Search found 5 matches

by mojo84
Tue Apr 23, 2019 4:10 pm
Forum: New to CHL?
Topic: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?
Replies: 27
Views: 1807

Re: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?

Liberty wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 4:03 pm
46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person:

(1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun or club; and

(2) is not:

(A) on the person's own premises or premises under the person's control; or

(B) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control.

(a-1) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun in a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control at any time in which:
Thanks. I remembered the part I enlarged above. In the posters question, the fact he is in control of the vehicle, he should be ok.
by mojo84
Tue Apr 23, 2019 1:48 pm
Forum: New to CHL?
Topic: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?
Replies: 27
Views: 1807

Re: firearm

Pedrowfwf123 wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:05 am
Hi guy... i have a question im going back to the oilfield in odessa/midland tx... can i cary my gun in my moms/brothers car even though the car isn't under my name?
I am not aware of who the car is titled to being an issue. As long as you are the one in control of the vehicle and authorized to be in control of it, I do not believe the motorist protection act or LTC laws address who owns the vehicle. Don't take my word as the sole source though.
by mojo84
Mon Apr 22, 2019 7:31 pm
Forum: New to CHL?
Topic: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?
Replies: 27
Views: 1807

Re: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?

RottenApple wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 7:23 pm
Jason Todd wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 12:01 pm
I never understood why some people need to bump an old thread to add false information.
Well. Now I feel a right ID10T for responding. I saw his new response and assumed (my bad) that it was a new thread. :???:
It wasn't that old of a thread. Nonetheless, it was resurrected with bad info.
by mojo84
Mon Apr 22, 2019 12:32 pm
Forum: New to CHL?
Topic: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?
Replies: 27
Views: 1807

Re: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?

Jason Todd wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 12:26 pm
Tex1961 wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 12:11 pm
Jason Todd wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 12:01 pm
RottenApple wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 10:11 am
WildRose wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 2:17 am
It's really pretty simple. If you have a lawful use of force but not deadly force drawing your weapon would be a crime.
As noted by rob777 above, this is not entirely correct.
:iagree:

I never understood why some people need to bump an old thread to add false information.
posting.php?mode=quote&f=53&p=1247389

Sec. 9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of force is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force.
Sec. 9.04 was cited back in November and I agree that's the correct answer.

The thread was dormant until bumped today with incorrect information. :tiphat:
:roll:
by mojo84
Mon Apr 22, 2019 10:19 am
Forum: New to CHL?
Topic: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?
Replies: 27
Views: 1807

Re: "Brandishing" law or prior cases?

WildRose wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 2:17 am

It's really pretty simple. If you have a lawful use of force but not deadly force drawing your weapon would be a crime.

As already noted, this is incorrect.

Return to “"Brandishing" law or prior cases?”