CHL holder accidently discharges weapon at work question

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

Bottom line as I have stated over and over again. He broke the laws that are relevant to carrying a concealed handgun in the state of Texas and needs to be held accountable.

Like I said, when you screw up, and possibly even run afoul of the law may someone be kinder and more merciful to you than you are willing to show here.

Thank you for your concern for my but I can assure you I am not as dumb as the subject in the OP and will not do something like this as I actually feel that it is important to follow the law.

[mamabearCali]

With all due respect, you are completely misunderstanding this issue from the standpoint of Texas law.

On this board, when you see someone say "concealed is concealed," that means nothing more or less than if you keep your gun concealed (and your mouth shut), nobody will know about your gun—regardless of the circumstances in question. We do not have a law against printing in Texas. Literally. There is no law against printing. What we DO have is a law against INTENTIONAL failure to conceal. When you open carry, that is "intentional failure to conceal." When you draw your weapon to show it off to friends, that is "intentional failure to conceal." When you draw your weapon in self defense, that is a defense to prosecution for intentionally failing to conceal your weapon. When you're showing off to your friends, you don't have that defense to prosecution.

When you are "printing," there is no way in most cases that the observer can know what the object is that is printing under that shirt. It has to rise to the level of being readily discernible (like, able to read the logo on the slide through the fabric) as a firearm. So if you wore your full sized 5" 1911 underneath a skin-tight UnderArmor shirt, such that the casual observer could tell if it was a Springfield and not a Kimber, that would probably rise to the level of intentional failure to conceal.

However, if the wind blows your shirt up, momentarily exposing your firearm for anyone to see, and you immediately make attempts to cover it up, that is NOT intentional failure to conceal.

So, in the case of the person who negligently fired the pistol, the pistol's owner was definitely guilty of intentional failure to conceal, as the events did not occur in the privacy of his own home.

Believe me, most of us are not worried about printing. In fact, concerns about printing are commonly raised by n00bs who are brand new to carrying, and the most common advice they get is, "strap it on, cover it up, and forget about it." Most respondents will tell the concerned individual there is no way for a casual observer to know whether the object under the shirt is a pistol, an insulin pump, a cellphone, or a colostomy bag. So, you have VERY much misread the tone of this board in that regard.

I am glad you are not so worried about it. I do however think that a class A misdemeanor and loss of a CHL because you show your friend your gun is pretty insane. I have checked and it is not even a crime in my state at all as long as you are not pointing it at anyone or threatening anyone with it. Yall have a great castle doctrine but some of your gun laws leave much to be desired. And with that I am done with this thread. Have a nice day yall.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

I am glad you are not so worried about it. I do however think that a class A misdemeanor and loss of a CHL because you show your friend your gun is pretty insane. I have checked and it is not even a crime in my state at all as long as you are not pointing it at anyone or threatening anyone with it.

You are certainly entitled to that opinion but your opinion does not negate the law and as the law stands it is a Class A misdemeanor for failure to conceal and a Class A or B misdemeanor conviction is grounds for CHL denial/revocation.

You can keep arguing how wrong it is or how much you don't like it but it is still the law and in being a law needs to be followed. If you break it you should have to deal with the consequences. Going to your traffic comparison of earlier if one speeds, doesn't wear seatbelt, or similar they are subject to a ticket and need to deal with the consequences. Difference is a Class C misdemeanor conviction is not grounds for a DL revocation nor a denial/revocation of CHL.

[chuckybrown]

Keith B, TAM, and Don't Tread on Me, may I ask a hypothetical question?

I ask that you answer this, and not respond with "you can't compare it this way". mamabearCali posted in the Never Again section about a belly band fail. viewtopic.php?f=26&t=46587" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Everyone was full of love, and suggestions, and kindness. Not one word that this was NEGLIGENT dropping of the weapon, vs. an accidental dropping of the weapon. Nor it becoming un-concealed (assuming it's a typical stall with 18" of open floor to stall space) and the need to call the cops and report and prosecute. What's different with that one vs this one if the law is the law?

Now, suppose, just SUPPOSE the gun went BANG. Would you have called for her prosecution?

My point in all this is, we're eating our own here. Granted, what happened was ENTIRELY bone-headed. But, this wasn't a crack addict waving a chrome Saturday night special around. Why is everyone so eager to run to the police and report this guy? What happened to "Crap, John just made a grave mistake. Thank GOD everyone is ok. Let's hope he/we learn from this, and we move on".

I get that what happened was technically a crime, but really.....we want add this one to the overcrowded dockets in the name of self-righteousness? REALLY?

Like someone else said, I sure don't want someone thinking this way on my jury. What happened to common sense?

Peace.

[johnson0317]

I would say that we are still full of love and kindness for mamabearcali. I think what is happening is that members are exercising their rights to agree with someone in one thread while not in another. It is not an attack on anyone. mamabearcali thinks that Texas law is too overboard, the others think it is not.

You can not compare her dropping her gun in a stall to this. It is really apples to oranges. She did not drop it on purpose, and it did not discharge. If it had, then yes, she would be facing charges...but it did not happen. We were all happy that she had a positive learning experience.

I can tell you, from personal experience, that I get along with pretty much everyone here; however, I have been called out more than once for something I wrote. I either see their point, or I don't. I certainly don't hold it against them for having a different point of view.

(and I am the first to get onto members for eating their own, just did it with the guy who tried to avoid property taxes.)

RJ

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

Keith B, TAM, and Don't Tread on Me, may I ask a hypothetical question?

I ask that you answer this, and not respond with "you can't compare it this way". mamabearCali posted in the Never Again section about a belly band fail. viewtopic.php?f=26&t=46587" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Everyone was full of love, and suggestions, and kindness. Not one word that this was NEGLIGENT dropping of the weapon, vs. an accidental dropping of the weapon. Nor it becoming un-concealed (assuming it's a typical stall with 18" of open floor to stall space) and the need to call the cops and report and prosecute. What's different with that one vs this one if the law is the law?

Now, suppose, just SUPPOSE the gun went BANG. Would you have called for her prosecution?

My point in all this is, we're eating our own here. Granted, what happened was ENTIRELY bone-headed. But, this wasn't a crack addict waving a chrome Saturday night special around. Why is everyone so eager to run to the police and report this guy? What happened to "Crap, John just made a grave mistake. Thank GOD everyone is ok. Let's hope he/we learn from this, and we move on".

I get that what happened was technically a crime, but really.....we want add this one to the overcrowded dockets in the name of self-righteousness? REALLY?

Like someone else said, I sure don't want someone thinking this way on my jury. What happened to common sense?

Peace.

1) Her incident would not have broken TX law as it was NOT INTENTIONAL failure to conceal.

2) If the gun went bang it would not have been an issue as she would have NOT INTENTIONALLY pulled the trigger.

3) What happened in the OP was not technically a crime. It was a crime. Period.

4) You are right, what happened to common sense? You know the common sense of not playing with guns? the common sense of following the law and being expected to follow the law?

5) You all are trying to make comparisons where they do not exist. You cannot compare two completely different incidents or scenarios.

[johnson0317]

Whether or not she was facing charges would depend on where the bullet ended up. I bet some nice LEO would try to find some law she had broken, no matter what.

RJ

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

I would say that we are still full of love and kindness for mamabearcali. I think what is happening is that members are exercising their rights to agree with someone in one thread while not in another. It is not an attack on anyone. mamabearcali thinks that Texas law is too overboard, the others think it is not.

You can not compare her dropping her gun in a stall to this. It is really apples to oranges. She did not drop it on purpose, and it did not discharge. If it had, then yes, she would be facing charges...but it did not happen. We were all happy that she had a positive learning experience.

I can tell you, from personal experience, that I get along with pretty much everyone here; however, I have been called out more than once for something I wrote. I either see their point, or I don't. I certainly don't hold it against them for having a different point of view.

(and I am the first to get onto members for eating their own, just did it with the guy who tried to avoid property taxes.)

RJ

Calling you out

Had mambearcali's gun gone off due to her dropping it in the thread that was quoted she would not face charges. TPC 42.01 states that one must intentionally or knowingly discharge the weapon.

[johnson0317]

What if it hit someone in the leg? or worse? Isn't that why we have a charge of unintentional manslaughter?

[chuckybrown]

I would say that we are still full of love and kindness for mamabearcali. I think what is happening is that members are exercising their rights to agree with someone in one thread while not in another. It is not an attack on anyone. mamabearcali thinks that Texas law is too overboard, the others think it is not.

You can not compare her dropping her gun in a stall to this. It is really apples to oranges. She did not drop it on purpose, and it did not discharge. If it had, then yes, she would be facing charges...but it did not happen. We were all happy that she had a positive learning experience.

I can tell you, from personal experience, that I get along with pretty much everyone here; however, I have been called out more than once for something I wrote. I either see their point, or I don't. I certainly don't hold it against them for having a different point of view.

(and I am the first to get onto members for eating their own, just did it with the guy who tried to avoid property taxes.)

RJ

Don't Tread On Me: Wow, you win. Thanks for "calling me out". But wait, doesn't what you state actually come into consideration here?

Johnson, thank you for responding.

Remember, many on here responded HEARTILY with the ND vs. OD argument, and then moved on to the legality of it all.

Guys, my point is this....and I'm not responding to this anymore: Common sense has been thrown out the window in this world. In this scenario, we've got a good guy that qualified for a CHL. A terrible mistake was made, but fortunately no one was hurt. But we've got people here that want to take a man/father/husband and turn his life completely upside down (job loss, financial risk, etc) and report and prosecute him because of (no matter how much you disagree...with all your valor and training) an accident.

This is egregiously wrong.

This debate will never be resolved. Let me just say I would not report the guy, and if on the grand jury, I would not indict him. If on the jury, I'd be in his corner.

Peace.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

Whether or not she was facing charges would depend on where the bullet ended up. I bet some nice LEO would try to find some law she had broken, no matter what.

RJ

What if it hit someone in the leg? or worse? Isn't that why we have a charge of unintentional manslaughter?

Nowhere in 42.01 does it state unless an AD/ND ends up....

If it was not intentional or knowingly it is not a crime. Had her gun gone off due to it falling out as she described there is no way that could be proven as intentionally or knowingly making that firearm discharge.

As for the LEO trying to find some law she had broken, I highly doubt it as the majority of LEO are decent individuals. You cannot charge someone for something that does not exist.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

Don't Tread On Me: Wow, you win. Thanks for "calling me out". But wait, doesn't what you state actually come into consideration here?

Johnson, thank you for responding.

Remember, many on here responded HEARTILY with the ND vs. OD argument, and then moved on to the legality of it all.

Guys, my point is this....and I'm not responding to this anymore: Common sense has been thrown out the window in this world. In this scenario, we've got a good guy that qualified for a CHL. A terrible mistake was made, but fortunately no one was hurt. But we've got people here that want to take a man/father/husband and turn his life completely upside down (job loss, financial risk, etc) and report and prosecute him because of (no matter how much you disagree...with all you valor and training) an accident.

This is egregiously wrong.


This debate will never be resolved. Let me just say I would not report the guy, and if on the grand jury, I would not indict him.

Peace.

What are you talking about specifically?

It was NOT an accident. He INTENTIONALLY pulled the gun out from his backpack to show his friend. What you are trying to do is make exceptions for someone who purposely broke the law.

This is egregiously wrong.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

For all those that feel I am in the wrong and am showing no mercy please show me where in the Penal Code it says that it is a defense to prosecution if a license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun while showing it to a friend, coworker, cleaning it, or anything else other than self-defense.

If I see this defense to prosecution I will gladly admit my being wrong in this matter and give up on my side of the argument.

You are all claiming that this was an "accident". How can have the facts and still claim this? He was carrying under the authority of his CHL and intentionally pulled the gun from his backpack to show a coworker. He failed to clear it and intentionally pulled the trigger (I agree that the discharge of the firearm was an accident due to negligence but as I stated earlier in the thread I see a LEO or DA having no problem with this as he intentionally pulled the trigger).

So, please show me in the law where he was in the right or has a defense to prosecution.

[paulhailes]

For all those that feel I am in the wrong and am showing no mercy please show me where in the Penal Code it says that it is a defense to prosecution if a license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,
and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun but was showing it to a friend, coworker, cleaning it, or anything else other than self-defense.

If I see this defense to prosecution I will gladly admit my being wrong in this matter and give up on my side of the argument.

You are all claiming that this was an "accident". How can have the facts and still claim this? He was carrying under the authority of his CHL and intentionally pulled the gun from his backpack to show a coworker. He failed to clear it and intentionally pulled the trigger (I agree that the discharge of the firearm was an accident due to negligence but as I stated earlier in the thread I see a LEO or DA having no problem with this as he intentionally pulled the trigger).

So, please show me in the law where he was in the right or has a defense to prosecution.

I can't find it, I agree with you, if you want to show your buddy your new gun take him to the range. I think this guy is lucky he didn't end up in serious trouble.

[MasterOfNone]

I can't find it, I agree with you, if you want to show your buddy your new gun take him to the range. I think this guy is lucky he didn't end up in serious trouble.

Just to play a little 's advocate, where in the law does it allow for a person to fail to conceal his handgun at a range for the purpose of showing it to a friend or selling it?