TexasCHLforum.com

Jason73 wrote:If I get pulled over I give the officer my dl and chl regardless of whether Im carrying or not. I know the law says I am not required to do so but I would rather the officer find out from me instead of finding out when he runs my dl for wants/warrants. I can think of no good reason not to inform the officer. Believe it or not those police officers are not the enemy, theyre the good guys.

Just my $.02

This is exactly right.

The fact of the matter is, the police and local authorities are there to protect us. Their job is already a difficult and dangerous one.
It is our duty to make the officer 100% at ease when he deals with us. We don't need to do anything that will make the officers look
unfavorably towards CHL'ers. Most of them like us. Most of them WANT us to have concealed handguns. It makes their jobs a little
easier with good guys having guns.

Don't make the job of the officer more difficult. Just show them your CHL regardless if you are carrying or not. They are going to find
out that you are a CHL'er the minute they check your background on the computer......then, they are going to ask you about it.

Save yourself some time and grief. Disclose the fact that you have a CHL up front and put everyone at ease. It may also save you a speeding
ticket!

srothstein wrote:

KBCraig wrote:For that matter, there's no obligation to carry a DL unless you're driving.

This one is debatable for a CHL. While no one else is ever required to carry a DL when they are not driving in Texas (or even then if they show it to the magistrate later), a CHL is required to provide both a DL and his CHL when asked for ID.

Yes, but I was sticking with the basic theme of the thread: any obligation to show a CHL when you're not carrying. I just wanted to point out that not only do you have to show the CHL when not carrying, you're not even required to carry it, nor any other forum of ID unless doing something (like driving) that requires it.

jnkirk1974 wrote:

Jason73 wrote:If I get pulled over I give the officer my dl and chl regardless of whether Im carrying or not. I know the law says I am not required to do so but I would rather the officer find out from me instead of finding out when he runs my dl for wants/warrants. I can think of no good reason not to inform the officer. Believe it or not those police officers are not the enemy, theyre the good guys.

Just my $.02

This is exactly right.

So very true! I was told by a CHL holder that when he was pulled over and produced his TDL along with his CHL he sat there and compared handgun's with the officer for 30min's and was ready to get home but the officer was so gung ho he would not stop talking! After speaking with a few HCSD officer's as well as DPS officer's who worked security for my job they view CHL holder's as the good guy's.

I was informed by my CHL instructor to produce your CHL along with your TDL at all time's just so they know even if you are not carrying.

srothstein wrote: I am curious what would happen if someone had the CHL but no DL in just such a case. I keep hoping no cop would be so stupid as to file this charge, but there is the thread from the other forum referencing disarming people. Every profession has it share of idiots.

One might get to skate that one. The TX DL # Is on the face of the CHL, and the CHL does have a picture. A friendly officer might accept it, and run the DL# using teh CHL as a source.
However, I have it straight from the DPS that the CHL does not officially count as general "ID". A Tx DL or Tx issued ID card are the only state isssued forms.

lrb111 wrote:However, I have it straight from the DPS that the CHL does not officially count as general "ID". A Tx DL or Tx issued ID card are the only state isssued forms.

That's very true. I'm working for Academy at the moment and a VALID TDL or TID is a must have regardless if you have a CHL license. The 4473 has area's for both so the only thing a CHL save's us firearm dealer's is the call to NICS.

dave_in_austin wrote:The thing that bothers me is the lack of knowledge of the law on the part of the LEO involved. A LEO has a responsibility to be familiar with the laws he is charged with enforcing. If he misunderstands this relatively simple law, then one has to wonder about the quality of his training and what other laws he is attempting to improperly enforce. A friendly letter to the LEO's training department would seem to be in order.

Part of the problem is that these guys have to know a lot of laws, therefore the details may get a little fuzzy. Especially as the laws change.

Traveling in states with reciprocal agreements is also an area they are not real familiar with, so I keep a copy of the laws in my car, just in case.

But I also let them know immediately that I'm a CHL holder if I'm stopped, even if my wife was the one driving. I just don't want the hassle.