law change

[paadams]

I heard the law changed on how long a CHL is good for. From 4 years to 10. Is this accurate and is this for new licenses only or for those that just got them. I only ask because I just got my license about 2 months before they changed the law. Any clarification is appreciated.

[seamusTX]

I heard the law changed on how long a CHL is good for. From 4 years to 10. Is this accurate ...?

No. A new license expires on your fourth birthday after it is issued. A renewal on the fifth.

The federal law that allows license holders to bypass NICS requires that the license have a term of less five years or less, so state law is not likely to change until the federal law changes. Check the weather reports in Hades.

- Jim

[KBCraig]

The confusion about "10 years" probably came from someone misunderstanding a new change in the law. While the license will only be good for a maximum of five years, CHLs renewing for the second or subsequent time only have to take the renewal class every 10 years.

[paadams]

thanks for clarifing that for me.

[drinks]

I heard the law changed on how long a CHL is good for. From 4 years to 10. Is this accurate ...?

No. A new license expires on your fourth birthday after it is issued. A renewal on the fifth.

The federal law that allows license holders to bypass NICS requires that the license have a term of less five years or less, so state law is not likely to change until the federal law changes. Check the weather reports in Hades.

- Jim

Either you are off 1 year or DPS messed up when they issued mine.
I received my CHL in June, '07 and it expires July '12, actually 5 years and 2 weeks.
This is a new ,not a renewal CHL.

[5111]

Either you are off 1 year or DPS messed up when they issued mine.
I received my CHL in June, '07 and it expires July '12, actually 5 years and 2 weeks.
This is a new ,not a renewal CHL.

You just got lucky because it was so close to your birthday. I got my CHL in August and my B-day is in February. So I got 4 years and 6 months. If you time it right you could get 5 or if you are really lucky (like you) you could get 5yr plus a week or two.

[seamusTX]

Either you are off 1 year or DPS messed up when they issued mine. I received my CHL in June, '07 and it expires July '12, actually 5 years and 2 weeks.

DPS messed up.

GC §411.183. EXPIRATION. (a) A license issued under this subchapter expires on the first birthday of the license holder occurring after the fourth anniversary of the date of issuance.

- Jim

[JJR1971]

My CHL instructor stated the law had recently changed so that it is now legal to carry a handgun in the glovebox of a car without a CHL.

However, if you have a "Not SA" (i.e. revolver) CHL permit but have the "wrong" kind of gun in your glove box (i.e. semiauto), you can be busted, whereas Joe Citizen *without* the CHL would be ok under the "travel presumption". Quirk of the law as it now stands.

Frankly I'm not comfortable with the "travel presumption" as adequate protection from arrest & prosecution....I wish the Texas law was more unambiguous and forthright on the subject, like South Carolina's law on carrying in a car (which is viewed as an extension of one's home in SC).
That's why I went ahead and took the CHL class and submitted my application & fee payment as of today.

[Liberty]

My CHL instructor stated the law had recently changed so that it is now legal to carry a handgun in the glovebox of a car without a CHL.

However, if you have a "Not SA" (i.e. revolver) CHL permit but have the "wrong" kind of gun in your glove box (i.e. semiauto), you can be busted, whereas Joe Citizen *without* the CHL would be ok under the "travel presumption". Quirk of the law as it now stands.

Frankly I'm not comfortable with the "travel presumption" as adequate protection from arrest & prosecution....I wish the Texas law was more unambiguous and forthright on the subject, like South Carolina's law on carrying in a car (which is viewed as an extension of one's home in SC).
That's why I went ahead and took the CHL class and submitted my application & fee payment as of today.

While the SA NSA might seem like an issue. I think its very unlikely to ever come as an issue for CHL holders. Most CHL instructors make available a SA for those who do not own own. Almost anyone who qualifies with a revolver these days does so because they are pretty convinced they don't want to have anything to do with the newfangled Semi Automatics. Perhaps it is timed to get this fixed at the state house though. Id we don't need a special liscense to drive with a standard transmission, we probably don't need a special lisence to to drive an auto loading pistol. What strikes me as funny about the whole thing is that from what I have seen is that the folks who prefer the wheel guns are usually the older more experienced shooters. It us young kids who are new to this handgunning thing that always have the auto loaders

[frankie_the_yankee]

Frankly I'm not comfortable with the "travel presumption" as adequate protection from arrest & prosecution....I wish the Texas law was more unambiguous and forthright on the subject,...

It is as of SEP 1. On that date, carrying concealed in a car became LEGAL. It's not dependent on a travel presumption any more. It's not a "defense to prosecution". It is an EXCEPTION to the law that generally bans carrying, just like having a CHL is an exemption.

But there are still some situations where carrying in a car without a CHL can bite you. So I would urge anyone to take the class and get the CHL.

[srothstein]

My CHL instructor stated the law had recently changed so that it is now legal to carry a handgun in the glovebox of a car without a CHL.

This is correct. It can actually be anywhere in the car, even on your hip, as long as it is concealed. There are a few other minor rules too.

However, if you have a "Not SA" (i.e. revolver) CHL permit but have the "wrong" kind of gun in your glove box (i.e. semiauto), you can be busted, whereas Joe Citizen *without* the CHL would be ok under the "travel presumption". Quirk of the law as it now stands.

This is not correct. Your instructor missed, or misunderstood, that the carrying of a weapon in the car is now an element of the offense. This means that to be charged with unlawfully carrying, an officer must first prove the you were not in a car you own or under your control. It is only after they can prove this offense that the non-applicability statute would kick in and you would have to show that it was of a type to match the CHL.

But as was already posted, this is really a non-issue since most people get the SA type of CHL, no matter what they carry.

Frankly I'm not comfortable with the "travel presumption" as adequate protection from arrest & prosecution....I wish the Texas law was more unambiguous and forthright on the subject, like South Carolina's law on carrying in a car (which is viewed as an extension of one's home in SC).
That's why I went ahead and took the CHL class and submitted my application & fee payment as of today.

Well, as was already posted, we now have a very unambiguous law on carrying in the car.It took effect on Sep. 1 and makes it very clear that you can carry in the car. The problem is the other little rules I mentioned and how they can bite people unexpectedly. For example, the law says you can have it if you are the car owner or it is under your control. If you are a passenger in my car, you would be unlawfully carrying.

A bigger problem is the rule to not be committing any non-traffic offense or any offense higher than a class C. It means if I stop you for throwing a cigarette out the car window, you would be unlawfully carrying (that is a class C but not a traffic offense). Same for having the radio too loud. If I stop you for DWI or reckless driving, you would be unlawfully carrying also (those are both higher than class C).

I strongly recommend the CHL. Not only does it alleviate some of these minor potential problems, but it eliminates the NICS call when you buy your next firearm.

[flintknapper]

Good info Stephan, thanks!