As a CHL pedestrian - at what point do you identify to LEO

[MaxBerlin]

It's pretty clear that when an LEO approaches your vehicle in a traffic stop that you produce your CHL when asked for drivers license or ID.

What about when you're walking around in any public space that you have a right to be in ?

Thanks in advance.

[WildBill]

It's pretty clear that when an LEO approaches your vehicle in a traffic stop that you produce your CHL when asked for drivers license or ID.

What about when you're walking around in any public space that you have a right to be in ?

Thanks in advance.

When the LEO asks for identification.

[MeMelYup]

It's pretty clear that when an LEO approaches your vehicle in a traffic stop that you produce your CHL when asked for drivers license or ID.

What about when you're walking around in any public space that you have a right to be in ?

Thanks in advance.

When the LEO asks for identification.

Yup!

[jbarn]

Under the penal code, no one has to produce ID unless engaged in a licensed activity like operating a motor vehicle on a public roadway, hunting, carrying a handgun under a CHL, etc., or if under arrest

If you are a pedestrian and a LEO asks you to identify yourself, it is no offense to refuse. Only if you are arrested must you give your Name, residence address or date of birth. It is unlawful to lie if you have been lawfully arrested, detained or the LEO believes you were a witness to a crime. Otherwise, you do not have to ID.

So, what law requires you to ID if you are carrying a handgun under a CHL? The Texas Government Code section 411(h) 411.205 states, " If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder's person when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder's driver's license or identification certificate issued by the department and the license holder's handgun license. "

There is no stipulation that you must be under arrest, or lawfully detained, etc. Interestingly, there is no penalty if you refuse. Other than a ticked off cop.....

However, if the officer suspects you have a handgun and you fail to show your CHL, he just might have PC to arrest you for Unlawfully Carry Weapons. He has no way of knowing your handgun is lawfully carried if he cannot ascertain you have a CHL. For example, you are walking home from the local 7-11. A crime happens in the neighborhood with a vague description of the suspect, and you look pretty close. The officer conducts a Terry search (see Terry v Ohio) and discovers your gun. He then asks you for ID. Under the "failure to ID", Penal Code 38.02, you have no obligation to say who you are. However, under TGC 411.205 you are required. The officer arrests you for UCW. Now you have a legal obligation to ID.

Make sense? Easier to just ID yourself.....

[nightmare69]

I thought unless you broke a law you did not have to ID even when driving. I was told this by some buddies who were forced to work DL checks, if the driver refused to show ID they could not force him cause he broke no laws.

[jbarn]

I thought unless you broke a law you did not have to ID even when driving. I was told this by some buddies who were forced to work DL checks, if the driver refused to show ID they could not force him cause he broke no laws.

Does the person have to know they broke a law, or is the officer's word enough?

If you are operating a motor vehicle on a public roadway and a LEO asks for your license and you fail to produce it, he has probable cause to arrest you for operating a motor vehicle without a license.

[MeMelYup]

GC §411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY LICENSE. (a) If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder's person when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder's driver's license or identification certificate issued by the department and the license holder's handgun license.

[jbarn]

GC §411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY LICENSE. (a) If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder's person when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder's driver's license or identification certificate issued by the department and the license holder's handgun license.

Yes, that has been covered. Notice there is no penalty if you fail to ID.

[gigag04]

Answered in the second post, but here comes page 2...

[jmra]

Answered in the second post, but here comes page 2...

[GlockDude26]

one of these days enough people will figure out that if you go by the legal definition of "transportation" that is clearly defined in the transportation code where most all motor vehicle statutes are in. transportation is defined as the commerical operation of a motor vehicle, and commercial is defined as being paid to drive. other exceptions are if you are in an accident where property is damaged, or an officer can prove you were acting in a dangerous fashion then you really don't have to produce any ID or legally get a ticket, and the officer really doesn't have any authority to pull you over in the first place. pretty much what it comes down to is traffic courts are the biggest money racket that states have and by producing id and/or signing a promise to appear you're consenting and waiving your private right to travel freely as it's stated in the constitution. look up the tao of law and do some research , i forget the lawyers name who put it out there but if you go about it the right way and not drive like an idiot you'll never pay a ticket again.....

[jbarn]

one of these days enough people will figure out that if you go by the legal definition of "transportation" that is clearly defined in the transportation code where most all motor vehicle statutes are in. transportation is defined as the commerical operation of a motor vehicle, and commercial is defined as being paid to drive. other exceptions are if you are in an accident where property is damaged, or an officer can prove you were acting in a dangerous fashion then you really don't have to produce any ID or legally get a ticket, and the officer really doesn't have any authority to pull you over in the first place. pretty much what it comes down to is traffic courts are the biggest money racket that states have and by producing id and/or signing a promise to appear you're consenting and waiving your private right to travel freely as it's stated in the constitution. look up the tao of law and do some research , i forget the lawyers name who put it out there but if you go about it the right way and not drive like an idiot you'll never pay a ticket again.....

Interesting. Completely wrong, but interesting. It is a point of view held by right wing extremist grouop, typically called militias. I am not suggest you are a member of one or even share their ideology, but you clearly have been exposed to their misguided beliefs.

But, in a sense if fairness, quote the laws or cite them here to support those claims. I have been wrong before....

I will help you; http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Texas Transportation Code, Title 7


Also, where in the constitution does it allow one to operate a motor vehicle on taxpayer funded road?

[srothstein]

Jbarn, you beat me to it. I was going to ask for the code citations myself. I could not find them in my search of the Transportation Code.

I may agree that traffic Court is, in most cases, a racket. But I do not agree with his definitions.

I do know that, as a general rule, if you are not operating a motor vehicle, you are not required to identify yourself to a peace officer unless you are under arrest. You may not provide a false id in most cases, but you do not have to answer. It is my opinion that the Government Code section cited does require a CHL to produce identification (CHL and license or ID card) on demand, and this is an exception to the general rule.

[gigag04]

We had one of those republic of Texas types try to arrest my fully uniformed zone partner for contacting him about a loud party call. After three tours in Iraq and Astan, my zone partner had a nice talk about what this guy's freedom actually meant.

[TomsTXCHL]

Under the penal code, no one has to produce ID unless engaged in a licensed activity like operating a motor vehicle on a public roadway, hunting, carrying a handgun under a CHL, etc., or if under arrest

If you are a pedestrian and a LEO asks you to identify yourself, it is no offense to refuse. Only if you are arrested must you give your Name, residence address or date of birth. It is unlawful to lie if you have been lawfully arrested, detained or the LEO believes you were a witness to a crime. Otherwise, you do not have to ID.

So, what law requires you to ID if you are carrying a handgun under a CHL? The Texas Government Code section 411(h) 411.205 states, " If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder's person when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder's driver's license or identification certificate issued by the department and the license holder's handgun license. "

There is no stipulation that you must be under arrest, or lawfully detained, etc. Interestingly, there is no penalty if you refuse. Other than a ticked off cop.....

However, if the officer suspects you have a handgun and you fail to show your CHL, he just might have PC to arrest you for Unlawfully Carry Weapons. He has no way of knowing your handgun is lawfully carried if he cannot ascertain you have a CHL. For example, you are walking home from the local 7-11. A crime happens in the neighborhood with a vague description of the suspect, and you look pretty close. The officer conducts a Terry search (see Terry v Ohio) and discovers your gun. He then asks you for ID. Under the "failure to ID", Penal Code 38.02, you have no obligation to say who you are. However, under TGC 411.205 you are required. The officer arrests you for UCW. Now you have a legal obligation to ID.

Make sense? Easier to just ID yourself.....

So if you are NOT CARRYING, you do not HAVE TO produce identification. But if you ARE CARRYING then you certainly do.

Easier to just ID yourself.....

And I don't know why you wouldn't want to cooperate.

I would normally ALWAYS cooperate with a LEO, unless of course I've been accused of some malfeasance (in which case I have learned here that you NEVER TALK TO LEOS!).