Why Hand Over CHL If You're Not Carrying?

[anygunanywhere]

Why don't we insist that the law requiring a second amendment permission card be eliminated and return to life the way the constitution intended.

Anygunanywhere

[jlangton]

I don't want to hijack this thread, but what would you think about changing the law to make it a requirement showing your CHL whenever an LEO asks for your ID? That way this question would never come up.

Or better yet-eliminate the "duty to inform"
It's not like they won't find out anyway.
JL

[Purplehood]

I am confused now.

My CHL class instructor is/was a Harris County Deputy and informed us that we should ALWAYS show the CHL. He stated that when running your plates/DL through the squad-car computer a big "CHL" thingie would pop-up. In fact, we were told that if we did not volunteer the CHL thing immediately, it could be suspended.

[KC5AV]

It can be suspended if you fail to produce it when asked for ID, when you are armed.
If you are armed, and LEO asks for ID, you have to provide your CHL.
If you are not armed, you are under no obligation to produce your CHL. Some in law enforcement are ignorant of that fact, and think you have to produce it no matter what. Some CHL holders feel it's a good idea to produce it no matter what.

[flintknapper]

I am confused now.

My CHL class instructor is/was a Harris County Deputy and informed us that we should ALWAYS show the CHL. He stated that when running your plates/DL through the squad-car computer a big "CHL" thingie would pop-up. In fact, we were told that if we did not volunteer the CHL thing immediately, it could be suspended.

If you do NOT have your weapon with you, then you are under no obligation (legally speaking) to show your CHL license when asked for identification. Some will argue that it is best to always show it, others see no need to(me included).


With respect to the law however, you do NOT have to show it if you are NOT carrying.

[Purplehood]

I reiterate, as it showed up on our written test. We were told to SHOW, as it was cause for temporary SUSPENSION.

Class was given at Shiloh in Houston.

[flintknapper]

I reiterate, as it showed up on our written test. We were told to SHOW, as it was cause for temporary SUSPENSION.

Class was given at Shiloh in Houston.

§6.43.

FAILURE TO DISPLAY LICENSE ON DEMAND

If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder's person, then upon demand by a magistrate or a peace officer that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder's driver's license or identification certificate issued by the department and the license holder's handgun license. Violation is a Class B misdemeanor under the Act, §6(i).

Again, you are NOT required by law to display your CHL license when you are NOT carrying.
Currently, under the "Motorist Protection Act" you are NOT required to volunteer that you are armed either. Of course, this is separate from CHL laws, but I wanted to point that out as well.



Edited to remove incorrect information: (If an officer asks if you are armed...you must give a reply, same as with any traffic stop).

[brianko]

My CHL class instructor is/was a Harris County Deputy and informed us that we should ALWAYS show the CHL.

Then you were given bad information. Please read the statutes. It's rather clear-cut when to present your CHL, and when not to.

[Purplehood]

Hey, I passed.

But thanks for the clarification. I appreciate it.

[KBCraig]

Again, you are NOT required by law to display your CHL license when you are NOT carrying. If an officer asks if you are armed...you must give a reply, same as with any traffic stop.

Currently, under the "Motorist Protection Act" you are NOT required to volunteer that you are armed either. Of course, this is separate from CHL laws, but I wanted to point that out as well.

A non-CHL doesn't even have to reply one way or the other.

[flintknapper]

Again, you are NOT required by law to display your CHL license when you are NOT carrying. If an officer asks if you are armed...you must give a reply, same as with any traffic stop.

Currently, under the "Motorist Protection Act" you are NOT required to volunteer that you are armed either. Of course, this is separate from CHL laws, but I wanted to point that out as well.

A non-CHL doesn't even have to reply one way or the other.

You sure?

[aardwolf]

A non-CHL doesn't even have to reply one way or the other.

You sure?

We're not allowed to lie to police even though they're allowed to lie to us to try to trick us into a confession. But I thought we still had the right to remain silent when interrogated.

[KBCraig]

A non-CHL doesn't even have to reply one way or the other.

You sure?

No law requires a driver to speak during a traffic stop. You've provided your identification; that's all that is required.

[flintknapper]

A non-CHL doesn't even have to reply one way or the other.

You sure?

No law requires a driver to speak during a traffic stop. You've provided your identification; that's all that is required.

I stand corrected then, and will modify my posts accordingly.

Somehow, I thought you must disclose if you were armed or not, but knew that other questions not related to I.D. did not have to be answered (at least not without benefit of legal council).

Thank you for the clarification.

Edited to remove incorrect information: (If an officer asks if you are armed...you must give a reply, same as with any traffic stop).

[rm9792]

A non-CHL doesn't even have to reply one way or the other.

You sure?

No law requires a driver to speak during a traffic stop. You've provided your identification; that's all that is required.

While this is true, it will seriously diminish your chances of a warning! I have a lead foot, I drive fast but safe (yes it is possible) but havent gotten a speeding ticket since 1989. Courtesy and honesty will go far. H(ouston)PD pulled me over for doing 86 on the freeway, chatted for a minute then told me to drive safe and slow down. HPD of all depts.