TexasCHLforum.com

Bonc_CHL wrote:Dang i wish this plastic would show up...already! I know its only been a week, this wait is going to drive me nuts!!

Try getting one back in '04ish when the wait was waaaaaaaaay longer than it is now.

TLE2 wrote:If you're drinking without a carry weapon, you're just drinking.

If you're drinking with a carry weapon, you're in "trouble"

If you're weapon is locked in the car, you're not carrying.

Just my opinion.

But if you're driving after drinking, you've got issues, whether or not there is a gun in the car.

Maybe not so easy for everyone to do but when I got my CHL I just stopped drinking unless I'm at home. (Didn't drink much before) Kinda like when they started drug testing at work I just stopped smokin that stuff. NOT WORTH THE RISK.

driver8 wrote:Maybe not so easy for everyone to do but when I got my CHL I just stopped drinking unless I'm at home. (Didn't drink much before) Kinda like when they started drug testing at work I just stopped smokin that stuff. NOT WORTH THE RISK.

I'd say "smokin that stuff" ain't worth the risk regardless.

But that's just me drink beer, Al Capone made sure it would be legal.

I have moved in the last week and still waiting on my plastic. Was woundering do I have to change my address before I get it or is it ok to do it after? Thanks.

Mutiny6910 wrote:Was woundering do I have to change my address before I get it or is it ok to do it after? Thanks.

Yes, you have moved since you filed, but as you do not have it yet, you have nothing to change.

I am new to board having just taken my class on Saturday. This topic was covered again and again as the guys could not get it. It is just as Johns036 said, if you have been drinking and the cop knows it, you probably will loose your liscense. My teacher said it really depends on the officer. But, if he smells alcohol, he would be liable if you went down the road and shot someone and he knew you had the gun. He would also feel horrible. As he would not know you from Adam, the teacher felt that you should leave the gun at home. There is 0 tolerance. He said that you could lock it up in a box in your trunk to prove you are safe with it, but because of the 0 tolerance he feels that you are risking your liscense if you choose to drink any amount, no matter how small.

At the instructor's class last week the magic words were "in control of." Locked in your trunk is still "in control of." Like driving, if you are gonna be packing don't be consuming adult beverages. If you are showing signs of impairment at 0.01 then you are impared. It's a judgement call by the LEO. 0.08 is an absolute where you are legally impaired regardless of your actions.

MoJo wrote:At the instructor's class last week the magic words were "in control of." Locked in your trunk is still "in control of." Like driving, if you are gonna be packing don't be consuming adult beverages. If you are showing signs of impairment at 0.01 then you are impared. It's a judgement call by the LEO. 0.08 is an absolute where you are legally impaired regardless of your actions.

Actually the 0.08 is not an absolute on you being "legally" impaired.... You are violating the law simply becuase your BAC is 0.08 or above. Your BAC over 0.08 is prima facie evidence (presumed) you are intoxicated. Kinda like the basic and absolute speed law...

Basic is reasonable and prudent - if you prove your speed was reasonable and prudent you did not violate anything
Absolute means there was a posted limit and you violated it. Sam concept w/ BAC and determining if you are intoxicated.

Up to 0.08 if you prove you had normal use of your mental and physical abilities you are free and clear however over 0.08 and your goose is pretty much cooked.

Bonc_CHL wrote: Dang i wish this plastic would show up...already! I know its only been a week, this wait is going to drive me nuts!!

Fasten your seat belt, it took about five months for mine. I didn't complete the dates for past residences so I had to resend the info. My application languished therefor months until I sent an email which kick started the process again.

Teamless wrote:

Mutiny6910 wrote:Was wondering do I have to change my address before I get it or is it ok to do it after? Thanks.

I had this very thing. I emailed them to find out the status of my CHL because it had been 3 or 4 months. While I was discussing with them the status I also informed the investigator of my new address and he made the change in my file so my card came in the mail with the correct address. That is the only way I found to make and address change to an application.

AFCop wrote:Actually the 0.08 is not an absolute on you being "legally" impaired.... You are violating the law simply becuase your BAC is 0.08 or above. Your BAC over 0.08 is prima facie evidence (presumed) you are intoxicated. Kinda like the basic and absolute speed law...

Hmm...has anyone ever even come close to successfully rebutting that presumption? Something like showing up to court with a bottle, drinking to .15, and beating Kasparov at chess while juggling razor blades and reciting poetry, maybe?

KD5NRH wrote:

AFCop wrote:Actually the 0.08 is not an absolute on you being "legally" impaired.... You are violating the law simply becuase your BAC is 0.08 or above. Your BAC over 0.08 is prima facie evidence (presumed) you are intoxicated. Kinda like the basic and absolute speed law...

Hmm...has anyone ever even come close to successfully rebutting that presumption? Something like showing up to court with a bottle, drinking to .15, and beating Kasparov at chess while juggling razor blades and reciting poetry, maybe?

0.08 is not rebuttable evidence that you are intoxicated. It is the legal definition of intoxicated. So if you are (0.08), you are (intoxicated).

I've posted this before, but I'll say it again. The legal definition of intoxicated is the same under the CHL law (46.035) as it is under the DWI law. So I'd recommend not driving your car if you've had "too many" to carry (under your CHL). The standard for conviction is the same for both. It is not as some contend... 0.01 or "what the cop thinks", it's the standard set out in PC 49.01. It is up to the prosecution to prove you are intoxicated under this standard, not up to you to prove you weren't.

That said, you should never carry under your CHL while intoxicated becasue it is against the law. However, I'm always surprised by the overwhelming majority of self-described teetotalers that break out whenever CHL and a drink comes up. You'd think this was the Women's Christian Temperance League (WCTL?) Forum....

It is legal to carry (under CHL) if you are not intoxicated and it is legal to drive if you are not intoxicated. In fact, it's technically legal (though not a good idea) to carry in your home even if you are intoxicated.

It all seems pretty cut and dry to me:

Sec. 46.035 (d) - A license holder commits an offense if, while intoxicated, the license holder carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether the handgun is concealed.

That being said, I *do* believe it is up to the officers personal discretion whether or not that person is intoxicated. The "legal limit" is the *highest allowable level*. I'm sure there are many who are impaired at .06. What about if the officer thinks you are under the influence of some kind of man-made chemical (Xanax or any of the other psychiatrist candy)? You won't blow anything on the meter, but you are intoxicated. This boils down to the officers discretion.

If I have a Shiner (it's rare for me to have a drink) and a steak at Saltgrass, I don't disarm.