TexasCHLforum.com

srothstein wrote:

AEA wrote:But what Law gives them the AUTHORITY to run serial numbers of CHL holder's guns?

The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States.

Well, more specifically, our principals of anything not forbidden is legal.

I thought that was for th epeople and was the other way around for the goverment: if its not allowed for the goverment to do it its prohibited.

Bullwhip wrote:

srothstein wrote:

AEA wrote:But what Law gives them the AUTHORITY to run serial numbers of CHL holder's guns?

The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States.

Well, more specifically, our principals of anything not forbidden is legal.

I thought that was for th epeople and was the other way around for the goverment: if its not allowed for the goverment to do it its prohibited.

You're thinking of the Tenth Amendment but that was repealed because it limits Federal power too much.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

gringo pistolero wrote:You're thinking of the Tenth Amendment but that was repealed because it limits Federal power too much.

Repealed? Surely you jest, given the amount of legislation passed under the guise of the Commerce Clause that doesn't pass even a basic smell test.

jimlongley wrote:

powerboatr wrote:just asking
but aren't the serial numbers already in the atf database? When i purchase a new firearm the serial number is listed on the atf form.

i would say private sales..the number may never get transferred to the new owner.
interesting.

That form stays in the possession of the owner of the gun store until such time as that store goes out of business, at which time the form passes on to BATFE where they are not supposed, by law, to record any of the information on the forms.

Not always true, when you purchase two handguns in a five day period it has to be logged on the ATF multiple handgun purchase form. This form is faxed to the ATF and they have all your info and the firearm info. They do check the serial numbers on these forms, I have had them call me when I wrote the wrong serial number. So, they can get the info on your handgun purchases.

mrvmax wrote:

jimlongley wrote:

powerboatr wrote:just asking
but aren't the serial numbers already in the atf database? When i purchase a new firearm the serial number is listed on the atf form.

i would say private sales..the number may never get transferred to the new owner.
interesting.

That form stays in the possession of the owner of the gun store until such time as that store goes out of business, at which time the form passes on to BATFE where they are not supposed, by law, to record any of the information on the forms.

Not always true, when you purchase two handguns in a five day period it has to be logged on the ATF multiple handgun purchase form. This form is faxed to the ATF and they have all your info and the firearm info. They do check the serial numbers on these forms, I have had them call me when I wrote the wrong serial number. So, they can get the info on your handgun purchases.

True, for that special case, but then it makes me wonder where they are finding the serial numbers to compare them to.

They must have serial numbers from the manufacturers, how else would they know the serial number I wrote was wrong?

mrvmax wrote:They must have serial numbers from the manufacturers, how else would they know the serial number I wrote was wrong?

The serial number is already in their database from a different purchase.

jimlongley wrote:

mrvmax wrote:

jimlongley wrote:

powerboatr wrote:just asking
but aren't the serial numbers already in the atf database? When i purchase a new firearm the serial number is listed on the atf form.

i would say private sales..the number may never get transferred to the new owner.
interesting.

That form stays in the possession of the owner of the gun store until such time as that store goes out of business, at which time the form passes on to BATFE where they are not supposed, by law, to record any of the information on the forms.

Not always true, when you purchase two handguns in a five day period it has to be logged on the ATF multiple handgun purchase form. This form is faxed to the ATF and they have all your info and the firearm info. They do check the serial numbers on these forms, I have had them call me when I wrote the wrong serial number. So, they can get the info on your handgun purchases.

True, for that special case, but then it makes me wonder where they are finding the serial numbers to compare them to.

When a weapon is reported stolen, the serial number (if provided by the theft victim) gets relayed into a database that law enforcement has access to. This is what the disarmed CHL serial number would be checked against.

AEA wrote:People (like us) do not carry around stolen guns or anything else and the background check we went through confirms this.

Yes, but it's possible.

One of my Glocks came from my sister. She got it from her ex during the divorce. During the divorce, he had decided to play dumb about assets, hoping to hide everything he could. (The judge actually greeted my ex-brother-in-law in court one day with "Good morning, Mr. I-Can't-Remember-My-Own-Name.") He flat-out refused to provide an inventory of his guns to the divorce court so in the final ruling the judge issued a blanket award of all of his firearms to my sister.

I feel fairly sure, based on some threats he made, that my ex-brother-in-law falsely reported all his guns as stolen. If I got caught with one of them, I'd eventually beat the rap but, frankly, I'd rather not bother. I know I wouldn't beat the ride.

I like that Glock and occasionally it'll be in my bag on the way to the range. I wouldn't be happy if an abusive and unnecessary search and run of serial numbers bit me on the butt.

Maybe I should just leave the dumb thing in the back of the gun safe till I'm dead and let my heirs deal with it. Since I have no heirs, it wouldn't weigh very heavy on my conscience.

E.Marquez wrote: As it always does, such a suggestion brings out the.... If a person has a CHL, but they place the gun in the center console. .. Is that gun in the car covered under MPA or CHL?.. Can I say MPA and not inform an officer when contacted and asked for ID?.. but then later if I get out, take the gun, place it in my holster and be covered by my CHL?

.

It doesn't matter whether the gun is in the console or on your person while in the car. If you have a CHL you are required to identify that you have a CHL when you are asked to identify yourself.

Then again, there is no penalty if you don't.

Liberty wrote:

E.Marquez wrote: As it always does, such a suggestion brings out the.... If a person has a CHL, but they place the gun in the center console. .. Is that gun in the car covered under MPA or CHL?.. Can I say MPA and not inform an officer when contacted and asked for ID?.. but then later if I get out, take the gun, place it in my holster and be covered by my CHL?

.

It doesn't matter whether the gun is in the console or on your person while in the car. If you have a CHL you are required to identify that you have a CHL when you are asked to identify yourself.

Then again, there is no penalty if you don't.

Since you are only required to have your CHL on your person when carrying, you are only required to produce your CHL when you are carrying. If you are not carrying a concealed weapon, then you have no duty to inform the officer that you hold a CHL. All this is a moot point for me since I carry everywhere that I am legally allowed to.

Liberty wrote:

E.Marquez wrote: As it always does, such a suggestion brings out the.... If a person has a CHL, but they place the gun in the center console. .. Is that gun in the car covered under MPA or CHL?.. Can I say MPA and not inform an officer when contacted and asked for ID?.. but then later if I get out, take the gun, place it in my holster and be covered by my CHL?

.

It doesn't matter whether the gun is in the console or on your person while in the car. If you have a CHL you are required to identify that you have a CHL when you are asked to identify yourself.

Then again, there is no penalty if you don't.

No sir, I would have to disagree .

That is not what the law requires..
"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."

And still it is a chicken or the egg deal....
If MPA is law and what is in place for chl is an exception to the law as has been theorized.... Then MPA is valid before CHL stuff even comes into play.

IANAL
SO until a test case hits the courts, it,s just opinions.

benenglishtx wrote:

AEA wrote:People (like us) do not carry around stolen guns or anything else and the background check we went through confirms this.

Yes, but it's possible.

One of my Glocks came from my sister. She got it from her ex during the divorce. During the divorce, he had decided to play dumb about assets, hoping to hide everything he could. (The judge actually greeted my ex-brother-in-law in court one day with "Good morning, Mr. I-Can't-Remember-My-Own-Name.") He flat-out refused to provide an inventory of his guns to the divorce court so in the final ruling the judge issued a blanket award of all of his firearms to my sister.

I feel fairly sure, based on some threats he made, that my ex-brother-in-law falsely reported all his guns as stolen. If I got caught with one of them, I'd eventually beat the rap but, frankly, I'd rather not bother. I know I wouldn't beat the ride.

I like that Glock and occasionally it'll be in my bag on the way to the range. I wouldn't be happy if an abusive and unnecessary search and run of serial numbers bit me on the butt.

Maybe I should just leave the dumb thing in the back of the gun safe till I'm dead and let my heirs deal with it. Since I have no heirs, it wouldn't weigh very heavy on my conscience.

If you are that unsure of it, my suggestion is to just sell it on.....it is of no use to you. Only good for possibly getting you into a LOT of trouble and loosing your CHL (you CANNOT be sure you could "Beat the rap").

If you are uncomfortable selling it on.........if it were me I would just take it to a LEO Station, tell them up front the story, ask them to run the numbers. If it comes back stolen, turn it over to them. If it is clear, keep it and enjoy it.

E.Marquez wrote:

Liberty wrote:

E.Marquez wrote: As it always does, such a suggestion brings out the.... If a person has a CHL, but they place the gun in the center console. .. Is that gun in the car covered under MPA or CHL?.. Can I say MPA and not inform an officer when contacted and asked for ID?.. but then later if I get out, take the gun, place it in my holster and be covered by my CHL?

.

It doesn't matter whether the gun is in the console or on your person while in the car. If you have a CHL you are required to identify that you have a CHL when you are asked to identify yourself.

Then again, there is no penalty if you don't.

No sir, I would have to disagree .

That is not what the law requires..
"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."

And still it is a chicken or the egg deal....
If MPA is law and what is in place for chl is an exception to the law as has been theorized.... Then MPA is valid before CHL stuff even comes into play.

IANAL
SO until a test case hits the courts, it,s just opinions.

The law requires display of the license REGARDLESS of which law (MPA or CHL) the handgun is being carried under. If you're armed, and a LEO asks for ID, you need to display the license.

E.Marquez wrote:

Liberty wrote:

E.Marquez wrote: As it always does, such a suggestion brings out the.... If a person has a CHL, but they place the gun in the center console. .. Is that gun in the car covered under MPA or CHL?.. Can I say MPA and not inform an officer when contacted and asked for ID?.. but then later if I get out, take the gun, place it in my holster and be covered by my CHL?

.

It doesn't matter whether the gun is in the console or on your person while in the car. If you have a CHL you are required to identify that you have a CHL when you are asked to identify yourself.

Then again, there is no penalty if you don't.

No sir, I would have to disagree .

That is not what the law requires..
"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."

And still it is a chicken or the egg deal....
If MPA is law and what is in place for chl is an exception to the law as has been theorized.... Then MPA is valid before CHL stuff even comes into play.

IANAL
SO until a test case hits the courts, it,s just opinions.

Interesting area I fall under along with any other LEO that maintains a valid CHL. As a LEO I am NOT required to identify myself nor tell the officer I am armed, and I am not required to have a CHL at all. I personally don't carry my CHL since I don't need it to carry my weapon as I carry my LEO ID. I only carry it when I am going to purchase a weapon. However, I would tell them out of courtesy that I am armed regardless.