Telling the LEO?

[The Wall]

I have had this discussion with friends, family, and read comments on several forums. The topic recently came up on a camping forum of all places.
I have looked on the Texas Dept. of Public Safety website and Google and can't find anything. Are you required to declare that you have a CHL when stopped by a LEO?
I could swear I've heard it was required if you have a CHL but not if you don't have one. Can't find anything in an official writing or document. I haven't been stopped but out of respect would show my CHL regardless of the law. I would like to have a reference to this if there is one that I can quote or show whenever this topic comes up.
Can someone please point me in the right direction?

[Beiruty]

1) It is required to disclose that you have a CHL AND you are carrying, IF you are carrying.
2) It is good idea to disclose that you have a CHL when NOT carrying.
3) There is no penalty if you failed to disclose.

FAQ from DPS web site: http://www.stateoftexaschl.com/chl-faqs/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

64. I have a friend that had his license suspended for ninety (90) days for failing to display his license when a peace officer asked him for identification. What happens if the officer does not ask for the CHL, am I still required to display my handgun license to the officer if I am carrying a handgun? Will my license be suspended?
Yes. Pursuant to GC 411.205(a), you must still display your concealed handgun license if you are carrying a concealed handgun when asked for identification by a peace officer or magistrate. However, as of September 1, 2009 there is no longer a ninety (90) day suspension for failure to display your license.

[C-dub]

There also seems to be some concern over the difference between failure to display when asked for ID versus not having it with us at all. The penalty for failure to display has been removed, but when an officer discovers that you have a CHL, after running your DL, you will be asked about it at that time. Being unable to produce a license at that time will probably result in an Unlicensed Carrying Weapon charge. I'm more than a little perturbed by this because the license is still valid and can be confirmed even though it is not in our possession at the time. It's just written in the law that we have to have it with us if we are carrying.

I don't like it, but that's the way it is. Some people have images of their insurance on their phones and are able to show that. Texas' law about identification doesn't actually require anyone to show an officer the physical license when required, but only that one must identify themselves. If I provide my name and address and birth date I have satisfied that requirement. I think failure to produce a CHL when carrying is currently a Class A misdemeanor. There was an attempt to increase that to a felony due to open carry likely passing this go around. I think that amendment was pulled. I wish it could be changed that a true unlicensed situation would either stay a Class A or maybe be bumped up to a felony. However, I think that for someone with a valid CHL who happened to forget their license at home there shouldn't be any penalty or at the most a small fine, like what is being done to carrying past a 30.06 sign.

[The Annoyed Man]

It is NOT required to disclose your CHL status to an officer unless:

A) you are asked for ID, AND

B) you are armed.

Both conditions have to be met. You don't have to tell an officer 'I AM A CHL AND I HAVE A GUN!!!!" right off the bat. In fact, most officers would probably consider that to be a bit hinkey. If you are not asked for ID, you are not required to disclose at all. If you are not armed, you are only required to show your TDL if asked. Those are the minimum requirements.

Now, many of us (myself included), purely as an act of courtesy, will hand over both IDs when asked even if we are not armed at the moment. For my own part, I figure a thorough officer is going to do a search for my CHL status from his squad car anyway - as a precaution. If I voluntarily oblige him by handing him both IDs (I don't consider a verbal notice to be necessary at the outset) even if I'm not carrying, I give him/her the chance to gracefully ask if I am armed, and I can then say, no, not today. But as a practical matter, the four times I have handed both IDs over to an LEO (I was armed each time), only one of them asked me if I was armed and where the gun was, and that was as far as things went. The other three couldn't have cared less.

[The Wall]

Thank you so much. I don't know how I missed this. I'll be sure to post on the camping forum.

[The Annoyed Man]

As a practical matter, while the requirement still exists, there is no penalty for failing to comply with it.

[sugar land dave]

I don't know TAM. I think there might be an unspoken penalty of having to deal with a suddenly angry peace officer.

[The Annoyed Man]

I don't know TAM. I think there might be an unspoken penalty of having to deal with a suddenly angry peace officer.

Well, you're right..... there is that. But I'm referring to what's on the books. In fact, the unspoken penalty is why I do the courtesy of showing both ID's whether or not I am armed. As a general thing, I'll even go so far as to ask, "do you need to see my ID?"

[thetexan]

You are only required to show your CHL if you are carrying on or about your person at the time a peace officer or magistrate requires you to show id.

If I am not carrying I show anyway. I do so as a practical matter. He will know you have a chl if he runs your id or plates and then wonder why you didn't mention it.

Yes, I know you don't have to. I'm comfortable in my confidence in my knowledge of my rights and have long ago stopped having something to prove. Cooperate when you can. It may save you a bad day later.

Tex

[carlson1]

You are only required to show your CHL if you are carrying on or about your person at the time a peace officer or magistrate requires you to show id.

If I am not carrying I show anyway. I do so as a practical matter. He will know you have a chl if he runs your id or plates and then wonder why you didn't mention it.

Yes, I know you don't have to. I'm comfortable in my confidence in my knowledge of my rights and have long ago stopped having something to prove. Cooperate when you can. It may save you a bad day later.

Tex

A run (10/28) on your license plate does not reveal you are a CHL holder.

[Jumping Frog]

Please note the statute uses the language "demand identification". Note that an LEO can carry on any conversation or ask any questions they want when the other party is voluntarily consenting to the interaction. But the word "demand" makes clear that we are not talking about a consensual interaction.

There are clear limits, both Texas statute, as well as case law (Texas and Federal) on when an officer can demand identification. One obvious example is being stopped for a traffic infraction. Walking down the street without any cause for reasonable suspicion does not qualify for demanding ID.

[jimlongley]

You are only required to show your CHL if you are carrying on or about your person at the time a peace officer or magistrate requires you to show id.

If I am not carrying I show anyway. I do so as a practical matter. He will know you have a chl if he runs your id or plates and then wonder why you didn't mention it.

Yes, I know you don't have to. I'm comfortable in my confidence in my knowledge of my rights and have long ago stopped having something to prove. Cooperate when you can. It may save you a bad day later.

Tex

If I am not carrying and an officer asks me for ID, he will get my DL. If not presenting my CHL when I am not carrying leads to a bad day later, it is the officer who has something to prove.

[thetexan]

A run (10/28) on your license plate does not reveal you are a CHL holder.

Are you certain about that?

I shouldn't have implied the 'something to prove' with such a broad brush. I am irritated at chls who carry and push the envelope just because they can in order to make a point that many times doesn't need to be made. That non-cooperative, in-you-face personality bugs me, and I had just gotten through having a discussion with one of those types. To everyone who isn't that way I appologize. To those who are that way, (and by that I mean those who deliberately look for opportunities to shove their 2nd amendment in the face of authority), if the shoe fits.

Having said all that I agree that, in general, you don't need to do anything but follow the law. Nothing else is required. Although, I am interested to hear more about running license plates and IDs and whether chl info is revealed during that process and how we know that.

tex

[SirTexasSir]

A run (10/28) on your license plate does not reveal you are a CHL holder.

Are you certain about that?

I shouldn't have implied the 'something to prove' with such a broad brush. I am irritated at chls who carry and push the envelope just because they can in order to make a point that many times doesn't need to be made. That non-cooperative, in-you-face personality bugs me, and I had just gotten through having a discussion with one of those types. To everyone who isn't that way I apologize. To those who are that way, (and by that I mean those who deliberately look for opportunities to shove their 2nd amendment in the face of authority), if the shoe fits.

Having said all that I agree that, in general, you don't need to do anything but follow the law. Nothing else is required. Although, I am interested to hear more about running license plates and IDs and whether chl info is revealed during that process and how we know that.

tex

I know the exact type your speaking of. Was just yesterday having a debate with a guy about the amendment attached for the open carry bill about LEO being able to stop and ask for you permit. He basically said he shouldn't have his rights violated just to make some one else feel more safer. As I put it to him I have no issue proven I have a permit if it makes the anti-gun folks happy and leave us alone. It takes you two seconds to show your ID and be on your way. When you watch those videos they tend to spend over 30-45 mins if not more wasting time to prove there point. What I see when they speak is it's all about ME ME ME ME ME ME ME and they don't think about any one else around them. Which is why I at this point refuse to back constitutional carry and the fact that it doesn't top felons from abusing the laws since LEO's can't ask them for there ID without reason.

[The Wall]

A run (10/28) on your license plate does not reveal you are a CHL holder.

Are you certain about that?

I shouldn't have implied the 'something to prove' with such a broad brush. I am irritated at chls who carry and push the envelope just because they can in order to make a point that many times doesn't need to be made. That non-cooperative, in-you-face personality bugs me, and I had just gotten through having a discussion with one of those types. To everyone who isn't that way I appologize. To those who are that way, (and by that I mean those who deliberately look for opportunities to shove their 2nd amendment in the face of authority), if the shoe fits.

Having said all that I agree that, in general, you don't need to do anything but follow the law. Nothing else is required. Although, I am interested to hear more about running license plates and IDs and whether chl info is revealed during that process and how we know that.

tex

I can tell you and my wife can also tell you it does show up when they run your license. She got stopped for a headlight being out and didn't tell them she had a CHL. He came back to the car and asked her about it. She wasn't carrying at the time but I was sitting in the passenger seat. He didn't say a thing to me and I didn't say a thing to him. She just got a verbal warning to get it fixed.