TexasCHLforum.com

Fingerman wrote:The intent of the bill is requiring those who have established domicile in Texas to obtain a Texas license if they choose to carry. If a student, worker or anyone else who is living in Texas temporarily for work or school they are not establishing residency here. As long as they continue to have a residence in their original state there is no problem.

I believe both the intent and the proof are the questionable issues are here. I understand Charles's clarification for us laypersons of "residence" and "domicile," but I'm not quite certain how they would be applied legally.

If I live in Florida and travel to Texas for a 90-day, contracted work assignment, it's pretty cut-and-dry. I have a contract to show it was temporary.

But what if I take a job with a Texas company and sign a three-year contract? If I'm wealthy enough, can I can keep my residential property in Florida and continue to claim it, as defined by the Texas Transportation Code §522.003(10) (as referenced in SB 481), to be "the person's true, fixed, and permanent home and principal residence and to which the person intends to return whenever absent"? Even if I'm absent for almost all of three years?

Under your definition, that's perfectly fine; I can keep on keepin' on.

But if I'm a working man and have to move my family and belongings to Texas and give up my home in Florida in order to take that three-year contract, I should no longer be able to carry under my Florida license?

And as Charles noted, the same logic applies not only to contract workers or to workers on specific assignment from their companies, but to students and our military as well.

"Temporary," in terms of residence, is defined nowhere that I can find in find in either the Texas Penal Code, Transportation Code, or Government Code. If your feet have touched nothing but Texas soil for 30 contiguous days, are you no longer "temporary"? After 90 days? Three years? Only if you aren't wealthy enough to claim, or have family in, another domicile and can receive mail there?

Even the DPS Driver License division doesn't define what "moving to Texas" means.

Trying to propose a bill like SB 481 without a solid definition of what it means to carry in Texas with an out-of-state license is, frankly, ludicrous. My bet is that this bill was researched, reviewed, and vetted by pre-law volunteers for about two hours, with very little or no external input.

Fingerman wrote:As previously stated I'm not a fan of needing a CHL to carry but I am a fan of my neighbor having to follow the same rules I do. Too follow the rules he must know the rules and the best way for him to know them in the instance is carrying the same license I do.

With that said, those who claim you can just turn in your out of state drivers license for a Texas license, you must still pass a test to show basic Texas motorist rules. Why should we not require the same for a CHL?

The second first: That is incorrect. DPS says: "Individuals who hold a valid, unexpired driver license from another U.S. state or U.S. territory, or from Canada, France, South Korea or Germany (the countries Texas has license reciprocity agreements with), do not have to take the knowledge or driving tests."

Something I didn't know until I looked it up, frankly. If you're licensed in South Korea, come on down and experience the Texas freeways and tollways. Trade your South Korean driver license for a Texas license.

One Indian business visitor I entertained in Houston a couple of years back had only one overwhelming observation: "There is so much concrete!" Traffic congestion he was used to; traffic congestion on a science-fiction scale, he was not.

To the first point: "Too follow the rules he must know the rules and the best way for him to know them in the instance is carrying the same license I do."

I agree with you in principle, but not in application.

Someone way up-topic said that reciprocity was not the issue.

I disagree. It isn't the only issue here, but it's a big one and should be brought forward.

Most Texas reciprocity agreements with other states contain language similar to the following: "The State of Texas shall give full faith and credit to a valid Concealed Handgun Permit issued by the State of _____ ..."

There are no "domicile" definitions, no residency restrictions, no use of the term "temporary"...no locational or temporal restrictions whatsoever. You either have a valid license or you don't.

Go explore the actual documents of our state's reciprocity agreements here: http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/RSD/CHL/legal/reciprocity/. Pick a state, then view the formal reciprocity agreement in PDF format.

If something like SB 481 passes, all the good work for reciprocity achieved by the Governor and his Attorneys General will be undone. Almost every single reciprocity agreement will have to be rewritten, reissued and then, hopefully, the reduced commitment accepted by the governor of the reciprocal state.


I'll end this by saying, for this particular discussion, it would be informative for the readers to know who among the commentators make some/most of their income from teaching Texas CHL courses.

I do not.

JP171 wrote:I know a lot of people disagree with this law as it is really an infringement, however I believe it is proper in its intent.

I am among those who disagree.

The substantial flaw in your argument is that EMTs, A/C contractors, and Electricians are licensed at the pleasure of a particular state; their specific activities are not protected by the Constitution of the United States of America.

But you knew that was coming, so let's get beyond it and go pragmatic.

If SB 481 passes, let's consider a scenario. You live and work in Florida, but are transferred to an office in Dallas. You buy a new home in Dallas. As of that purchase the new home becomes your established domicile in Texas (and I hate that the bill points to the Transportation Code for definition of that term). Moving into a new home in a new state and starting a new job involves scores of details and complications and hassles and headaches.

Do you want this upstanding Florida concealed handgun licensee to lose all his rights as soon as he moves to Texas? With everything else he has to deal with to have to schedule and take a Texas CHL class, apply online, go to a whatever-they're-called-now fingerprint location, and wait 60 days before he can legally carry again?

Frankly, not very business friendly, and Texas is one of the most business-friendly states in the country. We need to keep it that way.

How would you feel if the scenario were reversed and you faced the same penalty if you had to move to another state? To be stripped of your concealed carry license until you could obtain one from your new state?

Texas--in particular Gov. Perry--has worked with other states to engender concealed-carry reciprocity. This is a give-and-take proposition. Legislative changes can significantly endanger the reciprocity work already done.

I've had a Texas CHL for many years, and I also have a Utah license that staggers my renewal date for my TXCHL...just in case.