I think this is where the rub lies. It has been argued that a license that entitles you to do something doesn't override something you can do without a license. So, in essence, when carrying in your car, the MPA would apply because it is available to all, even those without a license, and then the CHL kicks in when you step beyond that legality. A good example is open carrying around your home. If the CHL was overriding on that, then you would be guilty of intentional exposure.G.A. Heath wrote: The way I read TPC 46.15(b)(6) is that Section 46.02 does not apply to a person who is carrying a concealed handgun and a valid license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, to carry a concealed handgun of the same category as the handgun the person is carrying. Meaning that the authority to carry the handgun in your vehicle as defined in 46.02(a)(2) as long as you don't meet any of the disqualifications in 46.02(a-1) does not apply seeing how you have your license and weapon on or about your person.
Placing the firearm in your trunk to avoid "carrying" the firearm in order to gain the protection of 46.02(a) may or may not get you arrested if caught but would need case law, or a revision to the penal code, to determine if it is a valid method. Unfortunately I am no longer dating a paralegal so I can not ask her to find things like this out for me regarding case law.
Now, until there is actual case law, we may not know exactly how a judge would rule, but if I get in trouble over it, this will be my defense argument.
EDIT TO ADD: Scott kinda beat me to it with the exception of my example of open carrying at home.
