TexasCHLforum.com

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

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

double post

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..

What is quoted above IS NOT actually a breach of the 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.

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.

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.

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 wrong

oldboyshooter wrote:My CHL instructor told us that if the weapon even patterned through a coat you were in violation.

Only if you intentionally failed to conceal the gun.

I guess the rules have changed, or he was incorrect.

The latter. Did he also say that you could be arrested for having a sip of alcohol?

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.

Your instructor missed his calling. He would achieve much more personal fulfillment as a philosopher.

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.

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

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.

you do a daily search on the words "alcohol," and "sip," don'tcha?

agreed with above sentiment.

boredelmo wrote: The thing about whether or not it is "breeching of the law" is that its up to the cop.

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.

Those matters are the perview of "juries".

boredelmo wrote: Depends on where you are (city) and what youre doing.

Nope. The law is what it is no matter where you are.

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.

Yes, a cop can arrest you if he believes that the legal requirements for an arrest have been met.

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)

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.

frankie_the_yankee wrote:And I am not aware of people getting convicted of failure to conceal merely because they were printing.

Try this.

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:

frankie_the_yankee wrote:And I am not aware of people getting convicted of failure to conceal merely because they were printing.

Try this.

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.