TexasCHLforum.com

. .

On the first reading it does look like a bit of an improvement.

This bill repeals the requirement to show your CHL when asked for ID by a LEO or magistrate.

Chas.

I'd like to see a bill that simply states that 30.06 postings are only allowed on premises not open to the public.

If a business such as a store or mall is open to the public, CHL holders should be as free to enter there as any other citizen. IMHO, this would make a pretty simple bright line law, and is hardly an unreasonable proposition.

Charles,
What effect would this have if passed. The CHL is tied to the DL. The LEO would still find out when they ran your info. Would this bill also break that link?

I could see the situation where we are not required to notify, the LEO runs info and finds out we are a CHL. Hopefully most LEO's would not think twice about it.

tboesche wrote:Charles,
What effect would this have if passed. The CHL is tied to the DL. The LEO would still find out when they ran your info. Would this bill also break that link?

I could see the situation where we are not required to notify, the LEO runs info and finds out we are a CHL. Hopefully most LEO's would not think twice about it.

All the bill does is repeal the requirement to show your CHL when asked for identification. All of Tex. Gov't Code §411.205 is repealed and the parts of Tex. Gov't Code §411.187 dealing with suspension for failure to show your CHL are repealed.

Status as a CHL will still show up when a LEO "runs" your TDL. There are two primary reasons justifying the repeal of the requirement to show your CHL. The first and strongest is that it is no longer necessary, since the LEO is going to get that information either from his MDT or dispatcher. Secondly, the people most likely to forget to show the CHL are those who rarely if ever get stopped on traffic and are still nervous. There is no reason for people to face a suspension or criminal conviction for not providing information that is available to the LEO from other sources.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:There is no reason for people to face a suspension or criminal conviction for not providing information that is available to the LEO from other sources.

That's especially true now that it's legal to carry in your car without a CHL.

Why don't they just add an endorsement to your driver's license. Since the DPS already has your picture on file for your driver's license it would eliminate having to send a picture with the application. They could just send you a new driver's license with the endorsement. Make it expire with your license then just have to take the renewal course every other time you got your license renewed. Surely this would be cheaper with less administration than issuing a whole other card. Then the point would be moot.

MoparMuscle wrote:Why don't they just add an endorsement to your driver's license. Since the DPS already has your picture on file for your driver's license it would eliminate having to send a picture with the application. They could just send you a new driver's license with the endorsement. Make it expire with your license then just have to take the renewal course every other time you got your license renewed. Surely this would be cheaper with less administration than issuing a whole other card. Then the point would be moot.

It would be better to put a restriction on the license of everyone with a criminal record.

boomerang wrote:It would be better to put a restriction on the license of everyone with a criminal record.

I like it. Punish the guilty, not the innocent!

And I like the two card system. I don't want places knowing that I carry. It's none of their business.