Return to “No CHL and traffic stop while carrying in vehicle.”
KBCraig wrote:The written standard doesn't need to be changed, it needs to be obeyed.WildBill wrote:There is a set and written standard. It may be vague and you may not like it, but it is a written standard.jlangton wrote:IMO-there should be a set standard for disarming a CHL holder during a traffic stop,and it should be a written standard, not something left up to an officer's "discretion". JL
If you could change the law, how would you write it to make it less vague and arbitrary?
i dont think thats going to happenMcKnife wrote:Solution:Elvis and I obviously disagree on the legal requirement for showing a CHL during an interaction with law enforcement. I would still do it even if the law is changed for the reasons I've stated, but that's beside the point. Elvis wants his officers to know of the gun; I don't want a CHL facing suspension and/or a Class B conviction for forgetting to show a CHL. This difference of opinion doesn't turn natural allies into enemies. It doesn't mean I don't care about his officers' lives, nor does it mean he is showing contempt for CHLs.
LEGALIZE OPEN CARRY!!!!
yeah cuz 21 year olds have a real high electabilityCrossfire wrote:It is what it is. If you are so "discontent", perhaps you should consider running for office and do something about it.lunchbox wrote:that may be however i am still discontent with it
that may be however i am still discontent with itElvis wrote:That is the reality of the legal system.lunchbox wrote:that right there is what is wrong with the legal systemElvis wrote:Sound like it could be a conflict in law if you were lucky enough to find someone at DPS or an asst. DA at your Class B trial to go along with your logic. I am going to continue to teach my students they must display their license when required. Having been involved in a criminal case or two I can hear the argument going something like, “But I was using the exemption under 46.02 as a traveler” “that’s fine, but we are not charging you with a violation of 46.02, we are charging you with failing to display as required” “But I don’t want to be charged with failing to display as required” “Too bad, you should have just shown the Officer your CHL”
that right there is what is wrong with the legal systemElvis wrote:Sound like it could be a conflict in law if you were lucky enough to find someone at DPS or an asst. DA at your Class B trial to go along with your logic. I am going to continue to teach my students they must display their license when required. Having been involved in a criminal case or two I can hear the argument going something like, “But I was using the exemption under 46.02 as a traveler” “that’s fine, but we are not charging you with a violation of 46.02, we are charging you with failing to display as required” “But I don’t want to be charged with failing to display as required” “Too bad, you should have just shown the Officer your CHL”
WildBill wrote:I'll have to defer to the Legal Eagles on this one.Elvis wrote:I understand that you are not required to tell the Officer you have a gun, only required to display the license, that is clear from the language. My issue is that you have a CHL, yet you are going to ignore the requirement to display your license because you choose to carry under the exemption of 46.02? Then why is G.C. 411.205 still on the books and enforceable?
thats my questionElvis wrote:I understand that you are not required to tell the Officer you have a gun, only required to display the license, that is clear from the language. My issue is that you have a CHL, yet you are going to ignore the requirement to display your license because you choose to carry under the exemption of 46.02? Then why is G.C. 411.205 still on the books and enforceable?
i think he is saying that it should fall under that exemption. and i agreeElvis wrote:An on a different note, I think we may have a difference of opinion on the law. You said in one post that a person with a CHL is always carrying underr the authority of the CHL when the pistol is on or about his person. This, IMHO, is clearly not the case if they are in a car, even if the gun is in a hip holster. As I understand it, a CHL only gives authority when the carrying would otherwise be illegal. Since the law was changed and it is no longer a violation of PC 46.02 to carry in a car, the CHL is not giving authority until they step out of the car. This may be a serious legal question if they are driving into a parking lot that is posted for 30.06. That law only applies when carrying under the authority of a CHL.
As proof that you CAN choose which authority you are carrying under, consider the cops who also have CHL's (it gets them through the NICS check for one thing). Which authority to carry are they using?
Now, I have to admit that the the law about showing us your CHL does not specify just when under the authority of your CHL. If that is what you meant (and it was in that context), the law is explicit that it applies if you have a CHL and a pistol on or about your person. It says nothing about authority. If I have a peace officer's license and badge, and a CHL, I would still be bound to show the CHL, even as i tell them i am also a cop.
Then are you saying there is no requirement for a CHL holder to notify the Officer if they are carrying in their vehicle because they now fall under the exception in 46.02?
im always armed so i dont have that optionWildBill wrote:I don't tell them until they ask. They never have.Elvis wrote:WildBill, the Officer will find out you have a CHL anyway so why not tell him upfront and then tell him the status of your gun, or lack of gun?
im pulling for this to be pulled from the booksElvis wrote:boom, I am with you man. The point I was trying to make is you can't carry under authority of the CHL and pick and choose laws that suit your circumstances.boomerang wrote:Maybe they don't have a CHL like it says in the subject line.Elvis wrote:Your statement that in the car you really are not carrying under the provisions or authority of the CHL is not the case. Because you have a CHL you are carrying under the CHL authority anytime the handgun is on or about your person and you are in public.
Elvis wrote:As a citizen you are very much entitled to tell your government how you should be treated. I agree that it isn't FAIR that someone get caught up in a speed trap and as the head of an agency I will not tolerate that behavior from Officers. Please tell me how you would like to be Policed. What laws should be enforced and what laws should be ignored. Officer discretion is an important tool and really the only tool we can use to correct unfair laws and unjust rules. My point is your attitude about the Officers safety is important. If you don't care or think it is fair that you have to show your CHL, that is telling the Officer that you don't care about his safety. Why then should he care about your safety?
