Will Perry's CHL Be Suspended?

[Keith B]

OP..

Yes.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry Is No Longer Permitted to Carry a Concealed Handgun, Buy Guns or Ammo

They are just quoting the laws in the article, not stating the DPS has actually taken his license away.

[RoyGBiv]

OP..

Yes.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry Is No Longer Permitted to Carry a Concealed Handgun, Buy Guns or Ammo

They are just quoting the laws in the article, not stating the DPS has actually taken his license away.

Understood.... however... they are quoting relevant/correct law. So... If perry doesn't have surrender his license during the period of his indictment, then, are we a nation of laws or of men?

[ELB]

OP..

Yes.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry Is No Longer Permitted to Carry a Concealed Handgun, Buy Guns or Ammo

They are just quoting the laws in the article, not stating the DPS has actually taken his license away.

Understood.... however... they are quoting relevant/correct law. So... If perry doesn't have surrender his license during the period of his indictment, then, are we a nation of laws or of men?

The Blaze article doesn't even cite the laws correctly. They claim Perry's CHL would be revoked . That would only be if he were convicted of a felony. For indictment of an alleged felony, the CHL can only be "suspended" and upon dismissal of the charges it must be unsuspended. According to the part of the law I cited above, it appears it can only be suspended if a peace officer submits an affidavit to the DPS. Per the law, it does not appear that Perry is required to surrender his license or until and unless DPS informs him they have suspended his CHL.

[RoyGBiv]

^^^

GC §411.187. SUSPENSION OF LICENSE. (a) The department shall suspend a
license under this section if the license holder:
(1) is charged with the commission of a Class A or Class B misdemeanor
or equivalent offense, or of an offense under Section 42.01, Penal Code, or
equivalent offense, or of a felony under an information or indictment;

Seems unambiguous to me...

Was perry charged with a felony? His license MUST be suspended.

No?

[RoyGBiv]

The Blaze article doesn't even cite the laws correctly.

Hair splitting?... Really?
The actual law is pretty clear. No?

I like Perry, and clearly this is all hogwash, I expect these charges won't last long, but, PC seems clear to me.

[nightmare69]

It should be suspended by default but I'm sure Perry has some pull as governor.

[MeMelYup]

That would be between Governor Perry and the state agency. By law it's confidential and no one else's business. If he refuses to comply with the licensing agency then it may become public. If he chooses to say, that is his choice.

[RetNavy]

Gary O’Connor of Powderly
To the Editor:
In her Aug. 21 column about Governor Perry’s indictment, Mary Madewell was uncharacteristically generous in her assessment. Let’s take a look at “the rest of the story.”
Perry and his apologists characterize the indictment as purely political and tied to Perry’s call for the Travis County DA to resign following her conviction for DUI. While I do not condone Lemberg’s drunk driving or subsequent behavior, the fact remains that Perry was silent about DUI convictions of two Republican DA’s, one of whom has two DUI convictions.
Secondly, when the complaint that resulted in the investigation of Perry’s Cancer Prevention and Research Institute was filed by Texans for Public Justice with the Travis County DA’s office, Lemberg recused herself and her entire office and declined to investigate. In fact a Republican judge from another county impaneled the grand jury which didn’t know the case they would consider, and appointed a non-partisan special prosecutor, also from another county.
The bottom line is that Lemberg’s office had nothing to do with the investigation, hardly the political retaliation promoted by Perry’s defenders.
Perry and has cronies have a history of questionable deals that benefit his major contributors ranging from attempting to require a specific vaccination for all Texas female teenagers to increased state mandated testing to the shady dealing with the cancer research center that funneled millions to a Perry contributor with little or no oversight or results.
Entirely politically motivated? I think not, and that, my friends, is “the rest of the story.”


i saw this in the local paper... due to you have to be subscriber i cannot post a link to it so i copied out of the letters to the editor section...
just thought it might be interesting, i dont know how the person researched it or if its true or not..

[ELB]

The Blaze article doesn't even cite the laws correctly.

Hair splitting?... Really?
The actual law is pretty clear. No?

I like Perry, and clearly this is all hogwash, I expect these charges won't last long, but, PC seems clear to me.

Not hair splitting. Fact.

The Blaze incorrectly cited the wrong part of the law in mentioning revocation -- note that they mention having to wait two years to reapply -- that applies to certain reasons for revocation. Suspension is what would apply in Perry's case. Big difference between suspension and revocation. A felony indictment gets you a suspension, which is a temporary withdrawal of CHL rights, but you do not lose your CHL permanently. A felony conviction gets you a revocation, which is permanent loss of CHL rights, and although in some cases you can reapply two years after the reason for revocation ceases to exist, a felony conviction (in Texas) is forever, so no chance to reapply. Big difference.

Facts are important, and reading the entire law correctly is important. For example, the indictment against Perry is based on a very tendentious misreading of the law.

[ELB]

^^^

GC §411.187. SUSPENSION OF LICENSE. (a) The department shall suspend a
license under this section if the license holder:
(1) is charged with the commission of a Class A or Class B misdemeanor
or equivalent offense, or of an offense under Section 42.01, Penal Code, or
equivalent offense, or of a felony under an information or indictment;

Seems unambiguous to me...

Was perry charged with a felony? His license MUST be suspended.

No?

It should be suspended by default but I'm sure Perry has some pull as governor.

Reading the law through a soda straw tends to exclude important elements. For example, the law very clearly states that CHL holders may not carry in hospitals. Pretty unambiguous, no? Execpt of course you have to read down a few paragraphs to find out that this applies only if the CHL holder was given effective notice. Thus looking at only one sentence, or even one section, of the law does not give the whole picture.

GC §411.187 (a) says the DPS shall suspend license if someone is indicted for a felony....BUT the very next section specifies how this is to happen. It is not automatic or by default. Some peace officer has to take an action to notify the Department in a particular way. Reading about it in the newspaper is not the way. So my point was until some peace officer takes this action (submits an affidavit), and the Department acts on the affidavit and notifies Perry, then his license is not suspended. (And he does not have to surrender it until he gets notice from the DPS. I suspect he stopped carrying anyway, and may have just sent in the CHL just to avoid giving Dems a way to pick at him.

I am curious as to who, if anyone, will take the step of submitting the affidavit with the relevant materials to support it. I am guessing one of the DAs investigators will be told to do it, but who knows, maybe one of the DPS officers will do it.

[ELB]

Gary O’Connor of Powderly
To the Editor:
...
Perry and his apologists characterize the indictment as purely political and tied to Perry’s call for the Travis County DA to resign following her conviction for DUI. While I do not condone Lemberg’s drunk driving or subsequent behavior, the fact remains that Perry was silent about DUI convictions of two Republican DA’s, one of whom has two DUI convictions.

Since O'Connor does not cite who these DAs are, hard to check easily, but in any case, in Lehmberg's case Perry had the power to act because she was head of a state-funded function, the PIU. That was something he had direct control over. He had to take a stand one way of the other -- either approve the funding and tacitly endorse a convicted DUI offender as head of Public Integrity Unit, or block it. Were she purely a county-level prosecutor, he would have no role in this.

Gary O’Connor of Powderly
To the Editor:
...
Secondly, when the complaint that resulted in the investigation of Perry’s Cancer Prevention and Research Institute was filed by Texans for Public Justice with the Travis County DA’s office, Lemberg recused herself and her entire office and declined to investigate. In fact a Republican judge from another county impaneled the grand jury which didn’t know the case they would consider, and appointed a non-partisan special prosecutor, also from another county.
The bottom line is that Lemberg’s office had nothing to do with the investigation, hardly the political retaliation promoted by Perry’s defenders.
Perry and has cronies have a history of questionable deals that benefit his major contributors ranging from attempting to require a specific vaccination for all Texas female teenagers to increased state mandated testing to the shady dealing with the cancer research center that funneled millions to a Perry contributor with little or no oversight or results.

Several sly misrepresentations here:
The CPRIT was a product a statewide vote to amend the Texas Constitution to establish it, and was voted into existence by Texas voters. It is not "Perry's".

By virtue of the legislation that set it up, the Governor appoints the board members. Since it was brand new, obviously Perry appointed all the board members. Lehmberg herself, and the primary investigator (who was indeed from Lehmberg's PIU office) both stated that at no time was Perry, the Governor's office, nor any of the board members appointed by Perry under any suspicion. The only ones investigated were the professional hired staff of CPRIT, and the only one indicted was a professional staff member. Nor, for that matter, was the company mentioned in the investigation (alleged to be Perry donors) aware that its proposal was improperly vetted by CPRIT; it was not under suspicion either.

Despite this, it was the Mo Elleithee, a spokesman for the Democratic National Committee, who alleged in an email that Perry was retaliating for an investigation in which neither he nor anyone associated with him was under investigation. Of course Mo left out that last part. I think I linked earlier in this thread to an Austin Statesman article that neatly torpedoed Elleithee's (and O'Connor's) claim. O'Connor, in his letter above, completely turns this around and attributes it to Perry supporters claiming some kind of retaliation over the CPRIT investigation.

Further, O'Connor asserts that "the complaint that resulted in the investigation of Perry’s Cancer Prevention and Research Institute was filed by Texans for Public Justice with the Travis County DA’s office, Lemberg recused herself and her entire office and declined to investigate." This is nonsense. I don't know who initially filed a complaint, but Lehmberg's Public Integrity Unit did indeed investigate, resulting in a Travis County Grand Jury indicting one person, a professional staff member of CPRIT. And, as noted earlier, neither Perry or anyone associated with him was under investigation.

[victory]

GC §411.187 (a) says the DPS shall suspend license if someone is indicted for a felony....BUT the very next section specifies how this is to happen. It is not automatic or by default. Some peace officer has to take an action to notify the Department in a particular way. Reading about it in the newspaper is not the way. So my point was until some peace officer takes this action (submits an affidavit), and the Department acts on the affidavit and notifies Perry, then his license is not suspended. (And he does not have to surrender it until he gets notice from the DPS. I suspect he stopped carrying anyway, and may have just sent in the CHL just to avoid giving Dems a way to pick at him.

I am curious as to who, if anyone, will take the step of submitting the affidavit with the relevant materials to support it. I am guessing one of the DAs investigators will be told to do it, but who knows, maybe one of the DPS officers will do it.

So if someone gets indicted for rape or murder in another state, their Texas CHL remsins valid until a Texas Peace Officer submits an affidavit? And its still legal to carry under the authority of their Texas CHL

That presents an interesting arbitrage opportunity. I wonder if a Texas resident could do the reverse with a license from some other state.

[GhostTX]

When I normally thought of Class A or B, I always thought of a violent crime where the suspension made some sense to me. But for non-violent, non-gun related crime like this Perry nonsense? Suspending because of that...that's a bit of a stretch. I thought we were innocent until PROVEN guilty.

I feel somewhat "better" that an officer needs to write an affidavit justifying the need for the suspension...so there's at least a chance of some common sense creeping in.

[anygunanywhere]

Just read the story again.
Out jogging with lab and coyote tries to take easy meal. Totally plausible. This is actually a fairly common behavior among coyote. The animal services officers I work with call it supper on a string.

Really? A Texas Coyote will take on a dog the size of a lab near a human?
I've lived in Texas a long time and most Coyote's that I've seen are pretty skittish and probably don't weigh as much as a lab...
Serious question. I've never had any fear of coyotes... If one was hanging about, I'd think something was wrong (rabies).

Dinner on a string? A yorkie maybe...

Last winter, Mrs. Anygun and I were sitting on our back porch in the dark enjoying the stars in the cold night air. No lights were on. As usual I had my super spotlight handy. Our now deceased male Bichon growled and perked up, gazing in the darkness. He was in her lap. I turned the spotlight on in the direction of his gaze and there was a large coyote not 30 feet away in a low crouch. I had my Kimber on the chair with me but the coyote made a quick exit before I could go to slide lock on him. Coyotes can be very brazen and I am certain an internet search will produce many examples of the described meal on a string and a hungry coyote will go for bigger prey if it is hungry or rabid enough.

I do not trust coyotes and am always armed at night on the patio now with at least a shotgun.

Anygunanywhere

[cb1000rider]

Good to know. I've seen a buck (in rutting season) charge an 85-lb dog, but we've never had *any* trouble out of the coyotes...

Good discussion on the Perry situation.