I have a concealment question
Moderator: carlson1
-
Topic author - Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 155
- Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 8:33 pm
- Location: North Dallas
I have a concealment question
I could not find it in the database, but forgive me if it is.
I realize if I fail to conceal my firearm it is a breach of law..
How ever is failure to conceal your double mag pouch also a breach of the law. I am asking because I carry my firearm right side IWB, but my mag pouch is on the belt left and durring certain movements protrudes below my vest and can be seen.
I am consious of the issue and reduce it but 100% of the time is real hard to ensure.
Thanks in advance
I realize if I fail to conceal my firearm it is a breach of law..
How ever is failure to conceal your double mag pouch also a breach of the law. I am asking because I carry my firearm right side IWB, but my mag pouch is on the belt left and durring certain movements protrudes below my vest and can be seen.
I am consious of the issue and reduce it but 100% of the time is real hard to ensure.
Thanks in advance
Big round, Little round, Having one is what counts!!!
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 13551
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:04 pm
- Location: Galveston
There is no obligation to conceal magazines or speedloaders in Texas. You can hang them from your ears.
If you travel, though, be sure to look up the laws of the states that you are visiting. Some states have severe restrictions on ammunition.
Showing a magazine or speedloader may draw unwanted attention, but you know that.
- Jim
If you travel, though, be sure to look up the laws of the states that you are visiting. Some states have severe restrictions on ammunition.
Showing a magazine or speedloader may draw unwanted attention, but you know that.
- Jim
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 5110
- Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 12:00 pm
- Location: North Texas
Re: I have a concealment question
double post
Last edited by AEA on Sun Oct 28, 2007 4:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Alan - ANYTHING I write is MY OPINION only.
Certified Curmudgeon - But, my German Shepherd loves me!
NRA-Life, USN '65-'69 & '73-'79: RM1
1911's RULE!
Certified Curmudgeon - But, my German Shepherd loves me!
NRA-Life, USN '65-'69 & '73-'79: RM1
1911's RULE!
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 5110
- Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 12:00 pm
- Location: North Texas
Re: I have a concealment question
What is quoted above IS NOT actually a breach of the law.........Supercat wrote:I could not find it in the database, but forgive me if it is.
I realize if I fail to conceal my firearm it is a breach of law..
If you INTENTIONALLY fail to conceal, you are in violation.
Examples:
Wind blows open your coat while walking.......not a breach of the law
You are in an accident and you are unconscious on the side of the road, your weapon is visible because your cover garment is open.......not a breach of the law.
You go into a restaurant and you remove your cover garment and hang it up, you sit down in the booth with your weapon visible....... you ARE in violation of the law.
Alan - ANYTHING I write is MY OPINION only.
Certified Curmudgeon - But, my German Shepherd loves me!
NRA-Life, USN '65-'69 & '73-'79: RM1
1911's RULE!
Certified Curmudgeon - But, my German Shepherd loves me!
NRA-Life, USN '65-'69 & '73-'79: RM1
1911's RULE!
-
- Junior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 6:14 pm
That would depend I think on the definition of "patterened". To what extent was the printing, just a bulge under the garment or could one plainly make out a barrel and handle? Answers to those type questions would tell if he was right or wrongoldboyshooter wrote:My CHL instructor told us that if the weapon even patterned through a coat you were in violation.
I guess the rules have changed, or he was incorrect.
Only if you intentionally failed to conceal the gun.oldboyshooter wrote:My CHL instructor told us that if the weapon even patterned through a coat you were in violation.
The latter. Did he also say that you could be arrested for having a sip of alcohol?I guess the rules have changed, or he was incorrect.
-
- Banned
- Posts in topic: 4
- Posts: 2173
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:24 pm
- Location: Smithville, TX
Your instructor missed his calling. He would achieve much more personal fulfillment as a philosopher.oldboyshooter wrote:My CHL instructor told us that if the weapon even patterned through a coat you were in violation.
I guess the rules have changed, or he was incorrect.
Communicating correct information and facts to a group of people is no where near as exciting as giving them (actually charging them for) the opportunity to bask in whatever happens to pour out of his mouth on a given day.
It's no wonder he seems to favor the latter.
Ahm jus' a Southern boy trapped in a Yankee's body
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 582
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:03 pm
- Location: Fort Worth
I just took the class yesterday, my instructor, off duty PD, emphasized that it has to be intentional failure to conceal. He even specified, going to wally world and reaching up to get something and the OWB holster and barrel now show below the now raised cover garment as NOT a violation. As I understood the examples he gave, you pretty much have to be flashing you gun on purpose to be in violation
"Water's, wet, The sky is blue. And old Satan Claws, He's out there, and he's just getting stronger." Joe Halenbeck
"So what do we do about it?" Jimmie Dix
"Be prepared, Junior, That's my motto, Be Prepared". Joe Halenbeck
"So what do we do about it?" Jimmie Dix
"Be prepared, Junior, That's my motto, Be Prepared". Joe Halenbeck
The thing about whether or not it is "breeching of the law" is that its up to the cop.
Depends on where you are (city) and what youre doing.
I can definitely see a situation where someone would get in trouble for unintentionally printing.
Cops can arrest you for pretty much anything and let the court sort it out.
Don't say it isn't true, a fellow was arrested and jailed for not having a front reflector on his bicycle because the cop was having a bad day. I was there when the judge looked at the charges and laughed and let him go.
Depends on where you are (city) and what youre doing.
I can definitely see a situation where someone would get in trouble for unintentionally printing.
Cops can arrest you for pretty much anything and let the court sort it out.
Don't say it isn't true, a fellow was arrested and jailed for not having a front reflector on his bicycle because the cop was having a bad day. I was there when the judge looked at the charges and laughed and let him go.
-
- Banned
- Posts in topic: 4
- Posts: 2173
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:24 pm
- Location: Smithville, TX
Nope. Cops don't make the law and are not the final authority on whether or not any given act is a violation of the law.boredelmo wrote: The thing about whether or not it is "breeching of the law" is that its up to the cop.
Those matters are the perview of "juries".
Nope. The law is what it is no matter where you are.boredelmo wrote: Depends on where you are (city) and what youre doing.
Yes, a cop can arrest you if he believes that the legal requirements for an arrest have been met.boredelmo wrote: I can definitely see a situation where someone would get in trouble for unintentionally printing.
Cops can arrest you for pretty much anything and let the court sort it out.
But as you say yourself, it is then up to the courts to "sort it out", i.e. to determine whether or not you broke the law.
And I am not aware of people getting convicted of failure to conceal merely because they were printing.
Are you ? (specific cases please)
Ahm jus' a Southern boy trapped in a Yankee's body
I don't think we are at any disagreement.
I pointed out that you could get in trouble for things that are lawful through ignorance or faulty judgment by an officer that could result in your arrest.
I also pointed out that ultimately the court would sort it out, per the bike reflector case.
A charge such as brandishing would def be something of a concern and as such one would generally hire a good lawyer to make sure the law is upheld correctly.
My post was just to point out that such a hassle and monetary loss isn't something you want to risk.
Trust me, right now after $15,000 bail and another $15,000 in lawyers fees I'm in a horrible financial bind trying to finish college and stay out of prison (possible 20 years) because of the arresting officer.
I have a clear cut case of self defense including video evidence, but the police officer decided it would be safer to arrest me anyways. My case doesn't even involve firearms, just a simple crkt folder.
Remember, There is no Justice System, there's Just a System.
I pointed out that you could get in trouble for things that are lawful through ignorance or faulty judgment by an officer that could result in your arrest.
I also pointed out that ultimately the court would sort it out, per the bike reflector case.
A charge such as brandishing would def be something of a concern and as such one would generally hire a good lawyer to make sure the law is upheld correctly.
My post was just to point out that such a hassle and monetary loss isn't something you want to risk.
Trust me, right now after $15,000 bail and another $15,000 in lawyers fees I'm in a horrible financial bind trying to finish college and stay out of prison (possible 20 years) because of the arresting officer.
I have a clear cut case of self defense including video evidence, but the police officer decided it would be safer to arrest me anyways. My case doesn't even involve firearms, just a simple crkt folder.
Remember, There is no Justice System, there's Just a System.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 13551
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:04 pm
- Location: Galveston
Try this.frankie_the_yankee wrote:And I am not aware of people getting convicted of failure to conceal merely because they were printing.
The guy wasn't convicted of anything, but he was arrested and charged, and had to hire a lawyer to get him out of trouble.
Of course, aside from being shot by the police, that's about as bad as it gets, and it was a long time ago.
- Jim
seamusTX wrote:Try this.frankie_the_yankee wrote:And I am not aware of people getting convicted of failure to conceal merely because they were printing.
The guy wasn't convicted of anything, but he was arrested and charged, and had to hire a lawyer to get him out of trouble.
Of course, aside from being shot by the police, that's about as bad as it gets, and it was a long time ago.
- Jim
That was eight years ago.