TexasCHLforum.com

sugar land dave wrote:I don't know TAM. I think there might be an unspoken penalty of having to deal with a suddenly angry peace officer.

Well, you're right..... there is that. But I'm referring to what's on the books. In fact, the unspoken penalty is why I do the courtesy of showing both ID's whether or not I am armed. As a general thing, I'll even go so far as to ask, "do you need to see my ID?"

As a practical matter, while the requirement still exists, there is no penalty for failing to comply with it.

It is NOT required to disclose your CHL status to an officer unless:

A) you are asked for ID, AND

B) you are armed.

Both conditions have to be met. You don't have to tell an officer 'I AM A CHL AND I HAVE A GUN!!!!" right off the bat. In fact, most officers would probably consider that to be a bit hinkey. If you are not asked for ID, you are not required to disclose at all. If you are not armed, you are only required to show your TDL if asked. Those are the minimum requirements.

Now, many of us (myself included), purely as an act of courtesy, will hand over both IDs when asked even if we are not armed at the moment. For my own part, I figure a thorough officer is going to do a search for my CHL status from his squad car anyway - as a precaution. If I voluntarily oblige him by handing him both IDs (I don't consider a verbal notice to be necessary at the outset) even if I'm not carrying, I give him/her the chance to gracefully ask if I am armed, and I can then say, no, not today. But as a practical matter, the four times I have handed both IDs over to an LEO (I was armed each time), only one of them asked me if I was armed and where the gun was, and that was as far as things went. The other three couldn't have cared less.