concealed means concealed?

[Abraham]

You can't rely on "cmc".

My G19 fell out of my holster once when the screws backed out of my holster and promply fell to the ground.

For just a moment I was stupefied with horror - luckily I was outside with no witnesses. I snatched it up off the ground with no one the wiser, but it could of been disastrous in a place of business.

Then there was the time, while shopping for groceries, my cover garment (unbeknownst to me) was not covering my pistol.

Mu point of course is don't rely with 100% conviction that "cmc" - it can bite you just when take a chance that perhaps you ought not to...

[Excaliber]

Why is "intentionally fails to conceal the handgun" so hard to understand?

PC §46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun.

[/quohttp://www.txdps.state.tx.us/internetforms/forms/chl-16.pdfte]

Easy to understand, but a difference of opinions between you and law enforcement could occur.

Say you have a jacket blow open. You say it’s an accident, the officer says it is an intentional act. Who will the court believe? Don't know, but it could cost you a lot of money to find out.

Unless a DA wants to try to make a case that you controlled the wind, that one would go nowhere.

The fact that it's pretty windy in many parts of Texas, jackets blow open all the time, and droves of CHL holders aren't being hauled off in cuffs tends to support the fact that both LEOs and DAs in Texas tend to read the law as it is written and intended.

[Keith B]

In the history of CHL in Texas, it has happened one time that I'm aware of and the guy ended up getting off. The story is detailed somewhere on these pages. Someone will find it.

Handdog. I don't consider $25000 in legal costs "getting off". Most likely it would have been much less expensive if he had just paid it or pleaded it down.
Reminder: the officer that arrested him indicated that the failure was intentional.

That's the only case we've got documented on here. I'm sure we've got some attorneys that could provide us Lexus Nexus examples.. and Maybe a few Leos that could look up similar charges.

That's the only one we know of that has gone end to end court...

It's a problem. It's a problem that I hope SB299 will help with.

I hope that was a mistype. If so, he should have gotten a different lawyer.

[bdickens]

In the history of CHL in Texas, it has happened one time that I'm aware of and the guy ended up getting off. The story is detailed somewhere on these pages. Someone will find it.

Handdog. I don't consider $25000 in legal costs "getting off". Most likely it would have been much less expensive if he had just paid it or pleaded it down.
Reminder: the officer that arrested him indicated that the failure was intentional.

That's the only case we've got documented on here. I'm sure we've got some attorneys that could provide us Lexus Nexus examples.. and Maybe a few Leos that could look up similar charges.

That's the only one we know of that has gone end to end court...

It's a problem. It's a problem that I hope SB299 will help with.

It's not a problem any more than getting hit in the head with a meteor is.

One time. It happened to one guy on one day. How many days have we had CHL and how many CHLs are there?

Like Excaliber said, the DA would have to convince a jury that you can control the wind.


FACT: It is not a crime for your handgun to inadvertently become exposed through no fault of yours.

FACT: Most people are so oblivious to what is going on around them that they probably wouldn't notice anyway.

FACT: If someone did notice, as long as you look like a respectable person anyway, don't freak out and just nonchalantly cover it back up and go about your business, he would probably think you are an off-duty cop.

[RJGold]

Don't you just love these topics that someone ELSE starts, then you get 3 pages of responses and the OP have never once shown back up to participated in the topic that they started.

Probing...???

[Ruger3]

I recently asked [Pre-paid legal service] about noncompliant 30.06 signs. This was their response:

"when it comes to technical deficiencies in 30.06 signs, by-in-large, there is not statutory or case law guidance. Whether the sign is determined to be "good", "no good", or "close enough" will NOT be determined by the police, but rather by a judge or jury. We always suggest you stay on the safe side and avoid being the test-case. Communicate your displeasure with the establishment by "speaking with your wallet"."