First Time Pulled Over, Lessons Learned

[sjfcontrol]

Mama NEVER swatted my butt before makin' me unload 'em...not since she grabbed me up at about 7 and busted her hand on the "D" cell batteries I had crammed in my pockets...

[speedsix]

...I didn't laugh when I saw the blood vessel welts in her hand...but I snicker a little now...

[OldCurlyWolf]

Mama NEVER swatted my butt before makin' me unload 'em...not since she grabbed me up at about 7 and busted her hand on the "D" cell batteries I had crammed in my pockets...

[barres]

However, 46.02(a-1) (MPA) says it is only an offense to carry a handgun in a car if (1) in plain view, or (2) the person is (A) engaged in criminal activity, (B) prohibited by law from possessing a firearm, or (C) a member of a criminal gang.

If none of those situations exist, then there is nothing illegal about having a handgun in your car, and therefore you don't need the exception granted by 46.15(b)(6). Therefore, if you meet the requirements for MPA, you are carrying under the MPA, even if you have a CHL.

And logically, it simply doesn't make sense to claim that you lose your rights to carry under the MPA by acquiring a license to carry. The point of a license is to grant additional privileges, not to restrict rights you would have otherwise had.

The only problem with this, as it pertains to the OP, is that this happened in a school zone, which is presumably within 1000 feet of a school, therefore, without a CHL, he was engaged in a criminal activity by violating the Federal Safe Schools Zone.

To the OP, I'm sorry that you had a less than stellar contact with an officer.

[sjfcontrol]

However, 46.02(a-1) (MPA) says it is only an offense to carry a handgun in a car if (1) in plain view, or (2) the person is (A) engaged in criminal activity, (B) prohibited by law from possessing a firearm, or (C) a member of a criminal gang.

If none of those situations exist, then there is nothing illegal about having a handgun in your car, and therefore you don't need the exception granted by 46.15(b)(6). Therefore, if you meet the requirements for MPA, you are carrying under the MPA, even if you have a CHL.

And logically, it simply doesn't make sense to claim that you lose your rights to carry under the MPA by acquiring a license to carry. The point of a license is to grant additional privileges, not to restrict rights you would have otherwise had.

The only problem with this, as it pertains to the OP, is that this happened in a school zone, which is presumably within 1000 feet of a school, therefore, without a CHL, he was engaged in a criminal activity by violating the Federal Safe Schools Zone.

To the OP, I'm sorry that you had a less than stellar contact with an officer.

Hmm, In general, local LEO's are not concerned with enforcing Federal laws. In fact, I don't think they could arrest for a Federal offense if they wanted to -- not their jurisdiction. Therefore I'm not at all sure that the violation of a Federal law would count toward "engaged in criminal activity", thought I certainly wouldn't want to test it.

Any LEOs/lawyers on this board have an opinion?