TexasCHLforum.com

chamberc wrote:Agreed. Not sure why people mis-read, "shall not be infringed".

It's right up there with "regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states" in the Failed 5th Grade English category.

boomerang wrote:

chamberc wrote:Agreed. Not sure why people mis-read, "shall not be infringed".

It's right up there with "regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states" in the Failed 5th Grade English category.

Here here!

As well as with folks thinking there is anything about a "separation between Church and State" in the US Constitution or the Bill or Rights...

cling wrote:Concealed is concealed.

That's what I was thinking when I was press-ganged by the little woman to walk around GrapeVine Mills mall this weekend....

Morgan wrote:

cling wrote:Concealed is concealed.

That's what I was thinking when I was press-ganged by the little woman to walk around GrapeVine Mills mall this weekend....

Thank goodness Grapevine Mills mall isn't posted to my knowledge. We always enter in Children's Place and all they have is a gun busters sign.

Commander wrote:I understand that we are still required to identify. I was wondering if the confliction of CHL vs Motorist Protection Act had been some of the catalyst for the removal of the penalty. I seem to recall that there was some discussion to eliminate the requirement for CHL holders to identify, but that went nowhere.

I think the effort to remove the display requirement is at least partly, if quietly, related to the MPA, i.e. it's absurd to require CHLs to display when no one else has to.

I believe the original requirement for a CHL holder to display the license when asked for ID by a peace officer was originally inserted as one of the ways to make the original CHL statute(s) acceptable to various parties -- in this case, law enforcement.

There was a bill last session to remove both the requirement to display and the associated penalties, fatally delayed along with other good stuff... ... Some elements from various delayed bills were inserted into the "DPS Sunset" bill during the special session. For reasons unknown to me, when that was accomplished, the requirement to display was untouched, but all the penalties were removed. Mr. Cotton mentioned something about this in another post I believe. Basically, "sausage-making."

As a CHL instructor, I will continue to suggest to my students, if asked for ID by a LEO, give them the DL and CHL.
This also will be appreciated by the LEO as they experience difficult persons every day more than they interact with CHL holders.

chamberc wrote:

Morgan wrote:

cling wrote:Concealed is concealed.

That's what I was thinking when I was press-ganged by the little woman to walk around GrapeVine Mills mall this weekend....

Thank goodness Grapevine Mills mall isn't posted to my knowledge. We always enter in Children's Place and all they have is a gun busters sign.

Well it isn't legally posted ANYWHERE, but they sure spent some money on signs.