sept. 1st you can drive with your gun in the car

[jewozzy]

Haven't looked to see if anyone posted this or not but come sept. 1st there will be new gun law that allows you to carry in your car anywhere your traveling. i dont feel like typing the new law up but basicly same rules as if you had your chl except its for driving only right now.

[Pro88LX]

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/80R/billtext/html/HB01815I.htm

[GT Dan]

Do you think thats going to make your job harder or more dangerous?

[AL P]

I can't wait to blast some people!!

[Skidmark]

I guess I better calm down the road rage

[Johnsredgt50]

you have always been able to carry while traveling.

[ALLAN]

you have always been able to carry while traveling.
+1
Very sad they have to clarify the law to stop cops from arresting people for it.

[whiteboy]

+1
Very sad they have to clarify the law to stop cops from arresting people for it.
I didnt know that.

The gun doesnt have to be stored in the trunk does it?

[Juiced4V]

I been doing that the last 9 years ;)

[Somewhere in Time]

So I can legally carry my hand gun under my front seat? Damn, did not know that.

[Denny]

So I can legally carry my hand gun under my front seat? Damn, did not know that.
It has to be concealed.

[AL P]

It has to be concealed.

I want to go down the street with it hanging out the window like Yosemite Sam. Might shoot a few kittens down out of trees too.

[Baron]

is it still the "we can arrest you and let the judge define 'traveling" or is traveling now defined as going from place to place peacefully?

[David]

is it still the "we can arrest you and let the judge define 'traveling" or is traveling now defined as going from place to place peacefully?
Traveling is now defined as:

(1) in a private motor vehicle, (2) not engaged in criminal activity, (3) not prohibited by law from possessing a firearm, (4) not a member of a "criminal street gang" and (5) not carrying the handgun "in plain view."

[JimD]

Lock and load ya'll

[LX331]

I have been doing this for years. :confused: :D

[Pro88LX]

Do you think thats going to make your job harder or more dangerous?

the people who would pose a threat to the police already carry guns in their cars.

[Treadhead]

the people who would pose a threat to the police already carry guns in their cars.


True!

Here is my understanding of the whole situation. You have always been able to carry a concealed weapon in your car if you were traveling 2 or more (3 or more?) counties. You were still subject to arrest and proving in court you were justified in carrying. Then a couple years ago the legislators updated the law to say you could carry with no restriction on the traveling part but, didn't define traveling which left a loop hole that many District Attorney's were using to prosecute people which I personally did not agree with. The Legislators finally got around to ameding the law to say exactly when/where and who could carry in the car.

[Baron]

so now, if you are traveling to the grocery store, it is ok to have it in the console?

[Pro88LX]

so now, if you are traveling to the grocery store, it is ok to have it in the console?

anytime you are in your car you can have a concealed handgun loaded and ready to rock!!

[Pro88LX]

True!

Here is my understanding of the whole situation. You have always been able to carry a concealed weapon in your car if you were traveling 2 or more (3 or more?) counties. You were still subject to arrest and proving in court you were justified in carrying. Then a couple years ago the legislators updated the law to say you could carry with no restriction on the traveling part but, didn't define traveling which left a loop hole that many District Attorney's were using to prosecute people which I personally did not agree with. The Legislators finally got around to ameding the law to say exactly when/where and who could carry in the car.


Thats my understanding as well.

[Baron]

anytime you are in your car you can have a concealed handgun loaded and ready to rock!!
But Judge, the guys over on DFWSTANGS.net said it was legal!!!

I may wait a month or two just in case.

[propellerhead]

anytime you are in your car you can have a concealed handgun loaded and ready to rock!!
The other clauses still apply... you can't be engaging in gang activity, or committing a crime, or must be legally allowed to possess a gun in Texas, etc.

[jewozzy]

+1
Very sad they have to clarify the law to stop cops from arresting people for it.

Yes you've always been able to carry if traveling however if your in dallas county and the city you live in is dallas county and i stop you and you have a gun in your car its still against the law. You have to be able to prove you were traveling with the rule before.

More dangerous? as far as my job goes eh... i dunno depends. I think the law should have been specified just like if someone is a chl holder where they have to state that they have the weapon in the car. For me it just means ill pull more people out of the car than i would usually.

[That_Is_My_El_Camino]

Yes you've always been able to carry if traveling however if your in dallas county and the city you live in is dallas county and i stop you and you have a gun in your car its still against the law. You have to be able to prove you were traveling with the rule before.This isn't a personal attack on you, or a personal attack on anybody, but I don't get where that's coming from. This is how the law reads now.§ 46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits
an offense if he intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on
or about his person a handgun, illegal knife, or club.
§ 46.15. NONAPPLICABILITY.
...
(b) Section 46.02 does not apply to a person who:
Text of subd. (b)(1) as added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 1221, § 4

(1) ...
(3) is traveling;
...
(i) For purposes of Subsection (b)(3), a person is presumed
to be traveling if the person is:
(1) in a private motor vehicle;
(2) not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other
than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance
regulating traffic;
(3) not otherwise prohibited by law from possessing a
firearm;
(4) not a member of a criminal street gang, as defined
by Section 71.01; and
(5) not carrying a handgun in plain view.It doesn't say that you have to be traveling through 3 counties and staying overnight to be considered traveling. It spells it out very, very clearly. I'm not trying to be a smartass or trying to argue, but I would like to have an idea of where the "interpretation" of traveling came from.

[jewozzy]

This isn't a personal attack on you, or a personal attack on anybody, but I don't get where that's coming from. This is how the law reads now.
It doesn't say that you have to be traveling through 3 counties and staying overnight to be considered traveling. It spells it out very, very clearly. I'm not trying to be a smartass or trying to argue, but I would like to have an idea of where the "interpretation" of traveling came from.

hmm to tell the truth the travel rule was in effect when i was in the academy. it was 3 counties if you were going from dallas to denton in other words you would have been fine.

however i dont know what the redefined rule of "traveling" is because its pretty much regulated by each department. that is why they are making this law its to clearly confirm what the rule is. like i said the only part i disagree with this is that it should be like if you have a chl and your required to tell the officer you have a gun in the car.

[That_Is_My_El_Camino]

hmm to tell the truth the travel rule was in effect when i was in the academy. it was 3 counties if you were going from dallas to denton in other words you would have been fine.How long ago was that?however i dont know what the redefined rule of "traveling" is because its pretty much regulated by each department. that is why they are making this law its to clearly confirm what the rule is. like i said the only part i disagree with this is that it should be like if you have a chl and your required to tell the officer you have a gun in the car.The new law doesn't so much redefine traveling, but it lists a traveling exclusion/exemption from unlawful carrying in Section 46.02 (doesn't specifically say "traveling," but it takes all the criteria from the old Section 46.15, subsection (i) and rolls that into a subsection of 46.02). And I completely agree that anybody carrying legally (well, those carrying illegally, too, but I doubt it'll happen) should inform the officer.

Bear in mind that this is coming from your average Joe with slightly above-average reading comprehension, not a police officer, judge, lawyer, or even criminal justice student. I only know what I've read in my CHL law booklet and the Texas Penal Code online. :o

[GT Dan]

More dangerous? as far as my job goes eh... i dunno depends. I think the law should have been specified just like if someone is a chl holder where they have to state that they have the weapon in the car. For me it just means ill pull more people out of the car than i would usually.

That's why I asked... I was just curious how you guys felt about it...

I think it's something for some of the dipshits around here to think about when they get stopped and the cop asks them to get out of the car... he really doesnt care about you as much as he wants you away from your car...

[Denny]

The "3 country rule" was always a discretionary tool that was used. Basically, it was a vauge law used to the advantage of law enforcement to let the officer use his state-given discretion to make a UCW arrest if he felt he needed to. Gang-bangers, dope dealers, robbers, burgalers, etc. usually don't commit their crimes too far from where they live... usually. I know people get all bent out of shape about this, but if you were to pull over a 40-45 year old white man in a Buick on his way to see his family and he stated he had his handgun in his glove compartment when you asked if there were any weapons in the car, you probably wouldn't think twice about it. Now if you pulled over a 20-25 year old black guy with a couple of his friends in his "donked-out" Crown Vic (none of the three have pants that go above their asses) because of a busted tail light you noticed the third time they cruised by a known drug distribution area and they had a handgun in the glove compartment, what would you do?

See how a vague law like this works? I can't recall a time that it was abused, although I'm sure it was.

On another note, I was pulled over in Glenn Heights a few weeks back and I presented my DL and CHL when asked to identify. The officer asked if I had a weapon in the vehicle. I told him there was a loaded handgun in the console. He then asks, "Why do you have a gun?" Shocked at the question, I turned to him with what my son said was a "You're a retard" look and said, "Because it's my right to do so." To many, his question wasn't a bad one to ask, but to me, I felt he was fishing for more. I've been there and I've done it myself. I really commend law enforcement as a whole, but there are just that few... :mad:

Officer's discretion can be the most useful tool and it can be the most destructive tool. I just want all officers to use their PRIVILEGE well because you never know who you are dealing with or what that person knows.

[HarrisonBT]

Traveling is now defined as:

(1) in a private motor vehicle, (2) not engaged in criminal activity, (3) not prohibited by law from possessing a firearm, (4) not a member of a "criminal street gang" and (5) not carrying the handgun "in plain view."

Where did you find this?
I have known about the "traveling" section for years,and whatsucked is that it was so vauge (spelling? vage?) i mean hell, i could consider 2 mile trip to the grocery store traveling, but the cop sure couldnt. I could consider traveling going from fort worth to lubbock, but a cop wont always agree.
Its great that the, according to you defined it.
Where did you find the defintion of traveling?

[HarrisonBT]

On another note, I was pulled over in Glenn Heights a few weeks back and I presented my DL and CHL when asked to identify. The officer asked if I had a weapon in the vehicle. I told him there was a loaded handgun in the console. He then asks, "Why do you have a gun?" Shocked at the question, I turned to him with what my son said was a "You're a retard" look and said, "Because it's my right to do so." To many, his question wasn't a bad one to ask, but to me, I felt he was fishing for more. I've been there and I've done it myself. I really commend law enforcement as a whole, but there are just that few... :mad:

Officer's discretion can be the most useful tool and it can be the most destructive tool. I just want all officers to use their PRIVILEGE well because you never know who you are dealing with or what that person knows.

Danny, totally see what your gettin at. I actually think the CDL can be a bad thing, like in your case. It can be a good thing becuase the cop would see you as a law abiding citizen, who went about it the proper way. Or for example he is one of the cops who thinks that only law enforcement should carry firearms, and he could, once he has sight of the chl, completely change and start looking for a reason to get you in trouble. in some cases i think the CHL could actaully be a negative thing cause you could be held at a high standardof the law, some would consider you an "expert" on the law. Im not saying i wouldnt be an expert when i start carrying.
All i wanted to do was carry in my car, i dont really wanna take it grocery shopping, altho i see someones need to do, im not gonna argue with that at all.
I just think the CHL could be a negative thing, like in your case.
Even if someone breaks into your house and you kill them, and your in somewhat of a gray area, the CHL could be what gets ya.

Does anyone see what im saying?

[ELVIS]

Danny, totally see what your gettin at. I actually think the CDL can be a bad thing, like in your case. It can be a good thing becuase the cop would see you as a law abiding citizen, who went about it the proper way. Or for example he is one of the cops who thinks that only law enforcement should carry firearms, and he could, once he has sight of the chl, completely change and start looking for a reason to get you in trouble. in some cases i think the CHL could actaully be a negative thing cause you could be held at a high standardof the law, some would consider you an "expert" on the law. Im not saying i wouldnt be an expert when i start carrying.
All i wanted to do was carry in my car, i dont really wanna take it grocery shopping, altho i see someones need to do, im not gonna argue with that at all.
I just think the CHL could be a negative thing, like in your case.
Even if someone breaks into your house and you kill them, and your in somewhat of a gray area, the CHL could be what gets ya.

Does anyone see what im saying?


lolz

god bless

[ceyko]

The other clauses still apply... you can't be engaging in gang activity, or committing a crime, or must be legally allowed to possess a gun in Texas, etc.

Dumb question I'm sure, but if you're getting pulled over for speeding...would that be considered a crime...

...or do you think it means committing a crime using the actual gun?

Take care,

[David]

Where did you find this?
I have known about the "traveling" section for years,and whatsucked is that it was so vauge (spelling? vage?) i mean hell, i could consider 2 mile trip to the grocery store traveling, but the cop sure couldnt. I could consider traveling going from fort worth to lubbock, but a cop wont always agree.
Its great that the, according to you defined it.
Where did you find the defintion of traveling?
The Texas Penal Code.

[Denny]

Danny, totally see what your gettin at. I actually think the CDL can be a bad thing, like in your case. It can be a good thing becuase the cop would see you as a law abiding citizen, who went about it the proper way. Or for example he is one of the cops who thinks that only law enforcement should carry firearms, and he could, once he has sight of the chl, completely change and start looking for a reason to get you in trouble. in some cases i think the CHL could actaully be a negative thing cause you could be held at a high standardof the law, some would consider you an "expert" on the law. Im not saying i wouldnt be an expert when i start carrying.
All i wanted to do was carry in my car, i dont really wanna take it grocery shopping, altho i see someones need to do, im not gonna argue with that at all.
I just think the CHL could be a negative thing, like in your case.
Even if someone breaks into your house and you kill them, and your in somewhat of a gray area, the CHL could be what gets ya.

Does anyone see what im saying?
Ya, but also failing to disclose that you have a weapon could be worse. I've never really worried about whether or not I'm in a bad scenario because I have the weapon or CHL, because I am held to a higher standard if I'm ever brought on the stand anyway. My background will always come up. I'd safely say that I can justify any and all of my actions better than most in that situation. That's one of those funny things about our system. Someone can be charged for anything, but a conviction has to be made in court, where justifying yourself can be as easy as anything else.

[Denny]

lolz

god bless
Ya, I got that...

[Denny]

Dumb question I'm sure, but if you're getting pulled over for speeding...would that be considered a crime...

...or do you think it means committing a crime using the actual gun?

Take care,
My interpretation, from what I always used it as, was a crime against persons, or engaging in organized crime, etc. Class C's aren't really criminal activity that's categorized under those. (again, just my interpretation)

[AL P]

I don't agree that the weapon should be disclosed. Any cop will already treat every person in a traffic stop as if they are armed and dangerous if they are worried at all about their own safety. I fail to see how disclosing that you are carrying does anything but promote the situation that Denny described or worse yet the situation in another thread where someone's gun was taken, defaced, "tested" etc.

And Denny, your answer to his question should have been "why do you?"

[ALLAN]

Yes you've always been able to carry if traveling however if your in dallas county and the city you live in is dallas county and i stop you and you have a gun in your car its still against the law. You have to be able to prove you were traveling with the rule before.

More dangerous? as far as my job goes eh... i dunno depends. I think the law should have been specified just like if someone is a chl holder where they have to state that they have the weapon in the car. For me it just means ill pull more people out of the car than i would usually.

My grandfather use to carry his 12 gauge on a gun rack in his pick up driving around Oak Cliff..lol

This is Texas...not Kali or NY. :rolleyes:

[Denny]

I don't agree that the weapon should be disclosed. Any cop will already treat every person in a traffic stop as if they are armed and dangerous if they are worried at all about their own safety. I fail to see how disclosing that you are carrying does anything but promote the situation that Denny described or worse yet the situation in another thread where someone's gun was taken, defaced, "tested" etc.

And Denny, your answer to his question should have been "why do you?"
I'm not going to ask a question that he can't answer ;)

[David]

I'm not going to ask a question that he can't answer ;)
I ignore stupid questions, that really gets them riled up.

[Denny]

I ignore stupid questions, that really gets them riled up.
Or the ever-so-popular, "Your mom told me to do it."

[David]

Or the ever-so-popular, "Your mom told me to do it."
LOL

[evil jose]

How appropriate that the law takes place on my birthday :D

[SS Junk]

Christ I hate DC/VA. No Castle doctrine and no law like this!

[propellerhead]

Dumb question I'm sure, but if you're getting pulled over for speeding...would that be considered a crime...

...or do you think it means committing a crime using the actual gun?

Take care,
I did a bad job at paraphrasing. The law reads "... engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic". This is one of the exceptions to the exception.

To clarify, it is against the law to possess a weapon. Period. It's called Unlawful Carrying of a Weapon (UCW). House Bill 1815 modified exceptions to UCW by stating you cannot be charged with UCW if you are in your own premises (including your vehicle), in premises you are in control of, or enroute to your premises to your vehicle. HB 1815 also says these exceptions do not apply to you if the weapon is in plain view, or you are engaged in criminal activity (other than traffic violations), are a member of a gang, are not allowed to legally possess a firearm.

[1985GT]

i just took my chl a month or two ago and they said that the "traveling" rule was very subjective and unclear and different cops and PDs handled it differently. I think this new law just clears it up a bit.

[That_Is_My_El_Camino]

I still don't see how anybody can say that the current traveling clause (i.e., the one that's been in effect since September of 2005) is "subjective" or "open to interpretation." It implicitly states, very clearly:(i) For purposes of Subsection (b)(3), a person is presumed
to be traveling if the person is:
(1) in a private motor vehicle;
(2) not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other
than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance
regulating traffic;
(3) not otherwise prohibited by law from possessing a
firearm;
(4) not a member of a criminal street gang, as defined
by Section 71.01; and
(5) not carrying a handgun in plain view.Period. There is no interpretation, no officer's discretion. Either you meet all 5 of those criteria and are legally traveling, or you don't and are unlawfully carrying a weapon.

[propellerhead]

I still don't see how anybody can say that the current traveling clause (i.e., the one that's been in effect since September of 2005) is "subjective" or "open to interpretation." It implicitly states, very clearly:Period. There is no interpretation, no officer's discretion. Either you meet all 5 of those criteria and are legally traveling, or you don't and are unlawfully carrying a weapon.
Agreed, however it's not always up to the officer on the street to decide. The officer can still arrest you and let the court decide if you were UCW or not. The officer may have reason to believe you do not meet all five criteria. Maybe you look like a gang banger. Maybe you were too nervous. When the officer explains what's going on to the junior DA fresh out of DA school who got stuck working the desk on a Saturday night, the DA might say "Book 'em and I'll figure out what's up. I have to look up the law on UCW first". Chances are you will leave a free man... but only after spending a night in jail and a ton of paperwork. That's the part that sucks.

[Baron]

Agreed, however it's not always up to the officer on the street to decide. The officer can still arrest you and let the court decide if you were UCW or not. The officer may have reason to believe you do not meet all five criteria. Maybe you look like a gang banger. Maybe you were too nervous. When the officer explains what's going on to the junior DA fresh out of DA school who got stuck working the desk on a Saturday night, the DA might say "Book 'em and I'll figure out what's up. I have to look up the law on UCW first". Chances are you will leave a free man... but only after spending a night in jail and a ton of paperwork. That's the part that sucks.
exactly the warning that I got from local law enforcement.

[That_Is_My_El_Camino]

Agreed, however it's not always up to the officer on the street to decide. The officer can still arrest you and let the court decide if you were UCW or not. The officer may have reason to believe you do not meet all five criteria. Maybe you look like a gang banger. Maybe you were too nervous. When the officer explains what's going on to the junior DA fresh out of DA school who got stuck working the desk on a Saturday night, the DA might say "Book 'em and I'll figure out what's up. I have to look up the law on UCW first". Chances are you will leave a free man... but only after spending a night in jail and a ton of paperwork. That's the part that sucks.Well, that smells like a bunch of bullshit, and this new law doesn't do anything that wasn't already done with the old law; all it does is lists those 5 criteria as an exception completely independent from the traveling exception, and it doesn't define traveling any more. So, it's just a simple cut and paste operation that doesn't clear up anything that wasn't already clear or state anything that wasn't already stated.

[kangol]

The Police are really anxious about this new law.

I was able to briefly observe a special training class today that was specifically designed to provide intense training to the local Police.

There was also a rigorously structured reward program to provide incentives to individuals that excelled in the training.

I was able to covertly snap a picture with my cell phone. This took place today around 19:30 off of Preston next to I635:























http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/8269/11657968936c3b76aca2cj5.jpg

[98BlownSS]

As it has been posted several times you are good to go as long as you are in a personal vehicle, not a gang banger, not prohibited by law (convicted felon), not committing a crime above a Class C Misdemeanor (DWI for example is a class B, Assault is a Class A) or waving it around inside your vehicle for the sheeple to see.

[That_Is_My_El_Camino]

...not committing a crime above a Class C Misdemeanor (DWI for example is a class B, Assault is a Class A)...It has to be a Class C Misdemeanor traffic violation, not just any Class C.

[Treadhead]

It has to be a Class C Misdemeanor traffic violation, not just any Class C.

Yep, everyone see's Class C and automatically thinks traffic violation. There are many other Class C violations out there. Loud Music for example. If you can afford it and qualify for one you are much better off getting a CHL.

[Denny]

Yep, everyone see's Class C and automatically thinks traffic violation. There are many other Class C violations out there. Loud Music for example. If you can afford it and qualify for one you are much better off getting a CHL.
Or my favorite... disorderly conduct. :o

[AL P]

Well I'm glad we cleared all this up, figuring out that the new law means nothing since some dipshit with a badge could just pull you over, find out you have a gun and then charge you with some bullshit charge like "loud music" or "disorderly conduct" in order to "get all those dangerous guns off the street". We live in interesting times, that's for sure.