alchohol and chl

[marksiwel]

That why when I go out drinking I carry one of these

[Keith B]

That why when I go out drinking I carry one of these

Be very careful. If you remove the cap they can arrest you for open 'container' carrying.

[chabouk]

If you are involved in a shooting after that one drink you better believe it is going to become an issue.

This is the conventional wisdom, and we hear it repeated over and over.

But is there anything to back it up? Any legal cases where someone was put through the wringer over a legally justified shooting, just because they had a drink and were not intoxicated?

There was a recent case in North Carolina where two off duty federal correctional officers were in a restaurant that has a reputation for turning into a biker bar after 9 p.m. Around midnight they were involved in an altercation with another patron, so they left. The other patron (a member of a motorcycle club) and his buddy followed them outside, and exchanged shots in the parking lot. The biker fired one shot, hit nothing, but was hit multiple times by return fire and died at the scene. His buddy was arrested for illegally carrying a concealed handgun. It was reported that all had been drinking, but I have to believe the officer who fired the shots was not intoxicated by NC standards, because the DA filed the case with the grand jury with a recommendation of 2nd degree murder. They refused to indict him for anything.

First of all the case above has nothing to do with CHL or TX law.

It's relevant because NC law is even more specific and strict than TX law. In NC, a licensee isn't allowed to drink at all, not just "not be intoxicated".

The fact of the matter is there are many variables that can lead to legal issues after a shooting. Even the smell of alcohol on your breath could bring your version of the events into question. Anyone who is willing to let alcohol become one of the "variables" is acting very foolishly and irresponsibly. As others have said, guns and alcohol don't mix. If that one drink is that important, leave the gun at home or better yet get some help.

For the record, I don't drink and carry, just like I don't drink and drive, so please don't insinuate that I might "need help". We're addressing the law, not the woulda-coulda-shoulda. This discussion is about the legality of responsibly enjoying an adult beverage at a non-intoxicating level.

There are many variables that can be used to question your judgment. Why were you at that kind of place at that time of day? Why didn't you do your shopping in daylight, instead of walking alone across a dark parking lot? Did you really think it was a good idea to wear an Eagles jersey in Dallas? Why didn't you make coffee at home, instead of stumbling into Starbucks desperate for a fix?

[WildBill]

We're addressing the law, not the woulda-coulda-shoulda. This discussion is about the legality of responsibly enjoying an adult beverage at a non-intoxicating level.

I have stayed out of this for four pages of posts. Against my better judgement, I feel compelled to add my two cents. The Texas Law is pretty clear about carrying while intoxicated so, actually, we are addressing the "woulda-coulda-shoulda."

Wgoforth's post stated that his LEO CHL instructor said: "The CHL carrier is not permitted to be drunk while carrying. For the purpose of CHL, drunk is considered any measurable amount of alcohol." We all know that this isn't the law, but if you were involved in a shooting after you had one drink THIS LEO would arrest you. According to davidtx's post, his LEO friend would also arrest you. How many other LEOs share this same opinion, I don't know, but obviously there are some. Again, it comes down to personal choice. Legal or not, do you want to take the chance of being arrested?

I know we shouldn't have to behave according to "legal what-ifs" but that is the reality of life.

[Big Tuna]

I hope that cop applies the same standards to everyone leaving a bar.

We all know drunk driving KILLS and INJURES many more people than drunk concealed carry, so I hope that cop goes after the real dangers to the people of Texas.

Mods note: Some images in video are graphic.

[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=Z2mf8DtWWd8[/youtube]

[CWOOD]

I hope that cop applies the same standards to everyone leaving a bar.

We all know drunk driving KILLS and INJURES many more people than drunk concealed carry, so I hope that cop goes after the real dangers to the people of Texas.

Mods note: Some images in video are graphic.

[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=Z2mf8DtWWd8[/youtube]

My gosh...That is POWERFUL

Thanks

[jmra]

First of all the case above has nothing to do with CHL or TX law.

It's relevant because NC law is even more specific and strict than TX law. In NC, a licensee isn't allowed to drink at all, not just "not be intoxicated".

The case you quoted had nothing to do with civilian cc. You are comparing apples and oranges.


For the record, I don't drink and carry, just like I don't drink and drive, so please don't insinuate that I might "need help". We're addressing the law, not the woulda-coulda-shoulda. This discussion is about the legality of responsibly enjoying an adult beverage at a non-intoxicating level.

If you don't drink and carry then how could you possibly think my remarks applied to you? I was speaking to the subject matter. As to the legality of drinking while carrying - why does the law set blood alcohol limits for driving and not for cc? The lack of a limit for cc speaks volumes.

There are many variables that can be used to question your judgment. Why were you at that kind of place at that time of day? Why didn't you do your shopping in daylight, instead of walking alone across a dark parking lot? Did you really think it was a good idea to wear an Eagles jersey in Dallas? Why didn't you make coffee at home, instead of stumbling into Starbucks desperate for a fix?
Thank you for making my point. As I stated earlier - there are enough variables involved that can lead to legal issues, you (I'm sorry, that should read "any person" instead of "you") would be very foolish to add alcohol to the mix.

All of the opinions that I have heard from LEO's (*albeit they are second hand from those posting LEO's comments) indicate that a person who was involved in a shooting with the smell of alcohol on their breath would be arrested if that LEO was handling the case. Could a person (I won't say "you") fight it in court and win? Let's see how this sounds "were you drinking?" - "yes, but I only had one beer" - bet they've never heard anyone lie about that one before.
*=edited comment.

[WildBill]

All of the comments that I have heard from LEO's on this thread indicate that a person who was involved in a shooting with the smell of alcohol on their breath would be arrested if that LEO was handling the case. Could a person (I won't say "you") fight it in court and win? Let's see how this sounds "were you drinking?" - "yes, but I only had one beer" - bet they've never heard anyone lie about that one before.

That was going to be my next question.

[Skiprr]

As to the legality of drinking while carrying - why does the law set blood alcohol limits for driving and not for cc? The lack of a limit for cc speaks volumes.

You are misreading the statutes. The definition of "intoxicated" is precisely the same for all instances: see PC §49.01(2); GC §411.171; and the the Health and Safety Code, Title 6, Subtitle C.

FYI, this subject has been discussed on the board extensively. The last round was just 60 days ago: http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=29504.

[Oldgringo]

Thanks for the graphic, Big Tuna.

Those are images truly worth 10,000, or more, words. Unfortunately, the ones who need most to see the video do not think the message applies to them.

[Kythas]

I hope that cop applies the same standards to everyone leaving a bar.

We all know drunk driving KILLS and INJURES many more people than drunk concealed carry, so I hope that cop goes after the real dangers to the people of Texas.

Mods note: Some images in video are graphic.

[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=Z2mf8DtWWd8[/youtube]

Wow. Very powerful.

Reminds me of one of the worst things I ever had to do when I was a cop - notifying parents that their teenage son was killed in a car accident caused by a drunk driver. Luckily I only had to do that once, but that was once too many.

However, that cured me of ever drinking and driving or letting any of my friends drink and drive if I could prevent it.

[jmra]

As to the legality of drinking while carrying - why does the law set blood alcohol limits for driving and not for cc? The lack of a limit for cc speaks volumes.

You are misreading the statutes. The definition of "intoxicated" is precisely the same for all instances: see PC §49.01(2); GC §411.171; and the the Health and Safety Code, Title 6, Subtitle C.

FYI, this subject has been discussed on the board extensively. The last round was just 60 days ago: http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=29504.

Here is the argument I have heard:

A person with a CHL charged with carrying while intoxicated would be charged under PC 46.035 d. The person is not charged with public intoxication under PC 49.

Since there are no definitions for intoxication within PC 46 and PC 49 is not referenced within PC 46 and PC 49 does not deal directly with CHL as it does with public intoxication, the operation of motor vehicles, water craft, and aircraft, the definition of intoxication within PC 49 (specifically the blood alcohol limit of .08) does not apply to PC 46 and therefore is open to interpretation. A loophole in the law if you will. (If you look at PC §49.01 you will see the title "Definitions in this chapter" - the argument is that these definitions of intoxication only apply if you are being charged under PC 49. You can not be charged for "cc while intoxicated" under PC 49 because there is no provision for such under PC49.)


This "loophole" is used by LEO's to justifiy the "ride" and why CHL instructors teach that the limit stated in PC 49 does not apply to cc. Can you beat it in court? Don't know, could be a bunch of bull, but it will cost you money to find out.

[boomerang]

Since there are no definitions for intoxication within PC 46

46.06 clearly states "Intoxicated" means substantial impairment of mental or physical capacity resulting from introduction of any substance into the body.

That's actually more lenient for us than the PC 49 definition, because BAC of 0.08 is not presumptive in the PC 46.06 definition.

Picture it this way. Only A meets the PC 46 definition but either A or B is enough to meet the PC 49 definition.

[frazzled]

How many $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$s do you have to beat it in court.

Just dont drink.

If you are just going to drink leave you gun at home.

Simple mantra that resolves the issue without paying $$$ and that whole holding tank joyfest.

[jmra]

How many $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$s do you have to beat it in court.

Just dont drink.

If you are just going to drink leave you gun at home.

Simple mantra that resolves the issue without paying $$$ and that whole holding tank joyfest.

I still wish someone would tell me why that one drink is so important.