Search found 2 matches

Return to “Question I should have asked in class”

by powerboatr
Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:59 pm
Forum: New to CHL?
Topic: Question I should have asked in class
Replies: 44
Views: 7936

Re: Question I should have asked in class

Bart wrote: and if you're arrested and found not guilty......you still were ARRESTED and JAILED and paid ton of $$ to defend your case.....so who won?
the man does.
you can be arrested for not committing a crime because the leo feels he/she is in their rights based on the situation.....
then you spend a few days in the clink, waiting to be arraigned then get bail then if the judge decides you still may have to go back to court to get it dismissed
but you get dismissed and you still paid out tons of money for being innocent/not guilty/dismissed
oh yes sue the leo for false arrest.....got more money to throw away???? this isn't tv so unless you make a million, you loose
so in the end you get bent over. so its best to avoid situations that may lead you to jail......?? :evil2:

distractions... i saw a person reading a kindle in traffic......and they were driving??????
by powerboatr
Wed Dec 15, 2010 2:57 pm
Forum: New to CHL?
Topic: Question I should have asked in class
Replies: 44
Views: 7936

Re: Question I should have asked in class

0.08 is not rebuttable evidence that you are intoxicated. It is the legal definition of intoxicated. So if you are (0.08), you are (intoxicated).

I've posted this before, but I'll say it again. The legal definition of intoxicated is the same under the CHL law (46.035) as it is under the DWI law. So I'd recommend not driving your car if you've had "too many" to carry (under your CHL). The standard for conviction is the same for both. It is not as some contend... 0.01 or "what the cop thinks", it's the standard set out in PC 49.01. It is up to the prosecution to prove you are intoxicated under this standard, not up to you to prove you weren't.

That said, you should never carry under your CHL while intoxicated becasue it is against the law. :rules: However, I'm always surprised by the overwhelming majority of self-described teetotalers that break out whenever CHL and a drink comes up. You'd think this was the Women's Christian Temperance League (WCTL?) Forum.... :roll:

It is legal to carry (under CHL) if you are not intoxicated and it is legal to drive if you are not intoxicated. In fact, it's technically legal (though not a good idea) to carry in your home even if you are intoxicated.
and if your arrested and found to be not guilty......you still were ARRESTED and JAILED and paid ton of $$ to defend your case.....so who lost?
I drink,
I dont drive if i have even ONE
I dont carry if i may be drinking
my lifestyle choices pretty much don't let me frequent places that i would routinely need a firearm if i was drinking.

dui/dwi fines and jail time are not SEVERE enough, if they had teeth , we wouldn't be having this discussion
if you get popped for dui. you go to jail for 20 years in bolivia,
after we cut off your arms, and sell your possessions, and ruin your life, like the poor sob that got hit by you while you were intoxicated doing 100 through town and stop signs and now is dead or paralyzed.

having a chl is a privilege, and we must protect that privilege. So we as chl holders shall live above reproach.
imagine the headlines
chl holder drunk and hits a bus of kids unloading at a bus stop........

Return to “Question I should have asked in class”