mkim1120 wrote:my business is located right next door to a police station so i get to speak w/ alot of officers (HPD) and they give me mixed answers about the new law of carrying a concealed weapon in ones vehicle.
90% of them say the DA wont even give them a straight answer on if it is okay
Really? 90% of how many need the DA to read a law to them and tell them if it is "OK", whatever that means.
so even w/ the new law in place it is still a bit sketchy.
Sketchy? What does that mean? There is nothing 'sketchy' about it. My 11 year old read it and it is clear to even her.
*CHL Instructor*
"Speed is Fine, but accuracy is final"- Bill Jordan
Remember those who died, remember those who killed them.
mkim1120 wrote:my business is located right next door to a police station so i get to speak w/ alot of officers (HPD) and they give me mixed answers about the new law of carrying a concealed weapon in ones vehicle.
90% of them say the DA wont even give them a straight answer on if it is okay
Really? 90% of how many need the DA to read a law to them and tell them if it is "OK", whatever that means.
so even w/ the new law in place it is still a bit sketchy.
Sketchy? What does that mean? There is nothing 'sketchy' about it. My 11 year old read it and it is clear to even her.
sketch·y
ADJECTIVE:
sketch·i·er , sketch·i·est
1. Resembling a sketch; giving only major points or parts.
2. 1. Lacking in substance or completeness; incomplete.
2. Slight; superficial.
mkim1120 wrote:my business is located right next door to a police station so i get to speak w/ alot of officers (HPD) and they give me mixed answers about the new law of carrying a concealed weapon in ones vehicle.
90% of them say the DA wont even give them a straight answer on if it is okay
Really? 90% of how many need the DA to read a law to them and tell them if it is "OK", whatever that means.
so even w/ the new law in place it is still a bit sketchy.
Sketchy? What does that mean? There is nothing 'sketchy' about it. My 11 year old read it and it is clear to even her.
sketch·y
ADJECTIVE:
sketch·i·er , sketch·i·est
1. Resembling a sketch; giving only major points or parts.
2. 1. Lacking in substance or completeness; incomplete.
2. Slight; superficial.
Have you read the law? It does not appear lacking in substance or completeness, nor does it appear incomplete to me. It also does not appear slight or superficial.
so I ask again, 90% of how many need the DA to read a law to them and tell them if it is "OK", whatever that means; and I reiterate, There is nothing 'sketchy' about it. My 11 year old read it and it is clear to even her.
*CHL Instructor*
"Speed is Fine, but accuracy is final"- Bill Jordan
Remember those who died, remember those who killed them.
Am I the only one who was completely OUTRAGED upon hearing of this new law? Like all of you CHL holders, I paid my dues, $140 to the state and about $100 to take the safety course. I jumped through the rest of the hoops to obtain my CHL and now the state is granting more and more firearm privileges to the non-CHL holders and to the road ragers that have no business carrying a weapon in the first place?
Lacking a better way to put it, it makes the license in my pocket less exclusive. I'm surprised the CHL holders haven't fought back on this issue. People will also argue that any 'bad guys' who tote guns were carrying even before this law was passed, but there DOES exist the class of unstable people who are only carrying now because they legally can. These people are the ones who will draw a weapon and fire, simply because they were cut off or thrown the middle digit on the road. These people shouldn't carry, and had this law not been passed, they wouldn't. I haven't heard of any rise in road rage yet, but I won't relax; it's still early.
Do I make a point at all? Hopefully Texas won't get too out-of-control with the handgun bills.
ForbidInjustice wrote:Everyone on this topic appears rather calm.
Am I the only one who was completely OUTRAGED upon hearing of this new law? Like all of you CHL holders, I paid my dues, $140 to the state and about $100 to take the safety course. I jumped through the rest of the hoops to obtain my CHL and now the state is granting more and more firearm privileges to the non-CHL holders and to the road ragers that have no business carrying a weapon in the first place?
Lacking a better way to put it, it makes the license in my pocket less exclusive. I'm surprised the CHL holders haven't fought back on this issue. People will also argue that any 'bad guys' who tote guns were carrying even before this law was passed, but there DOES exist the class of unstable people who are only carrying now because they legally can. These people are the ones who will draw a weapon and fire, simply because they were cut off or thrown the middle digit on the road. These people shouldn't carry, and had this law not been passed, they wouldn't. I haven't heard of any rise in road rage yet, but I won't relax; it's still early.
Am I talking out of my rectal cavity, or do I make a point at all? Hopefully Texas won't get too out-of-control with the handgun bills.
I am not bothered at all. I support the new law. I didn't get a CHL to belong to a club.
And your other assumptions...well, break the word down.
*CHL Instructor*
"Speed is Fine, but accuracy is final"- Bill Jordan
Remember those who died, remember those who killed them.
I got my chl for personal protection and not only in texas but in reciprocating states as well something non chl holders can't do,outside of texas,I just got one problem my kid lives in nebraska and i either gotta disarm when i cross state lines from kansas border or talk her into moving to a carry state.
ForbidInjustice wrote:Do I make a point at all? Hopefully Texas won't get too out-of-control with the handgun bills.
A non-CHL holder can't take the firearm into a restaurant or supermarket. A non-CHL holder can't cross most state lines with a loaded firearm.
The 2nd Amendment does not say " the rights of a CHL holder shall not be granted to others."
In a Constitutional America, there would be no CHL because everyone would be allowed to carry everywhere. I hope more laws are repealed and more people will carry. I'm hoping open-carry comes to Texas and you would not need a CHL except to go into states that don't recognize our Constitutional guarantees properly.
mkim1120 wrote:i am just repeating what HPD has stated to me
i own a chl
90% of how many need the DA to read a law to them and tell them if it is "OK",
You made the statement. Can you support it?
sure
let me just go conjure up a legal document with a data recorder and go interview a few hundred HPD officers and let them know the significance of the poll
ForbidInjustice wrote:Everyone on this topic appears rather calm.
Am I the only one who was completely OUTRAGED upon hearing of this new law? Like all of you CHL holders, I paid my dues, $140 to the state and about $100 to take the safety course. I jumped through the rest of the hoops to obtain my CHL and now the state is granting more and more firearm privileges to the non-CHL holders and to the road ragers that have no business carrying a weapon in the first place?
Lacking a better way to put it, it makes the license in my pocket less exclusive. I'm surprised the CHL holders haven't fought back on this issue. People will also argue that any 'bad guys' who tote guns were carrying even before this law was passed, but there DOES exist the class of unstable people who are only carrying now because they legally can. These people are the ones who will draw a weapon and fire, simply because they were cut off or thrown the middle digit on the road. These people shouldn't carry, and had this law not been passed, they wouldn't. I haven't heard of any rise in road rage yet, but I won't relax; it's still early.
Do I make a point at all? Hopefully Texas won't get too out-of-control with the handgun bills.
I know I am not alone on this forum. When I say that the first ammendment is about everyone having the right to Keep and bear arms, and litterally pray daily for the day that a CHL will be unnessassary for every freeman in the United States
Liberty''s Blog
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy
Liberty wrote:I know I am not alone on this forum. When I say that the first ammendment is about everyone having the right to Keep and bear arms, and litterally pray daily for the day that a CHL will be unnessassary for every freeman in the United States
ForbidInjustice wrote:Everyone on this topic appears rather calm.
Am I the only one who was completely OUTRAGED upon hearing of this new law? Like all of you CHL holders, I paid my dues, $140 to the state and about $100 to take the safety course. I jumped through the rest of the hoops to obtain my CHL and now the state is granting more and more firearm privileges to the non-CHL holders and to the road ragers that have no business carrying a weapon in the first place?
Lacking a better way to put it, it makes the license in my pocket less exclusive. I'm surprised the CHL holders haven't fought back on this issue. People will also argue that any 'bad guys' who tote guns were carrying even before this law was passed, but there DOES exist the class of unstable people who are only carrying now because they legally can. These people are the ones who will draw a weapon and fire, simply because they were cut off or thrown the middle digit on the road. These people shouldn't carry, and had this law not been passed, they wouldn't. I haven't heard of any rise in road rage yet, but I won't relax; it's still early.
Do I make a point at all? Hopefully Texas won't get too out-of-control with the handgun bills.
I'm outraged that I have to send money to the state of Texas before I can exercise one of my constitutional rights.
mkim1120 wrote:i am just repeating what HPD has stated to me
i own a chl
90% of how many need the DA to read a law to them and tell them if it is "OK",
You made the statement. Can you support it?
sure
let me just go conjure up a legal document with a data recorder and go interview a few hundred HPD officers and let them know the significance of the poll
So in reality, you have not talked to very many cops about this.
*CHL Instructor*
"Speed is Fine, but accuracy is final"- Bill Jordan
Remember those who died, remember those who killed them.
I agree with txinvestigator on this one, there is absolutely no ambiguity about the code. When I was waiting on my plastic to arrive I emailed DPS about it. Their response was in fact consistent with the code in that as long as you meet the criteria you could have a loaded handgun in the vehicle. The problem is not in the code itself, the problem is with LE policy for any given jurisdiction. DPS warned me that each jurisdiction are allowed to conduct traffic stops as the see fit and are allowed to handle concealed handgun issues as they see fit. Meaning places like Harris County can still make the arrest and allow the DA to determine if charges are pressed.
Since then, I spoke with 2 Travis County sheriffs specifically about this issue, both of whom said that if they find a concealed handgun in a vehicle and no one has a CHL, the person in control of the vehicle is going to jail. One of the sheriffs went as far to say “You may beat the wrap but you will not beat the ride� (I’ve heard people say this before….but this was the only time I heard it from a LEO and I was floored by his mentality). I also had the opportunity to speak to one Austin PD officer who said something similar but it was more along the lines that it depends on how the traffic stops goes insinuating that if you are not an rear he might let it slide, but if are being an rear you are going to jail.
In my mind the question is not about the traveling law itself, but more about how much immunity is extended to LEOs who arrest someone even though no law was broken?
pt145ss wrote: In my mind the question is not about the traveling law itself, but more about how much immunity is extended to LEOs who arrest someone even though no law was broken?
Unfortunately, until there is a test case and someone presses the false arrest aspect, it will go on. I won't blame the LEO as much as the administration/DA in their jurisdiction. Most of them are doing what they have been directed to do by the command.
All the more reason to have your CHL to help you get immunity from the ones that just won't let it go.
Keith
Texas LTC Instructor, Missouri CCW Instructor, NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun Instructor and RSO, NRA Life Member
