Is DL or ID Req'd to CC?

[Glockster]

I had a conversation with someone who stated that there is no requirement to carry either a DL or state issued ID card while carrying. That Sec. 411.205 only becomes applicable IF a LEO or magistrate demands that you produce one. That until that point that there is nothing in the law that saysyouhaveto carry anything other than your CHL. Am I missing something here?

[BulldogBorders]

Copy and paste is not working for the DPS site on my phone. But look at house bill 2739 effective 09/01/15

[longhorn86]

From HB2739:

CHAPTER 506. CONCEALED HANDGUN LICENSES AS VALID FORMS OF
PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION
Sec. 506.001. CONCEALED HANDGUN LICENSE AS VALID PROOF OF
IDENTIFICATION. (a) A person may not deny the holder of a
concealed handgun license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411,
Government Code, access to goods, services, or facilities, except
as provided by Section 521.460, Transportation Code, or in regard
to the operation of a motor vehicle, because the holder has or
presents a concealed handgun license rather than a driver's license
or other acceptable form of personal identification.
(b) This section does not affect:
(1) the requirement under Section 411.205, Government
Code, that a person subject to that section present a driver's
license or identification certificate in addition to a concealed
handgun license; or
(2) the types of identification required under federal
law to access airport premises or pass through airport security.

subsection (1) refers to government code Section 411.205, which states that both ID's must be presented upon request by LEO

Sec. 411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY LICENSE. 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.

To answer your question, technically yes, you could carry with only the CHL and no TDL on your person, but in the event you are stopped by LEO, you could be subject to citation for not producing both ID's when asked. Why take the chance?

[locke_n_load]

I hope that the next session takes care of this. I'm sure the only real scenario that the legislature thought of at the time of the CHL law was that a CHL holder would be asked for ID when pulled over while driving.
Since OC is becoming legal and cops may ask for LTC while walking about, there is no reason to carry or even have a driver's license. What if someone with an LTC is open carrying and doesn't even have a DL??? Ha.

Like I said, 2017 should have some good cleanup bills. Remove this DL requirement, make it "holster" instead of "shoulder or belt holster", remove off limit areas, etc.

[cyphertext]

Since OC is becoming legal and cops may ask for LTC while walking about, there is no reason to carry or even have a driver's license. What if someone with an LTC is open carrying and doesn't even have a DL??? Ha.

Like I said, 2017 should have some good cleanup bills. Remove this DL requirement, make it "holster" instead of "shoulder or belt holster", remove off limit areas, etc.

Note that the requirement is to have DL or their state issued ID... Even if you are "walking about", you should at least carry ID.

[Glockster]

Agree to all the fairly common sense answers. i have no problem with this but the person stating this has said that flat out there is NO requirement to have anything other than your permit, and that not having a DL or other issued state ID is only an issue IF you are stopped. But that it is perfectly legal to carry without a DL/ID. And also that there is no penalty for not carrying it so they cannot charge you with anything anyway (which he is confusing with no penalty on not having the CHL with you, I believe).

This is one of those things where someone says something that is just so contrary to what you think you know that you find yourself questioning whether the sky is the same color in their world.

[gdanaher]

Print out the relevant code, hand it to him, and wish him well.

[Glockster]

Print out the relevant code, hand it to him, and wish him well.

Been there, done that. Response was show me where in that code it says you have to have it to carry, that it only says to produce it when demanded. So no demand, no law requires you to have it.

[JALLEN]

If you aren't going to be stopped, why bother with a CHL? Or a DL?

If you use your weapon, you will very likely be stopped (remain at the scene).

[locke_n_load]

Since OC is becoming legal and cops may ask for LTC while walking about, there is no reason to carry or even have a driver's license. What if someone with an LTC is open carrying and doesn't even have a DL??? Ha.

Like I said, 2017 should have some good cleanup bills. Remove this DL requirement, make it "holster" instead of "shoulder or belt holster", remove off limit areas, etc.

Note that the requirement is to have DL or their state issued ID... Even if you are "walking about", you should at least carry ID.

IMO, if you are carrying and not doing any driving, your LTC should be all that you need, from a legal and common sense standpoint. Unfortunately that is not the case if your are asked by police for ID.

[Glockster]

I still hold the position that the laws says both, so that's what I will do.

About why a CHL doesn't substitute for a DL has had me thinking about that whole issue. I wonder how much of that is related to Federal requirements regarding DLs. There is the whole REAL ID requirements, which is what DHS (and therefore TSA) enforces to. I'm thinking that is one reason why for example, a carry permit isn't an acceptable form of ID at the airport. As far as I know, REAL ID addresses "state-issued driver’s licenses and identification cards from all states" and the requirement has become having "enhanced" DLs. I wonder if there has been an acceptable effort made at making a carry permit meet the REAL ID standards.

[Abraham]

cyphertext,

"Even if you are "walking about", you should at least carry ID."

If you aren't carrying, you as a U.S. citizen aren't by law required to carry an I.D.

If I care to go for a walk/bike ride/hike, etc. sans pistol, I can do so without an I.D.

LEO's may ask for an I.D., but I don't have to provide one when I'm out and about without my pistol and not under arrest.

As you may understand from what I'm posting, this demand for I.D., is a bit of a sore point with me.

My Dad was a WW11 veteran and used to tell me about this as it made him furious when countries like Germany during the war years could stop any citizen innocently going about their everyday business and demand "their papers".

Not so in the U.S. if you're simply going about your innocent business.

[ScottDLS]

I still hold the position that the laws says both, so that's what I will do.

About why a CHL doesn't substitute for a DL has had me thinking about that whole issue. I wonder how much of that is related to Federal requirements regarding DLs. There is the whole REAL ID requirements, which is what DHS (and therefore TSA) enforces to. I'm thinking that is one reason why for example, a carry permit isn't an acceptable form of ID at the airport. As far as I know, REAL ID addresses "state-issued driver’s licenses and identification cards from all states" and the requirement has become having "enhanced" DLs. I wonder if there has been an acceptable effort made at making a carry permit meet the REAL ID standards.

I think you're onto something. I am sure that the reason CHL isn't good for TSA is that Texas hasn't certified it to meet "REAL ID" standards, although it really would be more secure than a DL given the fingerprint/picture requirements. I used my CHL at the Pentagon once when they wanted two picture ID's and I didn't have anything else.

[Pariah3j]

cyphertext,

"Even if you are "walking about", you should at least carry ID."

If you aren't carrying, you as a U.S. citizen aren't by law required to carry an I.D.

If I care to go for a walk/bike ride/hike, etc. sans pistol, I can do so without an I.D.

LEO's may ask for an I.D., but I don't have to provide one when I'm out and about without my pistol and not under arrest.

As you may understand from what I'm posting, this demand for I.D., is a bit of a sore point with me.

My Dad was a WW11 veteran and used to tell me about this as it made him furious when countries like Germany during the war years could stop any citizen innocently going about their everyday business and demand "their papers".

Not so in the U.S. if you're simply going about your innocent business.

This is how it is suppose to be in the US - however isn't how its currently being practiced... we are scarily getting close to the Police State on this one...

[Glockster]

I still hold the position that the laws says both, so that's what I will do.

About why a CHL doesn't substitute for a DL has had me thinking about that whole issue. I wonder how much of that is related to Federal requirements regarding DLs. There is the whole REAL ID requirements, which is what DHS (and therefore TSA) enforces to. I'm thinking that is one reason why for example, a carry permit isn't an acceptable form of ID at the airport. As far as I know, REAL ID addresses "state-issued driver’s licenses and identification cards from all states" and the requirement has become having "enhanced" DLs. I wonder if there has been an acceptable effort made at making a carry permit meet the REAL ID standards.

I think you're onto something. I am sure that the reason CHL isn't good for TSA is that Texas hasn't certified it to meet "REAL ID" standards, although it really would be more secure than a DL given the fingerprint/picture requirements. I used my CHL at the Pentagon once when they wanted two picture ID's and I didn't have anything else.

We go to the same places. Having my CHL meant that I no longer had to worry about where to keep my passport when visiting the puzzle palace.