Is your employer violating your rights?

It has come to my attention that several large employers in the Dallas area, including Frito-Lay, UPS, and TI, are routinely violating the rights of employees regarding the transportation and storage of firearms and ammunition.

In Texas, any private employer can independently determine their own policy for the legal carry of firearms in their workplace.  That is, someone who holds a valid CHL, or is otherwise allowed by law to carry a firearm, can still be disallowed from carrying on the premises of a private business, either by internal policy (Employee Handbook; applies only to employees) or by posting the legally required notice specified by PC 30.06.  However, said employers CANNOT include in that prohibition any public OR PRIVATE driveways, parking lots, or parking garages, even if they own them, and even if they are not open to the public.

The Texas Legislature specifically gave Concealed Handgun Licensees the ability to store handguns and ammo in their personal vehicles at work.  This applies to all private and most public employers, with limited exceptions as noted below, and is non-negotiable.  While it is true that you could be fired for some other reason, that is also illegal, and the employer could be sued for illegal termination, either by you, or Federally by the EEOC.  This is especially true if you had not been the subject of multiple warnings with documented corrective actions.

If your rights have been violated by an employer in this regard, you can report them anonymously to the EEOC, or better yet, send a copy of the Employee Handbook to the Texas State Rifle Association.  In several cases, companies have quietly changed their policies after learning that the TSRA/NRA were considering legal action against them.  You can stay in the background on this.

The relevant sections of the Texas Penal Code and Government Code are included below.  Note that "premises" as defined by PC 46.035(f)(3) does NOT include parking lots, areas, or garages.

============================================================
52.061. Restriction on Prohibiting Employee Access to or Storage of Firearm or Ammunition.
A public or private employer may not prohibit an employee who holds a license to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, who otherwise lawfully possesses a firearm, or who lawfully possesses ammunition from transporting or storing a firearm or ammunition the employee is authorized by law to possess in a locked, privately owned motor vehicle in a parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area the employer provides for employees.

Sec. 52.062. EXCEPTIONS.
(a) Section 52.061 does not:
(1) authorize a person who holds a license to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, who otherwise lawfully possesses a firearm, or who lawfully possesses ammunition to possess a firearm or ammunition on any property where the possession of a firearm or ammunition is prohibited by state or federal law; or
(2) apply to:
(A) a vehicle owned or leased by a public or private employer and used by an employee in the course and scope of the employee ’s employment, unless the employee is required to transport or store a firearm in the official discharge of the employee’s duties;
(B) a school district;
(C) an open-enrollment charter school, as defined by Section 5.001, Education Code;
(D) a private school, as defined by Section 22.081, Education Code;
(E) property owned or controlled by a person, other than the employer, that is subject to a valid, unexpired oil, gas, or other mineral lease that contains a provision prohibiting the possession of firearms on the property; or
(F) property owned or leased by a chemical manufacturer or oil and gas refiner with an air authorization under Chapter 382, Health and Safety Code, and on which the primary business conducted is the manufacture, use, storage, or transportation of hazardous, combustible, or explosive materials, except in regard to an employee who holds a license to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and who stores a firearm or ammunition the employee is authorized by law to possess in a locked, privately owned motor vehicle in a parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area the employer provides for employees that is outside of a secured and restricted area:
(i) that contains the physical plant;
(ii) that is not open to the public; and
(iii) the ingress into which is constantly monitored by security personnel.
(b) Section 52.061 does not prohibit an employer from prohibiting an employee who holds a license to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, or who otherwise lawfully possesses a firearm, from possessing a firearm the employee is otherwise authorized by law to possess on the premises of the employer ’s business. In this subsection, "premises" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035(f)(3), Penal Code.
Sec. 411.203. Rights of Employers. This subchapter does not prevent or otherwise limit the right of a public or private employer to prohibit persons who are licensed under this subchapter from carrying a concealed handgun on the premises of the business. In this section, "premises" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035(f)(3), Penal Code.

Can I Use a .22 for the CHL Proficiency?

There's bad new, good news, and more bad news.

At the time of this writing, you cannot use a .22 for the Texas CHL Proficiency test. The good news for some people is that that will likely change in a few months. The Legislature is debating that as we speak (so to speak), and most people think it will pass in this session. If it does, that change would take effect next Sep 1.

The other bad news, however, has to do with whether or not you should take advantage of that. Some people, including some I respect, think this would be a good change. I disagree, but not for the expected reason. I have gone on record before, suggesting that the .22 should not be so easily dismissed as a defensive weapon, especially if it has a long barrel and a high-capacity magazine. Even the tiny Baretta Bobcat, with its 6-round magazine is better than nothing, but not much better. A target pistol, like the Ruger Mark III, would allow you to put 10 rounds in a home invader in a matter of seconds, which would likely make him rethink his career choices. However, unless you took a head shot, that would slow him down, but not stop him immediately. Keep in mind that that home invader, upon seeing the pistol, could get to you from across a large room in under 2 seconds (the well-documented Tueller Paradigm). If he has a knife, putting him in the hospital won't save your life. The .22 only works if the invader doesn't rush you.

However, I digress. My objection is not so much in using a .22, but in leading a person to think they know how to handle a firearm. There is a world of difference between the .22 and calibers like 9mm, 10mm, .40, .45, .38 Special, or the legendary .357 Magnum. Learning to shoot only a .22 is like riding a tricycle and thinking you can also ride a Harley. True, the .22 has killed many people. It is often the choice of hit men, but they surprise their victims, take head shots, or both, and the noise factor is important.

I often let beginners fire a few rounds from a .22 first, so they can get a sense of it, before we move on to something larger. The skills learned in handling a larger caliber gun will easily translate back to a smaller one, but the reverse is not necessarily true.

Whatever the point might be in allowing the .22 for the CHL Proficiency, it can't be making it easier to get the license. It is already easy enough for someone with a week's experience. The result would be people scoring 245 instead of 210 (175 is passing), and thinking they are now armed.

Col. Jeff Cooper once said, "Owning a handgun doesn't make you armed any more than owning a guitar makes you a musician."