TexasCHLforum.com

It can easily be done by changing a from 'defense to prosecution' to 'exception to the application of'. This changes the burden of proof and what can be used as evidence in prosecuting someone for a violation of said code. See http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/d ... m/PE.2.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; for explanations of defense, affirmative defense and exception.

who or when will this ever be changed??? this is a huge burden on citizens that own NFA items

baldeagle wrote:Just so I can ensure that I'm understanding the issue here, you're saying that you want the law changed from you can be arrested but not prosecuted to you cannot be arrested? ISTM that rescinding the law would mean that the state can't even charge you with a crime if you possess a suppressor without having begged for the Fed's permission to have one?

I think you are slightly misunderstanding the issue. The current law allows you to be arrested and prosecuted. It is a defense to prosecution to have the tax stamp, but one is still facing the many unpleasant consequences of having to defend oneself including both the costs of defense, the need for bail, and the overall stress of getting ground over months and months by the criminal justice system

baldeagle wrote:Wouldn't it be better to change the defense to prosecution section (c) to something like a person does not commit an offense under this section if the actor's possession was pursuant to registration pursuant to the National Firearms Act, as amended?

Yes. That is what is being suggested. Instead of a defense to prosecution, change it to the charge does not apply to anyone with the tax stamp.

Anyone know how a tire deflation device is defined in law? I assume that does not mean my tire pressure checker that also has the back end that can be used to deflate the tire.

Thanks, Jumping Frog. I guess I don't understand what "a defense to prosecution" means. I thought it meant that the DA couldn't press charges.

MechAg94 wrote:Anyone know how a tire deflation device is defined in law? I assume that does not mean my tire pressure checker that also has the back end that can be used to deflate the tire.

I think it means a device used to remove the stem from the valve. (Or it COULD mean a knife... )

sjfcontrol wrote:

MechAg94 wrote:Anyone know how a tire deflation device is defined in law? I assume that does not mean my tire pressure checker that also has the back end that can be used to deflate the tire.

I think it means a device used to remove the stem from the valve. (Or it COULD mean a knife... )

I suspect it means a caltrop. Go to this link and scroll down to the "modern uses" section.

cb1000rider wrote:My guess is changing the verbiage here so it aligns with Federal law is probably political suicide right now. With all the public pressure from "anti" groups against assault weapons and other points, how likely do you think it is that a conservative is going to stand up and make him/herself a target by "legalizing silencers on assault weapons" in Texas. And the result of all that work is no real change.

I use those quotes because that's how it will be spun.

I work with several people who have recent trusts to deal with suppressors. None of them have been stopped to the best of my knowledge, but I'll update if and when that happens.

The irony being that in many of the anti-gun European countries the antis worship silencers are cheap and legal. NZ sell .22 silencers in hardware stores, for, last time I checked, about $25.

A "Defense to Prosecution" is all you had for carrying w/ a CHL until 1997, and some case law seems to say that even today w/ PC 46.15 it is only a "DEFENSE". And it's all you have now for NFA items, carrying past a "gun buster". ATF won't approve transfers of NFA items like silencers where state law prohibits them, so it looks like the Feds believe that if you have a Defense, you are legal.

If you read the Penal Code definitions a Defense to Prosecution requires the prosecution to refute it "beyond a reasonable doubt" at trial, in order for you to be convicted. That is the same standard applied to the illegal conduct itself. The only difference is that the prosecution is not required to refute the defense IF you don't present it. If you go to trial with a clear legal defense in the penal code and your attorney doesn't present it...I would say you should report her to the State Bar. And you have good grounds for an appeal.

If you're worried about "taking the ride" I recommend against carrying under CHL or any of the other non-applicable actions in 46.15, like sport shooting, hunting, etc. The MPA is one part of PC 46.02 which specifically excepts you from the prohibitions therein. The others in 46.15 arguably only provide a Defense.

Meanwhile, I will continue possessing and shooting with my NFA items (machine guns, silencer), fairly secure in the knowledge that I have a Defense in that they are all registered under NFA and actually signed by the (then) Sheriff of my county. I suppose I could always take the ride for something that isn't even prohibited in law (witness the sitting Governor charged for executing a Constitutionally authorized veto), but I'm really not going to curl up in the fetal position in my home for fear of the black helicopters.

On second thought, I might start working on that second passport from St. Kitts & Nevis and some extra ammo for my bug out bag.

Even if you have the defense to prosecution..you cannot avoid the arrest by a peace officer..If i am traveling from houston to San Antonio on a saturday with my family and i get pulled over somewhere in between the two cities and the cop does not like my NFA Tax stamps..he has the ability to lock me up for the whole weekend until i see a judge on monday..then i have to go hire an attorney for maybe lets say anywhere between 5K-10K...So you can call it whatever you want..The fact remains is ..those who possess NFA Items can get locked up if they run into Peace officer who is having a bad day..I hope something can be done about penal code 46.05 ..

Voonman wrote:Even if you have the defense to prosecution..you cannot avoid the arrest by a peace officer..If i am traveling from houston to San Antonio on a saturday with my family and i get pulled over somewhere in between the two cities and the cop does not like my NFA Tax stamps..he has the ability to lock me up for the whole weekend until i see a judge on monday..then i have to go hire an attorney for maybe lets say anywhere between 5K-10K...So you can call it whatever you want..The fact remains is ..those who possess NFA Items can get locked up if they run into Peace officer who is having a bad day..I hope something can be done about penal code 46.05 ..

Those who carry with a CHL can be "locked up" by a Peace Officer
Those who target shoot w/ a handgun...
Peace Officers can arrest other Peace Officers for carrying...

All the 46.15 non-applicabilities are "Defenses", if as has been reported...case law says "non-applicability" is only a Defense. There are many laws in the Penal Code that provide Defenses rather than exemptions. Peace Officers who arrest people for PC sections where a clear statutory Defense exists and is known to the Peace Officer at time of arrest, are likely to find themselves in trouble with the DA. It's really no different than arresting you for something that is not illegal and then making the prosecution deal with it. You can get "locked up" for walking by a Peace Officer who is "having a bad day", but I like to believe it is extremely rare. Therefore I decline to alter my behavior to account for it. As I mentioned, the standard for proving you didn't have a defense is exactly the same as proving that you committed a crime (beyond a reasonable doubt).

Ultimately I'd like to see the statutory construction of the Defense to Prosecution in the Texas Penal Code go away. I don't know its history or purpose, but since it currently exists throughout the Code, I don't really support picking it off one by one. Reason--- You bring the Legislature's attention to the fact that CAN legally own a machine gun or walk by a Gunbuster sign, then you're more than likely to get it prohibited.

I only had 1 gun range harass me about my silencers and paperwork. All the other gun ranges I have been to either dont care or were happy to let me shoot suppressed since it less noise for them. One thing that was funny about the range who harassed me I asked how many people they check to make sure they are allowed to posses a hand gun since they are near a very bad part of town. I didn't get much of a response. Most people are very curious about how much it suppresses and almost everytime I take mine to the range someone asks about it.

I would say most people are in 3 camps about class 3 devices - know nothing, know a lot, or think they know.

Just dont let that wendy davis in office she is a card carrying gun grabber.She will probably try to make them totally illegal.

What did harassment constitute? Did they want to see the paperwork?

cb1000rider wrote:What did harassment constitute? Did they want to see the paperwork?

Well the first thing the range dude did was come up behind me while I'm actively shooting and grab my shoulder. Then start yelling at me that I never told them about my suppressor. To which I asked him to show me the sign where it said i was supposed to tell them about it. Then said he wanted to see my paper work or they would call houston police.

At that point I decided to leave since they have no right to see my paperwork and I felt there unsafe actions didn't constitute anymore of my business. I have never returned to that gun store. They never did call the police on me… Typical scare tactics of a bone head. I did find the people shooting their guns gangster style entertaining though.

I went to the texas city gun range today and the range officer thought my suppressed 308 was pretty cool. They are strict but not over the top like another place I won't mention.lol