"Printing"

[Cshuff21]

I have read several posts about people worried about "printing" when they are out and about. From my understanding "printing" isn't against the law and you shouldn't get in trouble for it. As long as the weapon is covered either by pants, shirt, jacket, coat etc. you should be fine. Correct? For instance, if I am wearing just a T-shirt which is usually thin and you can see the outline of the weapon and holser but can't acutally see the weapon in plain site that would be fine???

I apologize if someone has already answered before but I will soon be carrying and don't want to worry about "printing"

[tomtexan]

I have read several posts about people worried about "printing" when they are out and about. From my understanding "printing" isn't against the law and you shouldn't get in trouble for it. As long as the weapon is covered either by pants, shirt, jacket, coat etc. you should be fine. Correct? For instance, if I am wearing just a T-shirt which is usually thin and you can see the outline of the weapon and holser but can't acutally see the weapon in plain site that would be fine???

I apologize if someone has already answered before but I will soon be carrying and don't want to worry about "printing"

Just perform a search on the word "printing." I bet you will find more to read about it than you could possibly take in during a days time.

[RoyGBiv]

CHL-16 has not been updated yet... so here is 46.035 from http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/D ... /PE.46.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Emphasis added.

Sec. 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the 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.

Unfortunately, this does not exactly match the "enrolled" version of SB299 which says....
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/ ... 00299F.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Emphasis added.

A license holder commits an offense if the 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 displays the handgun in plain view of another person in a public place.

Probably takes time to update all the code references after bills are signed...
Current law, if you get arrested, should be the same as SB299...

This is my OPINION. IANAL. This is not legal advice.

[flechero]

For several of the same reasons I want to be concealed, I don't want to print. While not a legal issue to print, it could be something undesirable depending on where you do it and who sees. If what I'm wearing causes me to print, I'll change to pocket carry that day. Although, I have corrected most of my wardrobe over the years to allow IWB anytime, with a number of different dress codes.

There will always be an exception and an occasional rain/wind storm that foils your cover garment, but dressing appropriately and remaining concealed are generally pretty easy to do. Buy a good belt/holster and carry something reasonable in terms of size and you shouldn't have many problems.

[texanjoker]

IMO if a person is walking around with a thin t shirt and the gun is clearly outlined that is not properly concealed and not an accidental exposure. The law change benefits somebody from an accidental exposure. Does that fall under intentionally fails to conceal? That is the $2 question. Best to conceal it with more then a thin t shirt.

[WildBill]

IMO if a person is walking around with a thin t shirt and the gun is clearly outlined that is not properly concealed and not an accidental exposure. The law change benefits somebody from an accidental exposure. Does that fall under intentionally fails to conceal? That is the $2 question. Best to conceal it with more then a thin t shirt.

IMO, if a person can easily tell that you have a gun under your thin t-shirt, then it is not concealed.

[jmra]

IMO if a person is walking around with a thin t shirt and the gun is clearly outlined that is not properly concealed and not an accidental exposure. The law change benefits somebody from an accidental exposure. Does that fall under intentionally fails to conceal? That is the $2 question. Best to conceal it with more then a thin t shirt.

Although I agree that a firearm should be properly concealed, "intentionally fails to conceal" is no longer part of the law.
As stated earlier by another poster, that wording has been changed to "intentionally displays the handgun in plain view of another person in a public place".
I don't think what the OP is suggesting is necessarily against the new law but it is inviting unwanted attention. For instance, OP walks into a store with his gun outlined through his t-shirt. Employee sees it. Worse case police get a MWAG call. Or manager tells OP to leave which means he has been given notice and can never return while carrying.
The smart thing to do is properly conceal so that no one is the wiser.

[G26ster]

We've been around this block before when it comes to the definition of "concealed." The operative word is "openly." I still do not want to be the test case to decide that legal definition. Note that the definition relies on "ordinary observation of a reasonable person." We have discussed juries and reasonable persons in many instances here in Texas, and I'd say that a "reasonable person" that detected a gun on your person where the outline is clearly visible (under a T-shirt?) could interpret that as "openly." You be the test case, have the arrest record, take the ride, pay the attorney(s) and "hopefully" I'll be wrong. It's just not going to be me

Sec. 411.171. DEFINITIONS. In this subchapter:

(3) "Concealed handgun" means a handgun, the presence of which is not openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable person.


Note: I base my opinion on "my" interpretation of that sentence as the "presence" of the handgun is openly "discernible" (the "presence" is clearly visible through the cover garment), not the handgun itself so to speak. MHO

[Weg]

I used to freak out if I could see a bulge on my side, until I realized no one notices! I had many times in which people who knew I carried did not notice when I thought it was obvious. Bottom line is in 7 or 8 years of carrying I have become much more "loose" about concealing. Bottom line, is if you ran into me in public you would see a bulge on each side, one is a gun the other is my Iphone in a Otter case. It's almost impossible to distinguish which is which. In my mind, that is not printing. If I had a tight shirt on clearly hugging the profile of a gun, I would think that's a bit dicey. To me, carrying to the " letter of law " means your gun is concealed, i.e. not readily identifiable as a gun.

[Jim88]

For instance, if I am wearing just a T-shirt ...

If you're just wearing a t-shirt, you'll have a different kind of failure to conceal problem.

[jmra]

For instance, if I am wearing just a T-shirt ...

If you're just wearing a t-shirt, you'll have a different kind of failure to conceal problem.

[StrangeBulge]

For instance, if I am wearing just a T-shirt ...

If you're just wearing a t-shirt, you'll have a different kind of failure to conceal problem.

Failure to conceal is not a problem anymore ... "Just a t-shirt" would be an intentional display

[ralewis]

Everyone when they first start carrying goes thru the process of first feeling like everyone can detect they are carrying then after a time realizes that if you had a 3rd eye and a unicorn on a leash, most folks won't notice. I distinctly remember walking thru an HEB here in Austin feeling I was being stared at 10 years ago when I first got a CHL. I've also had my share of wardrobe malfunctions with a shirt or jacket riding up or the wind blowing, etc. Never seemed to draw any attention.

I'm certainly glad the Legislature cleaned up the law to be more clear. I think as long as you aren't actually open carrying and have it covered, few folks will ever have any idea you are carrying.

[nyj]

IMO if a person is walking around with a thin t shirt and the gun is clearly outlined that is not properly concealed and not an accidental exposure. The law change benefits somebody from an accidental exposure. Does that fall under intentionally fails to conceal? That is the $2 question. Best to conceal it with more then a thin t shirt.

That's very subjective. You may interpret my 'hump' on my side under my shirt as a gun, but your average person won't even notice. A gun will never truly print it's outline unless you are wearing tight clothing.

[texanjoker]

IMO if a person is walking around with a thin t shirt and the gun is clearly outlined that is not properly concealed and not an accidental exposure. The law change benefits somebody from an accidental exposure. Does that fall under intentionally fails to conceal? That is the $2 question. Best to conceal it with more then a thin t shirt.

That's very subjective. You may interpret my 'hump' on my side under my shirt as a gun, but your average person won't even notice. A gun will never truly print it's outline unless you are wearing tight clothing.

His statement implies you can see the outline of the gun and holster. IMO that is not concealed.