The following links only provide evidence that "something happened."
https://patch.com/texas/downtownaustin/court-finds-austin-violation-states-open-carry-law
https://www.texastribune.org/2019/01/17/austin-city-hall-must-allow-guns-judge-rules/
https://www.dallasnews.com/news/gun...pay-fine-violating-open-carry-law-judge-rules
All three of these articles incorrectly - wildly incorrectly - cite City of Austin as violating "open carry laws."
This is barking nonsense.
This had nothing to do with "open carry" law. The law at issue is the "fines for signs" law, an enforcement mechanism to keep state and local governments from denying license holders from carrying a handgun on state/local government premises or properties beyond what the statute forbids. If a Texas resident finds state or local government improperly trying to forbid licensed carry (for example by signs or by oral communication), then he can notify the government entity by letter. If the entity does not correct the problem within three days, the resident can forward the complaint to the State Attorney General, who will investigate. If he determines there is a violation and the entity does not correct it in 15 days, he can file suit.
Courts and offices utilized by the courts are by statute off-limits to licensed carry. There has been an issue as to whether licensed carry can be prohibited within the entire building where a court resides, or only within the court room and the court offices themselves. Some counties and cities have multi-use buildings that contain courts, tax assessors, recorders, and all manner of other government offices.
Some of the cities and counties claim the law says they can ban the whole building. The Attorney General says only the court room and the court offices. The [STRIKE]Peoples Republic[/STRIKE] City of Austin naturally went for full suppression for their city hall building, which has some minor courts that meet only two or three times per month, and the AG took them to court (two years ago). It has finally wound its way through the trial court level, and in some respects both sides won...or lost.
The judge ruled that the City can ban licensed carry throughout the entire building...but only when court is actually in session. So Austin was fined for six instances where they verbally denied entry to License-To-Carry (LTC) holders who had handguns with them while court was NOT in session.
Allthough a local 2A activist filed the original complaint, it seems that at least some of the six instances for which the city of fined were because the Attorney General sent some of his investigators -- sworn peace officers who also had LTCs -- to, er, investigate. The investigators did not ID themselves as peace officers to the deputies at the City Hall doors, but only has LTC holders with handguns. They were denied entry and this became evidence in the trial.
The law provides that on a first violation, the fine is $1500 for each day the violation continues. Second and subsequent violations are $10,000 or $10,500. To me, after the first time the undercover guys were turned away, every other time became a second or subsequent violation, but apparently they are not "violations" until the court rules they are. So six entry denials x $1500 each means the City has to fork over $9,000 to the State.
Unless they appeal. We'll see.
https://patch.com/texas/downtownaustin/court-finds-austin-violation-states-open-carry-law
https://www.texastribune.org/2019/01/17/austin-city-hall-must-allow-guns-judge-rules/
https://www.dallasnews.com/news/gun...pay-fine-violating-open-carry-law-judge-rules
All three of these articles incorrectly - wildly incorrectly - cite City of Austin as violating "open carry laws."
This is barking nonsense.
This had nothing to do with "open carry" law. The law at issue is the "fines for signs" law, an enforcement mechanism to keep state and local governments from denying license holders from carrying a handgun on state/local government premises or properties beyond what the statute forbids. If a Texas resident finds state or local government improperly trying to forbid licensed carry (for example by signs or by oral communication), then he can notify the government entity by letter. If the entity does not correct the problem within three days, the resident can forward the complaint to the State Attorney General, who will investigate. If he determines there is a violation and the entity does not correct it in 15 days, he can file suit.
Courts and offices utilized by the courts are by statute off-limits to licensed carry. There has been an issue as to whether licensed carry can be prohibited within the entire building where a court resides, or only within the court room and the court offices themselves. Some counties and cities have multi-use buildings that contain courts, tax assessors, recorders, and all manner of other government offices.
Some of the cities and counties claim the law says they can ban the whole building. The Attorney General says only the court room and the court offices. The [STRIKE]Peoples Republic[/STRIKE] City of Austin naturally went for full suppression for their city hall building, which has some minor courts that meet only two or three times per month, and the AG took them to court (two years ago). It has finally wound its way through the trial court level, and in some respects both sides won...or lost.
The judge ruled that the City can ban licensed carry throughout the entire building...but only when court is actually in session. So Austin was fined for six instances where they verbally denied entry to License-To-Carry (LTC) holders who had handguns with them while court was NOT in session.
Allthough a local 2A activist filed the original complaint, it seems that at least some of the six instances for which the city of fined were because the Attorney General sent some of his investigators -- sworn peace officers who also had LTCs -- to, er, investigate. The investigators did not ID themselves as peace officers to the deputies at the City Hall doors, but only has LTC holders with handguns. They were denied entry and this became evidence in the trial.
The law provides that on a first violation, the fine is $1500 for each day the violation continues. Second and subsequent violations are $10,000 or $10,500. To me, after the first time the undercover guys were turned away, every other time became a second or subsequent violation, but apparently they are not "violations" until the court rules they are. So six entry denials x $1500 each means the City has to fork over $9,000 to the State.
Unless they appeal. We'll see.
