Chl A Waste???? [Archive] - DFWstangs Forums

ScottsMach03

08-28-2007, 11:20 PM

Well I went out with a buddy of mine who works for the local PD here in tyler. He mention that as soon as Sept 1st comes around there is nothing they can do to a individual if they're carrying a firearm, in the car, or OUT OF THE CAR :eek: (wtf)
He said all he can do if they are carrying on themselves without a chl is write a ticket. He cant do anything if they have one in the car. No more illegal possession. He said they are having a meeting next week discussing the new gun laws on carrying. I cant believe he told me I wasted my time getting my CHL.

BottleRocket

08-28-2007, 11:30 PM

Well I went out with a buddy of mine who works for the local PD here in tyler. He mention that as soon as Sept 1st comes around there is nothing they can do to a individual if they're carrying a firearm, in the car, or OUT OF THE CAR :eek: (wtf)
He said all he can do if they are packing without a chl is write a ticket. No more illegal possession. He said they are having a meeting next week discussing the new gun laws on carrying. I cant believe he told me I wasted my time getting my CHL.

you want a ticket then? doesnt sound like a waste..

JMAC

08-28-2007, 11:32 PM

Ducking a ticket doesn't sound worthless to me. Plus, when you purchase a firearm it makes it much easier to get in and out of place.

That_Is_My_El_Camino

08-28-2007, 11:39 PM

A badge doesn't guarantee an understanding of the law.

The law currently reads that you're unlawfully carrying a weapon while you're in a car if it's in plain view, you're prohibited by law from possessing a handgun, you're committing a crime other than a Class C Misdemeanor regulating traffic, or are a member of a gang. On September 1st, it changes to read the same thing, only more clearly. Somehow. You still can't carry outside your car (except en route to your car) without a CHL.

Cooter

08-28-2007, 11:44 PM

also raises legal liability big time... I'd rather risk a ticket, but I'm just a white boy

GT Dan

08-29-2007, 12:10 AM

It wasn't a waste... there have been other threads about this. There is no guarantee that every police officer you make contact with will interpret the new laws the way your buddy does. I wish they did but I'm sure they wont...

With the CHL, theres no question about your legal status or the interpretation of the law...

yoda

08-29-2007, 12:19 AM

Also a non chl holder cant carry within 1k feet of a school. Dosnt sound like a big deal but if you were to get pulled over within 1k feet of one They can run you through the ringer...

ScottsMach03

08-29-2007, 06:41 AM

You still can't carry outside your car (except en route to your car) without a CHL.

Thats exactly what he was saying. If he stopped someone for carrying all they had to say was they were en route to their car.

ScottsMach03

08-29-2007, 06:42 AM

BTW people, I know getting my CHL wasn't waste. I just stated what was said.

propellerhead

08-29-2007, 08:26 AM

If you're talking about the Castle Doctrine law, that new law allows you to have that pistol in your home, business or vehicle, from your vehicle to your home or business (assuming you can legally have that pistol at your place of business), from your home or business to your vehicle. The new law won't allow you to go from your car to the mall, in and around the mall, to the movie theater, to the restaurant, and back to your car. That's where a CHL comes in handy.

PS. If you use your handgun that you have in your car, I sure hope you can convince the responding officer, investigating officer, DA and a jury that someone was attacking you in your car or attempting to remove you from your car, and not just some brawl in a parking lot at a GTG.

Mr Majestyk

08-29-2007, 08:38 AM

As others have said, if you think all police are going to just write you a ticket if they find you in possession of a handgun without a CHL, by all means take that risk and save the $$ required to get a CHL :D

For people like me that travel (as in drive) out of state, a Texas CHL is honored by reciprocity agreements with many of the other states with CHL programs. Your new found right to carry without a CHL in Texas won't do you any good in that case.

ScottsMach03

08-29-2007, 09:32 AM

Like I stated before, this was merely a conversation between me and a friend. I personally dont thing my CHL was a waste, and I know that each officer is going to use their own best judgement when conducting a traffic stop.

For those of you who keep replying and stating "you think", need to reread my post. I HAVE a CHL, I know what the outcome will be if someone without a CHL is cought carrying a loaded firearm on them when there out in public.

futant

08-29-2007, 01:35 PM

I think I was more surprised that the officer actually knew the law.
Most don't know shit about the laws they enforce, much less your actual rights.

Think about how many cops ask to search your car, when in fact they have no right at all.
The only thing funnier than that is how many ppl believe they are allowed to do that .(without probable cause)

So to me this is good news that some departments may actually recognize this new definition of 'traveling' and the presumption of innocence.
In my opinion , if you don't have a CHL you should expect to be arrested and then have to prove you were traveling. They changed this to they have to prove you weren't traveling, which is great.
The reality of it is, most officers would arrest you. Even though this is not exactly fair prosecution the way the new law is written, it doesn't mean they wouldn't do it.

Your supposed to be innocent before proven guilty, but we all know most of the time that is BS.

RoadW3@aol.com

08-31-2007, 10:53 AM

if you give consent for the search, it is legal. If an officer asks to search your car and you say, yes, well it is ok to do so. When you remove consent, then it is unlawful search. That is easy to understand.

GT Dan

08-31-2007, 01:10 PM

For those of you who keep replying and stating "you think", need to reread my post. I HAVE a CHL, I know what the outcome will be if someone without a CHL is cought carrying a loaded firearm on them when there out in public.

No one read past the first sentence... :D

Chili

08-31-2007, 02:42 PM

PS. If you use your handgun that you have in your car, I sure hope you can convince the responding officer, investigating officer, DA and a jury that someone was attacking you in your car or attempting to remove you from your car, and not just some brawl in a parking lot at a GTG.

I'm with you on the carrying to the mall, theater, etc, but I'm not sure I understand the post script.

A CHL isn't a license to use a weapon, it is a license to carry it. The application of the law pertaining to deadly force should be applied equally. So, you and I are standing next to each other at a G2G, you with your CHL and weapon on you, me without my chl but my weapon in my car because I am 'traveling'. Some incident necessitates the use of our weapons (like some guy comes up pointing a gun at the group, is shooting at us, whatever). I lean in my car and grab mine, you pull yours, we both fire. What you are suggesting is that I am screwed and you are not.

The fact that we are allowed to carry the weapon in the car doesn't limit it's use to defending yourself only when in the car, does it? I would think the use of the weapon and the carrying of the weapon are two different issues.

Denny

08-31-2007, 02:45 PM

You know what's a waste?

REPOSTS... now those are wastes.

Chili

08-31-2007, 02:56 PM

You know what's a waste?

REPOSTS... now those are wastes.

I know something worse than that.. Calling repost without a link to the initial post.. Prove your claim sir. :D

ScottsMach03

08-31-2007, 02:58 PM

Denny

08-31-2007, 02:59 PM

I know something worse than that.. Calling repost without a link to the initial post.. Prove your claim sir. :D
You want ALL of them?

Chili

08-31-2007, 03:01 PM

You want ALL of them?

One would suffice :)

Denny

08-31-2007, 03:04 PM

One would suffice :)

http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=335183

http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=333365

http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=332912

Woops, went too far already.

Chili

08-31-2007, 03:18 PM

http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=335183

http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=333365

http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=332912

Woops, went too far already.

See I wouldn't call this a repost because he has additional / different info.

there is nothing they can do to a individual if they're carrying a firearm, in the car, or OUT OF THE CAR (wtf)
He said all he can do if they are carrying on themselves without a chl is write a ticket.

Denny

08-31-2007, 03:19 PM

See I wouldn't call this a repost because he has additional / different info.
He just added nonsense, that's all.

propellerhead

08-31-2007, 04:12 PM

I'm with you on the carrying to the mall, theater, etc, but I'm not sure I understand the post script.

A CHL isn't a license to use a weapon, it is a license to carry it. The application of the law pertaining to deadly force should be applied equally. So, you and I are standing next to each other at a G2G, you with your CHL and weapon on you, me without my chl but my weapon in my car because I am 'traveling'. Some incident necessitates the use of our weapons (like some guy comes up pointing a gun at the group, is shooting at us, whatever). I lean in my car and grab mine, you pull yours, we both fire. What you are suggesting is that I am screwed and you are not.

The fact that we are allowed to carry the weapon in the car doesn't limit it's use to defending yourself only when in the car, does it? I would think the use of the weapon and the carrying of the weapon are two different issues.
If we were halfway between the mall and your car, then it's clear that you will be UCW (unlawful carrying of a weapon) without a CHL. If we're both standing next to your car, it will be a tough one to evaluate. My understanding is that you will be able to carry in your vehicle come Sept 1 since your vehicle is an extension of your "castle". Being outside your car would then be synonymous to being outside your house. You would have to show that you were unlawfully removed from your house or car to justify the use of deadly force.

However, I have read of cases before where someone used an unlawfully carried weapon in self-defense, and the use of deadly force was authorized, and the person was not charged with UCW even though he/she was guilty of it.

Interesting... I'll have to read up on it.

ScottsMach03

08-31-2007, 04:33 PM

If we were halfway between the mall and your car, then it's clear that you will be UCW (unlawful carrying of a weapon) without a CHL. If we're both standing next to your car, it will be a tough one to evaluate. My understanding is that you will be able to carry in your vehicle come Sept 1 since your vehicle is an extension of your "castle". Being outside your car would then be synonymous to being outside your house. You would have to show that you were unlawfully removed from your house or car to justify the use of deadly force.

However, I have read of cases before where someone used an unlawfully carried weapon in self-defense, and the use of deadly force was authorized, and the person was not charged with UCW even though he/she was guilty of it.

Interesting... I'll have to read up on it.

Do you have a TX PENAL CODE BOOK? If you do then you will find that he has the same right to use deadly force whether he is in his car, or standing beside it that you do with a chl. Any citizen is able to protect themselves from harm. If someone was to come up and attack him and he reach in his car and grabbed his 9mm and blasted the perp then there would be nothing the law could do to him. He would be with in his rights. Now if he was a felon, or doing some illegal behavor, then it changes everything.

propellerhead

08-31-2007, 04:47 PM

That's what I was thinking but needed confirmation. If the use of deadly force is justified, then can or will he be charged with UCW or will the UCW be ignored.

HOOCBB

08-31-2007, 05:21 PM

That's what I was thinking but needed confirmation. If the use of deadly force is justified, then can or will he be charged with UCW or will the UCW be ignored.

That would depend on the perception of the responding officer through your words and actions(or lack thereof). If you don't at least tell the responding LEO the basics of what happened and refuse to talk, you will probably be arrested on the spot and charged with homicide. The decision to add-on UCW may come from the DA's office.

A wise attorney was told me that a courtroom is a stage and it's all about perception and deception. But the perception starts at the scene.

Don't be stupid. You do have the right to remain silent, but there are times when you need to talk. Just keep it simple or you could say something you will regret.

Chili

08-31-2007, 09:11 PM

He just added nonsense, that's all.

Lol.

Chili

08-31-2007, 09:13 PM

That's what I was thinking but needed confirmation. If the use of deadly force is justified, then can or will he be charged with UCW or will the UCW be ignored.

That's the only real gray area I see too.. Ultimately I would rather have the CHL, just considering the scenario presented.

propellerhead

08-31-2007, 09:36 PM

From what I gathered, you can be charged with UCW but probably won't if the focus is on whether you were justified in the use of deadly force or not. Like if you are charged with robbing a bank, they're probably not going to pay attention to the fact that you were illegally parked. :)

In other words, the use of deadly force issue is separate from the UCW issue.

V-SICK

09-09-2007, 01:35 PM

If we were halfway between the mall and your car, then it's clear that you will be UCW (unlawful carrying of a weapon) without a CHL. If we're both standing next to your car, it will be a tough one to evaluate. My understanding is that you will be able to carry in your vehicle come Sept 1 since your vehicle is an extension of your "castle". Being outside your car would then be synonymous to being outside your house. You would have to show that you were unlawfully removed from your house or car to justify the use of deadly force.

However, I have read of cases before where someone used an unlawfully carried weapon in self-defense, and the use of deadly force was authorized, and the person was not charged with UCW even though he/she was guilty of it.

Interesting... I'll have to read up on it.

I can add by experience,
When I was 16 I had a Felony of a second degree.
I used a fire arm to protect my self from someone shooting at me.
I shot the other guy in the leg 3 times while in school grounds.

The day before I told my principal and the School Cop that some gang was messing with me and they told me they were going to shoot me, I asked to be transfered to another school, but I was denied the transfer.

The next day I show up to school with a small .25Cal just to scare the guys if I need it to, but I ended up having to return fire when the guy started shooting at me.

I was only charged with Possession of a Fire arm in a forbidden Place
I was in probation for 1 year / The judge said if I complete probation with no problems he will see that my record gets cleaned and a sealed.

So I did and now I don't have any criminal record

I'm not saying what I did was the right thing to do in any way, but if I did anything different I wouldn't be here posting reposts all the time.