tbryanh wrote: Constitutional carry in the state of Texas is illegal. There is a law that says you cannot carry. The CHL (LTC) provides an exception to the law. A LEO can therefore assume you are breaking the law when you carry and can detain you until you prove you are not breaking the law.
This is different than driving. Driving is not illegal in the state of Texas. There is no law that says you can't drive. There is a law that says you must have a driver license if you drive, but there is no law that says driving is illegal.
The act of driving does not give a LEO reasonable suspicion to suspect that you are breaking the law.
That's certainly an interesting interpretation with a certain amount of logic to it, but boy it's right on the edge.
The issue to me is that this creates a situation where engaging in a legal activity results in a stop-on-demand situation. You just gave up your 4th amendment rights to exercise your 2nd amendment rights. I think further backing this concept is taking a look at other open carry legislation in states like Oklahoma where the law makes it clear that stop and detain just to check a license isn't allowed.
I could argue that possession of prescription drugs (a controlled substance) is illegal without a prescription, but we don't have officers that demand to see a prescription every time they find a pill bottle.
Certainly, if it stands as-is today, we'll see multiple court cases on it.
IMHO, it may warrant attention or a voluntary contact, but in no way does it rise to the level of "reasonable suspicion". I don't think that any action which could otherwise be legal warrants reasonable suspicion. The two concepts are incompatible.tbryanh wrote:The act of carrying does give a LEO reasonable suspicion to suspect that you are breaking the law.
