TexasCHLforum.com

I am having seconds thoughts about the ability to charge and convict this man of impersonating a public servant.

Originally I had the mindset of arresting the man for impersonating a peace officer, but that is not the case.

Based on some of the arrests I have read you could be arrested for going to a movie theater, showing your CHL badge and walking in to see a free movie.

The law is for any public servant, not just for impersonating an LEO, so he wouldn't have to say "police" to induce someone to let you in the theater.

It seems like this could also apply to someone impersonating a health inspector trying to get a free meal at a restaurant or telling a person you work for NASA so you get a discount on your hotel room.

The way it is written, the law seems pretty vague. I think they did that on purpose.

Texas Penal Code Sec. 1.07. DEFINITIONS.
Public servant" means a person elected, selected, appointed, employed, or otherwise designated as one of the following, even if he has not yet qualified for office or assumed his duties:
(A) an officer, employee, or agent of government;
(B) a juror or grand juror; or
(C) an arbitrator, referee, or other person who is authorized by law or private written agreement to hear or determine a cause or controversy; or
(D) an attorney at law or notary public when participating in the performance of a governmental function; or
(E) a candidate for nomination or election to public office; or
(F) a person who is performing a governmental function under a claim of right although he is not legally qualified to do so.

WildBill wrote:I am having seconds thoughts about the ability to charge and convict this man of impersonating a public servant.

Originally I had the mindset of arresting the man for impersonating a peace officer, but that is not the case.

Based on some of the arrests I have read you could be arrested for going to a movie theater, showing your CHL badge and walking in to see a free movie.

The law is for any public servant, not just for impersonating an LEO, so he wouldn't have to say "police" to induce someone to let you in the theater.

It seems like this could also apply to someone impersonating a health inspector trying to get a free meal at a restaurant or telling a person you work for NASA so you get a discount on your hotel room.

The way it is written, the law seems pretty vague. I think they did that on purpose.

Texas Penal Code Sec. 1.07. DEFINITIONS.
Public servant" means a person elected, selected, appointed, employed, or otherwise designated as one of the following, even if he has not yet qualified for office or assumed his duties:
(A) an officer, employee, or agent of government;
(B) a juror or grand juror; or
(C) an arbitrator, referee, or other person who is authorized by law or private written agreement to hear or determine a cause or controversy; or
(D) an attorney at law or notary public when participating in the performance of a governmental function; or
(E) a candidate for nomination or election to public office; or
(F) a person who is performing a governmental function under a claim of right although he is not legally qualified to do so.

Actually, I believe to meet the full violation they would have to give a command to a person and direct them to do something as a police officer would. Just saying you are a cop or having a badge is not legally a violation.

Keith B wrote:Actually, I believe to meet the full violation they would have to give a command to a person and direct them to do something as a police officer would. Just saying you are a cop or having a badge is not legally a violation.

I understand what you are saying, but I just read a story about a guy arresting for impersonating a fire fighter. He was a volunteer firefighter on the way to a fire and got pulled over. The story was that he was arrested for identifying himself as a fire fighter. He did not try to direct traffic, tell people not to go into a building, etc.

Most public servants don't have badges, so having a badge isn't the only way to impersonate one.

In the OP, if Trujillo told the guy in the carwash, let me see those pill bottles, that would be directing that person to do something that an LEO would do. If a guy has a badge around his neck, even if it says CHL, I could see a conviction. Of course we don't know all of the story.

Keith B wrote:Just saying you are a cop or having a badge is not legally a violation.

If you walked up to an LEO and said "I'm here to help, I'm a Cop." and then showed your badge, you would find yourself in handcuffs.

WildBill wrote:In the OP, if Trujillo told the guy in the carwash, let me see those pill bottles, that would be directing that person to do something that an LEO would do. If a guy has a badge around his neck, even if it says CHL, I could see a conviction. Of course we don't know all of the story.

What if he was a security guard in uniform, washing his car on the way home from work, and did the same?

nightmare wrote:

WildBill wrote:In the OP, if Trujillo told the guy in the carwash, let me see those pill bottles, that would be directing that person to do something that an LEO would do. If a guy has a badge around his neck, even if it says CHL, I could see a conviction. Of course we don't know all of the story.

What if he was a security guard in uniform, washing his car on the way home from work, and did the same?

Then he would still be an idiot.

Pecos wrote:

213886791.jpg

jmra wrote:

nightmare wrote:

WildBill wrote:In the OP, if Trujillo told the guy in the carwash, let me see those pill bottles, that would be directing that person to do something that an LEO would do. If a guy has a badge around his neck, even if it says CHL, I could see a conviction. Of course we don't know all of the story.

What if he was a security guard in uniform, washing his car on the way home from work, and did the same?

Then he would still be an idiot.

Maybe even a bigger idiot. As a trained security guard he should know that he was not an extension of the DEA.

Chas is right, there's no evidence of any illegal activity at all. The guy who called 911 probably had an anti-gun political agenda.

I was wearing a NRA baseball cap and some teen punk in a hoodie followed me with his hand making a gun sign, saying "bang bang, bang bang!" This was 11PM at night at Kroger's. I'll bet you $1000 that if I had an uninintentional failure to conceal, that punk would call 911 and clain that I threatened him or brandished my weapon. Be careful of lying anti-gunner with an agenda.

drjoker wrote:Chas is right, there's no evidence of any illegal activity at all. The guy who called 911 probably had an anti-gun political agenda.

I was wearing a NRA baseball cap and some teen punk in a hoodie followed me with his hand making a gun sign, saying "bang bang, bang bang!" This was 11PM at night at Kroger's. I'll bet you $1000 that if I had an uninintentional failure to conceal, that punk would call 911 and clain that I threatened him or brandished my weapon. Be careful of lying anti-gunner with an agenda.

This is one of the reasons I do not wear any gun related clothing when I carry.

Why are we trying to determine if a guy is guilty or innocent based on newspaper article (if you believed the New York Times, Obama is greatest president ever). Like the guy said, he will have his day in court and the facts will come out. Then we can talk about abuse of CHL holders by LEO or if this guy is just a dumb. JMO

jmra wrote:

drjoker wrote:Chas is right, there's no evidence of any illegal activity at all. The guy who called 911 probably had an anti-gun political agenda.

I was wearing a NRA baseball cap and some teen punk in a hoodie followed me with his hand making a gun sign, saying "bang bang, bang bang!" This was 11PM at night at Kroger's. I'll bet you $1000 that if I had an uninintentional failure to conceal, that punk would call 911 and clain that I threatened him or brandished my weapon. Be careful of lying anti-gunner with an agenda.

This is one of the reasons I do not wear any gun related clothing*SNIP*

Fixed it for ya...lol

Just kidding. I don't usually wear the t-shirts with gun stuff because you can't see the back (where most of the good stuff is) because of my cover garment. So I just don't spend the money on them. I do wear my caps though. I may need to rethink. Depends on the cap though? Most people will not recognize the CrossBreed logo for what it is but my Springfield Armory or NRA caps are a different story.

When you pass all the needed requirements for your CHL to carry all you need after that is your license to present to the authorities when ask for it or a situation accuse that you need to present it. A CHL badge is something a person would carry to show off or bring attention to themselves as being important. As a retired police officer who retired before CHL's were out, I would not have a problem with a CHL holder. I would however have a problem with someone flashing a badge in any manner.

I look at badges the same as I look at 1911s. A normal well adjusted person will carry one or not depending on their personal opinion of them. Or if their job requires it. People with "issues" will insult other people with different opinions about what to carry. People with serious issues will do it to strangers online.

bbobb wrote:I look at badges the same as I look at 1911s. A normal well adjusted person will carry one or not depending on their personal opinion of them. Or if their job requires it. People with "issues" will insult other people with different opinions about what to carry. People with serious issues will do it to strangers online.

Is the irony of your post lost to you?

Anygunanywhere