TexasCHLforum.com

Although I drink very little alcohol, I was curious as to what the law was about a CHL holder having an alcoholic beverage while carrying. I got to thinking about while reading the New Mexico CHL Laws.

John Galt wrote:Although I drink very little alcohol, I was curious as to what the law was about a CHL holder having an alcoholic beverage while carrying. I got to thinking about while reading the New Mexico CHL Laws.

You're not allowed to be INTOXICATED while carrying under CHL (PC 46.035). Intoxicated has exactly the same meaning for carrying as it does for DWI. - A blood alcohol concentration of 0.08 or greater OR "not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties by reason of the
introduction of alcohol, a controlled substance, a drug, a dangerous drug, a combination of two or more of those substances, or any other substance into
the body".

While many would argue that any alcohol denies normal use of mental or physical faculties, that is belied by the fact that large numbers of people are not prosecuted for DWI despite having BAC >0.

My advice is that if you wouldn't drive, then don't carry. Legally the standard is exactly the same.

As always if you want to be 100% safe don't drink and carry (or drive for that matter). However I doubt having a glass of wine (or a beer) with dinner is going to cause any problems. You would have had to do something else to even get the officer to check you in the first place.

John Galt wrote:Although I drink very little alcohol, I was curious as to what the law was about a CHL holder having an alcoholic beverage while carrying. I got to thinking about while reading the New Mexico CHL Laws.

What do the New Mexico CHL Laws say?

ScottDLS is exactly correct.

What I tell my students is that they should keep in mind that if they end up having to use their handgun after consuming alcohol, that the prosecutor may (probably will) end up using that as a piece of the evidence in your grand jury/trial. The law doesn't make it illegal to have a drink and carry. But it's your duty to be informed of the consequences of your actions.

Yeah, the definition for intoxication comes from 49.01, Offences against public safety, health and morals.

I teach all of my students that the phrase "not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties" is a very broad requirement. I say that the only time you DO have normal use of mental or physical faculties and can PROVE it, is when you have not taken any drop of alcohol. Once the first drop of alcohol is consumed the prosecutor has the beginning of a charge. And since "normal" while subjective, is clear in its definition. Just as we begin dying the moment we are born, we begin losing normal functionality to some degree the moment we consume any amount of alcohol or drug, no matter how small. The prosecutor understands that logic and will use it to his advantage.

tex

thetexan wrote:Yeah, the definition for intoxication comes from 49.01, Offences against public safety, health and morals.

I teach all of my students that the phrase "not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties" is a very broad requirement. I say that the only time you DO have normal use of mental or physical faculties and can PROVE it, is when you have not taken any drop of alcohol. Once the first drop of alcohol is consumed the prosecutor has the beginning of a charge. And since "normal" while subjective, is clear in its definition. Just as we begin dying the moment we are born, we begin losing normal functionality to some degree the moment we consume any amount of alcohol or drug, no matter how small. The prosecutor understands that logic and will use it to his advantage.

tex

What Texans says. My teacher stated it only takes 1 beer to destroy your life and he is right. I follow this rule when I drive and carry.

WildBill wrote:

John Galt wrote:Although I drink very little alcohol, I was curious as to what the law was about a CHL holder having an alcoholic beverage while carrying. I got to thinking about while reading the New Mexico CHL Laws.

What do the New Mexico CHL Laws say?

Pursuant to NMSA 1978 Section 30-7-4 no person shall carry concealed handgun while impaired by the use of alcohol.

John Galt wrote:

WildBill wrote:

John Galt wrote:Although I drink very little alcohol, I was curious as to what the law was about a CHL holder having an alcoholic beverage while carrying. I got to thinking about while reading the New Mexico CHL Laws.

What do the New Mexico CHL Laws say?

Pursuant to NMSA 1978 Section 30-7-4 no person shall carry concealed handgun while impaired by the use of alcohol.

Thank you sir!

In my previous career managing technicians I can't tell you how many conversations I had with employees which started off with the employee saying "I just went out to have one drink..."
I don't drink alcohol at all, but if I did I wouldn't drive or carry while doing so.

When I'm armed, there is 0 alcohol. I mean Z-E-R-O.

If we were talking motorcycles, it would be "8 hours from bottle to throttle".

I treat it just like driving while consuming alcoholic beverages. If I wouldn't feel comfortable driving, even if legally allowed, I don't carry. I know I'm fine to drive after a beer or two with dinner, and I also know one margarita can be enough for me to feel it. If I start with a beer and want something more, I'll walk it out to the car. I've done many times, a drink or two friends can easily become more so I just excuse myself and lock it in the glove box. This is very subjective and up to the individual to determine what they feel comfortable with. Know the law as stated above and make your own decision how to proceed.

Wes, not trying to pick a fight....but....if you lock up your gun in the glove box....do you
then give the car/truck keys to someone else? A drunk driver is a deadly driver. If you "feel it (alcohol)" and you realize you need to NOT be carrying a sidearm..... wouldn't it make sense to not crawl behind the wheel of a car/truck?
I'm not accusing you of driving impaired, but putting up a gun to then resume drinking or immediately get behind the wheel. Let's think about this.

Did I ever say I was then continuing to drive? No I didn't. Using your logic that a person can't have even the means to access the firearm when drinking would mean no one with a firearm in their home could ever drink. Let's think about this.