CHL?

[Rex B]

Interesting. Pioneer makes a nice system with a DVD player that also uses the screen for GPS.
Sounds like if it's only used for GPS it's still illegal.

[shootthesheet]

"travel not driving".... I'd love to see where the law makes a distinction here.... but as a still (patiently waiting) non-CHL owner, I'm ALWAYS on a long trip. Even if I'm driving from my house to the grocery store, if I'm asked, I'm on my way to Houston. That "you're not traveling, you're driving around town" thing is lame bull

There is not a distinction yet. If you have a CHL and there is a gun where you can get to it then it is yours unless another CHL holder has it on their person or claims it as their own.

If a CHL holder is asked for ID and they have a gun on or about them then they must show the peace officer their CHL.

The best way to avoid problem like this is to have your things in order. Drive properly and obey the requirements about vehicles. Keep it concealed and go beyond to make sure you’re not outside the law. I will tell you I have received a warning and then a speeding ticket in the last two years. I was also pulled over on a fishing expedition by a state trooper. I no longer speed. I would suggest the O.P. do the same as well as visit this board and study the manual. Ask questions if necessary no matter how basic or complex they may be. There are some good and knowledgeable people here. I have learned more and continue to learn since I took the class. That is what we all must do to ensure we don't do the little things that will reflect on all CHL holders. IANAL

[theinvisibleheart]

Thanks for all your help, guys! This is fun and interesting!

1. I fixed the expired reg for $20 and lack of proof of insurance (no fee).
It looks like Austin (DMV home) screwed up on adr which is why, I never
got the notice. Still my fault.

2. I'll request deferred adjudication/90 days probation/dismissal of
charge for DVD/movie player.

3. I went to Lewisville PD to find out if there was PC(probable cause)
for the stop. Ofc. Jones told me that the reason for the stop, after
he went to front of the vehicle and saw the expired reg, was expired
reg. Since it was impossible to see expired reg from the rear at
10:55pm on a dark street, he had to have run my plates before the stop
initiated at around 10:55pm.

I went to LPD to find the time my plate was ran. I was told that the
dispatch will get me the time tomorrow.

THANKS! I started presenting my DL/CHL everywhere (:-).

I think DL+CHL doctrine is flawed, after the passage of MPA and
castle doctrine. CHL should be mandatory only in places where
CHL is required to carry firearms legally.

But it's my fault for no abiding by the code. From now on, I'll present
my DL+CHL everywhere.

If it's suspended for 90 days, I'll just do w/o for 90 days.

--John

[stroo]

I was reading the DVD citation wrong. I am so technologically backward that I was only thinking of music CD, not video DVDs. It makes sense that a video screen shouldn't be visible to the driver.

[fickman]

I know this is hotly debated here, but I'll throw in my $0.02.

I present my CHL anytime I'm asked for DL by a LEO regardless of if I'm carrying or not.

Why?

1) CHL instructors advised us to as a courtesy.

2) My Brother-in-law is a LEO, and he said he appreciates it.

3) It identifies me (in general) as one of the "good guys" to most LEOs. They know I subjected myself to a background check, sat through a class, taken a test, and spent a lot of money to get that thing. They also know that I'm (probably) willing to risk my life to save somebody else's.

4) The personality of every LEO I've shown it to has changed favorably after showing it. They have let their guard down a little and been more personable. Three times I was pulled over for speeding (never egregiously over the limit) and they let me off each time. I don't count on it. I don't think it's a "get-out-of-jail-free card". I don't think I'm "in the club". I don't behave recklessly with a sense of entitlement. Nope. Once I was lost and missed a speed reduction (in Bridgeport), once I was passing somebody on a highway (Hwy 84 between Post and Sweetware - State Trooper pulled me over), and once I had a new truck with oversize tires and an inaccurate speedometer (in Keller). They were more polite, friendly, and open in conversation once they saw the card and my courtesy towards them. . . and each one gave me warning when they didn't have to. The CHL wasn't the only reason, but it was definitely one variable in a list of reasons they chose to show mercy to me. This is only n=3, so your experience may vary. I don't plan to seek out more data plots.

[HGWC]

You're required to identify with the CHL if you're in possession, but I don't see anywhere in the law where you have to admit to having the firearm. As we've seen here, admitting to having a firearm can be incriminating, and you don't have to answer questions that can incriminate you. Someone correct me if I'm wrong on the law not requiring you to admit you have a firearm. Sounds to me like the best answer to an officer's questions about firearm possession is to not answer until you have you're attorney present.

[theinvisibleheart]

BTW, for people familiar with criminal law on this board, would
"fruit of the poisonous tree" (extension of exclusionary rule) apply
if an improper stop was made by the officer?

That is, basically, evidence whose source was not legally obtained becomes
tainted and not admissible. So, if prior to flashing the red lights, LEO did not ran the plate,
everything thereafter becomes legally tainted?

Also, the department and by extension, the city, becomes
liable for civil rights violation?

Thanks for sharing your legal expertise.

--John

[The Annoyed Man]

You're required to identify with the CHL if you're in possession, but I don't see anywhere in the law where you have to admit to having the firearm. As we've seen here, admitting to having a firearm can be incriminating, and you don't have to answer questions that can incriminate you. Someone correct me if I'm wrong on the law not requiring you to admit you have a firearm. Sounds to me like the best answer to an officer's questions about firearm possession is to not answer until you have you're attorney present.

How can admitting that you have a firearm be incriminating if it is legal for you to have one in the first place? Your CHL permits it, unless otherwise in a posted area. Period. It seems to me that what's at issue here is the OP's failure to produce both his CHL along with TDL when he was first stopped, since he knew he was armed. That is the violation.

Here's a simple way out this kind of quandary in the future: Carry your CHL & TDL in a separate ID holder in your shirt pocket where you can access it if pulled over without trying to dig your wallet out from the pocket on which you are sitting. I have a brown leather one that folds, with two clear plastic covered ID holders on the inside. Personally, I have yet to be pulled over for anything since I moved to Texas almost 3 years ago; but if I am, I will have my ID holder in hand, window down, when the cop walks up to my window. I will hand it to him before asked to do so - whether or not I have a weapon in the car. There is a simple reason for it... ...I don't have the energy for avoidable confrontations, and I don't care if he knows about my CHL status. He's a cop, fer cryin' out loud, and it is not the same thing as disclosing my CHL to a regular civilian. This is not about letting myself be bullied, or being cowed by "the man." It is a simple acknowledgment that the guy has a tough job, and I'm willing to meet him halfway to make things go more smoothly. Who among us really needs any extra hassles? It seems to me that a spirit of confrontation because of an insistence of standing on niggling principles when there is more to be lost than to be gained by taking a stand on those principles is lacking in wisdom.

If the cop behaves poorly, remember that he most likely has a dash cam. His poor behavior will be on tape and on record, and it can be subpoenaed. You do have legal recourse in the end if your rights are violated; and if you vigorously pursue protecting those rights after the fact, particularly if there is litigation involved in which you are the plaintiff, you can bet your bottom dollar that the officers in that jurisdiction will receive a refresher course on the proper way to interact with a citizen who is lawfully in possession of a firearm, particularly if that citizen has gone a little bit out of his way to try and make things go smoothly. But at the end of the day, you're talking about a confrontation between two people, both who have guns, but only one of which will be exonerated if there is a shooting; and one of the involved people is legally considered a "friend of the court," and the other isn't.

Matthew 10:16,17 says

16 I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.

17 "Be on your guard against men; they will hand you over to the local councils and flog you in their synagogues.

The shrewd thing to me seems to be to prepare yourself in advance for the possibility that you may be stopped in the future, have a plan for dealing with that eventuality, regularly rehearse it in your mind, and then act on it if you are stopped. Here's how I do it: almost every time I see a cop car near me on the road, I ask myself, "what are you going to do if he pulls you over?" It's that simple. By now, I've gone over it in my mind so many times, I've already got the process visualized and internalized. I know for a certain fact that, even if the officer is an ignorant jerk, I'm going to do everything right. That way, at the end of the day, I have the moral and the legal high ground.

[HGWC]

How can admitting that you have a firearm be incriminating if it is legal for you to have one in the first place?

In cases all over the country, the apparent legal possession of a firearm can still lead to all sorts of hassle. For example, in this case just having a CHL on file lead to being questioned about a potential Class A misdemeanor during a traffic stop. I've never been questioned about firearms during many traffic stops in over thirty years of driving. Yet I expect to get questioned every time now. The laws are complicated, and just as in this case, you may be unaware that you are in violation.

If you're dealing with a good cop, politely and respectfully refraining from answering questions on a potential Class A misdemeanor offense during a traffic stop should never be a problem. In this case, had the gentleman not answered the question, the only way the gun would have been uncovered is if the officer conducted a search without consent. We should do everything we can to comply with the law. However, "Do you have any firearms," during a traffic stop is tied directly to a potential Class A misdemeanor, up to a $4000 fine, up to a year in jail, and permanent revocation of your CHL, just for starters. Before answering, you might ask yourself, among other things, how well do you really know the laws, and how sure are you that you're in compliance? People will handle the situation as they feel appropriate. I'm just saying that refraining from answering the question is an option, and it's something to think about.

[Liberty]

However, "Do you have any firearms," during a traffic stop is tied directly to a potential Class A misdemeanor, up to a $4000 fine, up to a year in jail, and permanent revocation of your CHL, just for starters. Before answering, you might ask yourself, among other things, how well do you really know the laws, and how sure are you that you're in compliance? People will handle the situation as they feel appropriate. I'm just saying that refraining from answering the question is an option, and it's something to think about.

I propose that if any CHL isn't absolutely sure whether they are in compliance, that they stop carrying until they figure it out. That's suppose to be the idea of a 10 hour class, the handbook every CHL holder is supposed to receive, and of this forum.. I and many (most all?) CHLers carry confidently that we are within the law.

[HGWC]

I propose that if any CHL isn't absolutely sure whether they are in compliance, that they stop carrying until they figure it out. That's suppose to be the idea of a 10 hour class, the handbook every CHL holder is supposed to receive, and of this forum.. I and many (most all?) CHLers carry confidently that we are within the law.

That's a 73 page manual you're talking about, and the training class was up to how long ago? Let me go get my manual and refresh my memory. Ah yes, here it is. Training class, indefinite delay for issuance of the CHL, then four years, then up to the person's birthday in the fifth year. Sorry I'm so irresponsible I didn't even memorize that on page 13 long enough to even get my CHL. I suppose I should just recognize I'm not worthy! The OP is not the first person I've heard of that has made the mistake of not showing the CHL when asked for ID. I wonder how well the OP thought he knew the laws before this traffic stop.

[mr.72]

Actually, I think the OP was under the impression that they didn't have to show their CHL if they were legally carrying in a place that did not require a CHL to carry (their car).

[FlynJay]

That's a 73 page manual you're talking about, and the training class was up to how long ago? Let me go get my manual and refresh my memory. Ah yes, here it is. Training class, indefinite delay for issuance of the CHL, then four years, then up to the person's birthday in the fifth year. Sorry I'm so irresponsible I didn't even memorize that on page 13 long enough to even get my CHL. I suppose I should just recognize I'm not worthy! The OP is not the first person I've heard of that has made the mistake of not showing the CHL when asked for ID. I wonder how well the OP thought he knew the laws before this traffic stop.

As a CHL, having been through the 10-15 hour training class, you should have a fairly good idea of what the law says. You also have a handbook and a very good .pdf of the handbook from the TXDPS website, which when you have questions you should research to find the correct answer. If in doubt bring it up here and people will help you figure it out.

But, It is the CHL's responsibility to know the laws. If you are wrong on the law, the reprecussions could be as benign as a 90 day suspension for failure to show CHL, or as serious as homicide.

If you really want a thought exercise try deciphering other states laws (mandatory if you want to carry in other states), Texas is definately one of the better written.

[theinvisibleheart]

first, to clear it off, it's DEFINITELY MY FAULT for not presenting TX DL+CHL since it's in reg.

To me and also to my friend who is an attorney/CHL holder, albeit, in TN, it's counterintuitive and doesn't make sense when I can have f/a w/o CHL or I don't have a f/a on me.

I realize that legislative laws are created, quite often, on an evolutionary basis and therefore, may not make sense.

A better law (for state of Texas) would be a requirement to produce CHL when it's relevant (illegal otherwise). For example, I'm neither at my home or vehicle or f/a appropriate place like shooting range, and I have a f/a on me. In that case, it makes perfect sense for LEO to ask for CHL and for CHL holder to produce one.

If I'm not mistaken about TN requirement to produce CHL on demand, not DL+CHL everywhere everytime like in TX, whether relevant or not, then TN's model make more sense, at least, in this regard.

--John

[Keith B]

I propose that if any CHL isn't absolutely sure whether they are in compliance, that they stop carrying until they figure it out. That's suppose to be the idea of a 10 hour class, the handbook every CHL holder is supposed to receive, and of this forum.. I and many (most all?) CHLers carry confidently that we are within the law.

That's a 73 page manual you're talking about, and the training class was up to how long ago? Let me go get my manual and refresh my memory. Ah yes, here it is. Training class, indefinite delay for issuance of the CHL, then four years, then up to the person's birthday in the fifth year. Sorry I'm so irresponsible I didn't even memorize that on page 13 long enough to even get my CHL. I suppose I should just recognize I'm not worthy! The OP is not the first person I've heard of that has made the mistake of not showing the CHL when asked for ID. I wonder how well the OP thought he knew the laws before this traffic stop.

There is an old saying, 'Ignorance of the law is no excuse'. That goes for traffic laws, violence, theft, CHL, etc. You are not going to get away with running a stop sign or speeding just because you say you forgot it was supposed to be obeyed.

When you get a license of any kind, you have a responsibility to follow the rules. The OP failed to follow the rules. He admits he did. It was and honest mistake, and happens. Luckily, it sounds like he is not going to get hit with not showing his CHL when he presented his ID. However, the law is written as such, and unless it is changed (which we hope will happen) you must follow it.