Search found 5 matches

by C-dub
Thu Nov 06, 2014 9:18 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Blatant Printing: would you say something?
Replies: 117
Views: 23743

Re: Blatant Printing: would you say something?

Abraham wrote:It's concealed.

Yeah, it's probably a gun, but you don't KNOW it's a gun.

It's lumpily concealed, but still concealed.

End of story.
:iagree:
It looks odd, but even though I'm looking at a picture trying to determine if that a gun under there or not, I still can't really tell. It doesn't really take the shape of a gun in those photos.
by C-dub
Mon Nov 03, 2014 8:32 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Blatant Printing: would you say something?
Replies: 117
Views: 23743

Re: Blatant Printing: would you say something?

IIRC, an LEO friend of mine once told me that the only reason he got a CHL was to bypass the background check requirement when buying a gun. He knew he would pass, but either thought it would speed things up or he had issues with the background check due his name or something.
by C-dub
Mon Nov 03, 2014 7:44 am
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Blatant Printing: would you say something?
Replies: 117
Views: 23743

Re: Blatant Printing: would you say something?

gljjt wrote: C-dub, sorry. I was referring to the statement below yours in the text I quoted above. This is what I think is problematic, from TresHuevos:

Covered by a shirt is not "openly discernible". I believe Keith B. put it best, "Unless the shirt is so tight you can read the word Glock on the bottom of the magazine, it is still concealed".
No apology necessary. I was agreeing with you and you stated what I failed to get across when I posted the statute.
by C-dub
Sun Nov 02, 2014 9:33 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Blatant Printing: would you say something?
Replies: 117
Views: 23743

Re: Blatant Printing: would you say something?

gljjt wrote:
TresHuevos wrote:
C-dub wrote:
TresHuevos wrote:Meh, who cares? Is it illegal? No. I don't carry a gun to conceal it, I conceal it as a matter of law, tactics and just general convenience because I wouldn't want to put up with people's comments and questions.
It may be illegal.
GC §411.171. DEFINITIONS. In this subchapter:
(1) Repealed by Acts 2013, 83rd Leg., R.S., Ch. 1302, Sec. 14(1), eff. June 14,
2013.
(2) “Chemically dependent person” means a person who frequently or
repeatedly becomes intoxicated by excessive indulgence in alcohol or uses
controlled substances or dangerous drugs so as to acquire a fixed habit and an
involuntary tendency to become intoxicated or use those substances as often
as the opportunity is presented.
(3) “Concealed handgun” means a handgun, the presence of which is not
openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable person.
Bold emphasis is mine. Just because it is covered doesn't mean it is concealed. I had a friend that carried like this and the first time I witnessed his carry method I pointed it out to him. Prior to that incident, neither of us knew the other had a CHL and had never discussed firearms. Since he was a friend it was easy to say something. If he were a stranger, I probably wouldn't have said anything and just realized how much of a failure he was at concealment.
Covered by a shirt is not "openly discernible". I believe Keith B. put it best, "Unless the shirt is so tight you can read the word Glock on the bottom of the magazine, it is still concealed".
I disagree. The law says the presence of which is not openly discernable, it doesn't say the gun itself. If you are wearing a tight fitting shirt where a gun is clearly indicated, the presence of a gun is discernable. I would expect trouble with law enforcement. I think the term openly would be interpreted to mean clearly, and not necessarily open as in open carry. You may beat the wrap but not the ride. I suspect you may not beat the rap.
That is my point. Mine is covered by a shirt with barely a bulge of any sort. The OP said,
I can clearly see the outline of a pistol and a kydex holster.
My former friend had a t-shirt that was either white or a light blue that was also so snug that knew it was the mid-sized Glock, either .40 or 9mm. Anyone could tell it was a gun, but maybe the average person wouldn't know what make or model.
by C-dub
Sun Nov 02, 2014 11:14 am
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Blatant Printing: would you say something?
Replies: 117
Views: 23743

Re: Blatant Printing: would you say something?

TresHuevos wrote:Meh, who cares? Is it illegal? No. I don't carry a gun to conceal it, I conceal it as a matter of law, tactics and just general convenience because I wouldn't want to put up with people's comments and questions.
It may be illegal.
GC §411.171. DEFINITIONS. In this subchapter:
(1) Repealed by Acts 2013, 83rd Leg., R.S., Ch. 1302, Sec. 14(1), eff. June 14,
2013.
(2) “Chemically dependent person” means a person who frequently or
repeatedly becomes intoxicated by excessive indulgence in alcohol or uses
controlled substances or dangerous drugs so as to acquire a fixed habit and an
involuntary tendency to become intoxicated or use those substances as often
as the opportunity is presented.
(3) “Concealed handgun” means a handgun, the presence of which is not
openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable person.
Bold emphasis is mine. Just because it is covered doesn't mean it is concealed. I had a friend that carried like this and the first time I witnessed his carry method I pointed it out to him. Prior to that incident, neither of us knew the other had a CHL and had never discussed firearms. Since he was a friend it was easy to say something. If he were a stranger, I probably wouldn't have said anything and just realized how much of a failure he was at concealment.

Return to “Blatant Printing: would you say something?”