped the potential consequences of that act. We all want to protect our families, friends, other citizens and ourselves from the bad guys, but before this happens you need to be prepared. Buying that new shiny pistol is exciting but before you carry or shoot it, remember that pistol is a tool – a dangerous tool. Get the right kind of pistol. Study it, examine it, read the instructions, and practice safely with it before you start toting it around.

For your own safety, as well as others, you should understand how to care for your pistol. One of my gun toting friends who usually carries a couple of pistols was bragging about being prepared. I asked him to let me examine the pistol he carried in his boot. It would not even work because it was so dirty. He was embarrassed. A retired Texas Ranger friend of mine who gave me his hideout gun showed me the one he now carried. He, too, was embarrassed as I pointed out to him it might shoot one time and no more because the slide was dirty. Recently in Abilene, a group of my friends were showing off their barbeque guns, those shiny big guns they wear when having a cook out. One of them was fooling with his pistol and it accidentally went off. Luckily it did not kill one of them.

Today, the new law allows a person with a concealed hand gun license to openly carry if it is in a holster. The Old West may have risen again, but the “basics” of carrying a gun will never be the same. With more freedom comes a greater responsibility to be well trained on handling and operating a weapon. It also comes with some legal risk to the carrier. The district attorney has graciously provided HCCLA an interpretation of what the law means. JoAnne Musick, as president of HCCLA, has provided us with the position of the defense bar. While they are similar in many ways, there is still some polite disagreement about what the new law means. Can a police stop you and ask to see your license? Yes! Should you show it to them? Yes! But what happens if you don’t? Well….it is a little unclear. This lack of legal clarifications as to the application of this law is a problem, and it will be for your future clients. We will only know the answers when someone is arrested and judged on the facts of their situation. Be aware that someone will be the guinea pig on which this law is tried and those yet-to-be-determined answers are defined. That person may be your client.

As lawyers, what do we advise our gun toting clients? Make sure you have a good reason for openly carrying your shiny new pistol and that you have a concealed hand gun license if you intend to carry one. Be aware that you may, and probably will be, a target for law enforcement to stop and ask you questions. When the police may ask you if you have a permit be polite and tell them the correct answer. This is the moment where potential problems arise. Also be aware that if you are in the wrong place at the wrong time an outlaw may try to shoot you first because you are openly carrying a pistol.

We do know that Penal Code 46.02 still remains the law and allows gun rights to those individuals who do not have a concealed handgun license. The revisions that took effect January 1, 2016 now state that a person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun in a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned or controlled by that person at any time if (1) the handgun is in plain view, unless the person is licensed to carry a handgun and the handgun is carried in a shoulder or belt holster, or (2) the person is engaged in criminal activity, or (3) prohibited by law from possessing a firearm, or (4) a member of a criminal street gang.

Also note that even with a license a gun owners can’t waltz into just anywhere without taking notice of the posted signs. Gun owners and business owners alike should be aware of Texas Penal Code 30.06 which details the requirements for signs a business may display to prohibit guns on their premises. According to a “reliable and credible” law enforce source who shall remain nameless for his own protection, many of the signs posted by business owners are not even effective as they do not comply with the code. This may save your gun-slinging client but not your gun-shy business owner. Makes sure you have crossed all your “T”s and dotted all your “I”s before posting your sign and expecting it to be enforced.

—

Penal Code 30.06

(a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:

(1) carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and

(2) received notice that:

(A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was forbidden; or

(B) remaining on the property with a concealed handgun was forbidden and failed to depart.

(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.

(1) “Entry” has the meaning assigned by Section 30.05(b).

(2) “License holder” has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035(f).

(3) “Written communication” means:

(A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: “Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun”; or

(B) a sign posted on the property that:

(i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;

(ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and

(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.

(d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

(e) It is an exception to the application of this section that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.

—

AS WE ENTER THE NEW YEAR with the open carry law, there are several things to remember: safety first. A firearm is designed to kill. Yes, there are some people who skeet shoot or go to a gun range but a firearm is designed to kill. If you have ever been in law enforcement as a licensed peace officer or in the military, you will know the consequences of weaponry ignorance. Firearms are not games. They are designed to cause destruction of a target. And secondly, this new law could dramatically affect the status quo. Our clients need to understand they must make sensible decisions when choosing to carry. We know many of them will not. That is what keeps us in business. Still, we as lawyers are also in the law enforcement business. Our job is to make sure our clients are legally arrested and searched. This job is made more difficult now because no one knows for sure the details to this new law. Johnny cash sang a song, DONT TAKE YOUR GUNS TO TOWN. I RECOMMEND YOU READ THE LYRICS OR LISTEN TO THE SONG before you take your guns to town. Think long and hard about the consequences. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMMp_llzBT4)

Do you want to go away peacefully in the night or “Die with your Boots On??” Do you want to be judged by 12 or carried by 6?

“I have a very strict gun control policy. If there is a gun around, I want to be in control of it.” – Clint Eastwood

“There are no dangerous weapons. There are only dangerous men.” – Robert Heinlein

“A man’s rights rest in 3 boxes. The ballot box, the jury box .and the cartridge box.” – Frederick Douglas

This is all very serious business and when a shooting happens, many people may “beat the rap but not the ride.”

Having been made aware of District Attorney Devon Anderson’s advisory opinion to law enforcement officers [below], it appears the debate is alive and well. Whether or not a police officer may stop a citizen engaged in open carry to check for a license is a very real question.

First and foremost, nothing in the open carry statute authorizes an officer to detain a citizen to determine if they have a license. The ability of a law-abiding citizen to lawfully open carry a handgun does not forego the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.

While Ms. Anderson is correct that an officer may approach any individual in a consensual encounter, citizens are generally free to decline the encounter and walk away. The Supreme Court has consistently held that a person’s refusal to cooperate with a police request during a consensual encounter cannot, by itself, provide the basis for a detention.[i]

Her position that anything short of voluntary compliance with the officer’s inquiry should be reasonable suspicion to believe the person is illegally possessing the gun is perhaps too broad. Anderson cites Chiarini v. State for the proposition that courts have routinely permitted law enforcement officers to approach and detain those individuals observed to be in possession of a handgun. Recognizing that Chiarini was decided prior to the open carry law, we note that observation of a handgun may no longer carry the same connotation of illegal conduct.

There are three types of police-citizen inter-actions: (1) consensual encounters that do not implicate the Fourth Amendment; (2) investigative detentions that are Fourth Amendment seizures of limited scope and duration that must be supported by a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity; and (3) arrests, the most intrusive of Fourth Amendment seizures, that are reasonable only if supported by probable cause. Police officers are as free as any other citizen to approach citizens to ask for information or cooperation. Such consensual encounters may be uncomfortable for a citizen, but they are not Fourth Amendment seizures. However, investigative detentions go beyond the consensual encounter and impact the Fourth Amendment rights of citizens.

Ms. Anderson’s position that declining the officer’s inquiry should be reasonable suspicion to justify an investigative detention discounts the necessity for reasonable suspicion. If declining an officer’s inquiry amounts to reasonable suspicion, then a citizen could never resist an officer’s inquiry. Consistent with Supreme Court opinions, an officer may only detain (stop) someone when the officer has specific, articulable, and individualized facts to make it reasonable to suspect that the person may be committing a crime.

In any event, if an officer does detain a citizen solely for engaging in open carry, that detention must be brief and limited to determining whether or not the citizen has a license to carry.

HCCLA will encourage lawyers to challenge the validity of any detention that fails to comply with the long established constitutional requirements governing the seizure of citizens. Though an officer may engage in a consensual encounter with any person regardless of their choice to open carry, nothing in the statute divests an otherwise law-abiding citizen of his or her constitutional rights. Generally, citizens may decline the consensual encounter and expect law enforcement to meet reasonable suspicion standards prior to their detention.

Much like a drivers license is required to legally operate a motor vehicle on our Texas roadways, a license is required to carry a handgun both openly and concealed. Law enforcement does not stop every vehicle operator to present his or her license. Why would they stop every open carry citizen?

Instead, it sounds as though Devon Anderson doesn’t support the Republican platform for open carry. While the Governor preaches liberty, Ms. Anderson wants to usher in an era of “papers please.” This is not what one expects in a free society. Ms. Anderson must accept that elections have consequences and the peoples elected legislature has spoken and approved open carry throughout Texas and Harris County.

____________________

[i] Wade v. State, 422 S.W.3d 661, 664-665 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013), citing Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429, 437, 111 S. Ct. 2382, 115 L. Ed. 2d 389 (1991) (“[A] refusal to cooperate, without more, does not furnish the minimal level of objective justification needed for a detention or seizure.”); Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491, 498, 103 S. Ct. 1319, 75 L. Ed. 2d 229 (1983) (plurality op.) (a suspect’s refusal to listen or answer a police officer’s questions in a non-seizure circumstance “does not, without more, furnish” the officers with reasonable suspicion for a seizure.).

View and Download Devon Anderson’s Advisory Opinion Here

Download (PDF, 941KB)

DON’T TAKE YOUR GUNS TO TOWN

Don’t Take Your Guns to Town, by Robert Pelton (past president)

“Open Carry” NOT “Papers Please”

Important Links

Upcoming Events

Contact Us