Alcohol & your CHL

[Keith B]

Buying alcoholic beverages in bars, restaurants, and (choke) airports is just too danged expensive. One restaurant beer is about one third of a box of ammo.

I would rather spend my money on killing paper than killing brain cells.

[sjfcontrol]

Buying alcoholic beverages in bars, restaurants, and (choke) airports is just too danged expensive. One restaurant beer is about one third of a box of ammo.

I would rather spend my money on killing paper than killing brain cells.

When you're stuck in a airport, you can do a lot more with a beer (or a drink) than you can with a box of ammo.

[cb1000rider]

Why do you assume that when the definition of intoxication is the same for both offenses?

I should note that one thing that would solve this for me is the consistent use of lapel cams. Not the kind of use that we see in Louisiana, full of missing data and technical malfunction, but legit use that protects the officer and the public.

[ScottDLS]

Look at it this way, to get arrested, two things have to happen:
1) You have to be intoxicated, per LEO's professional (trained) opinion.
2) You have to be a danger to yourself or others per the LEO's professional (trained) opinion.

There is no evidence to disprove the opinion in most cases. It's hard to prove a negative "I wasn't drinking/whatever" - and no physical evidence is required for the charge.

No issue with it when it's used to deal with someone that is intoxicated and a danger to himself or others. I've seen it used a different way several times.

It's a much less serious charge, yes, but it's a charge that can be very hard to beat.. It can be used to solve the problem at hand and if used that way, it's very hard to beat, that's all I'm saying.

Really.... you need to "prove yourself innocent/disprove the opinion" of a class C misdemeanor, which is legally a "crime" albeit a minor one...? Maybe now in Obama's America....

[Wolverine]

Really.... you need to "prove yourself innocent/disprove the opinion" of a class C misdemeanor, which is legally a "crime" albeit a minor one...? Maybe now in Obama's America....

Guilty until proven innocent didn't start with Obama.

[ScottDLS]

Really.... you need to "prove yourself innocent/disprove the opinion" of a class C misdemeanor, which is legally a "crime" albeit a minor one...? Maybe now in Obama's America....

Guilty until proven innocent didn't start with Obama.

However I still believe that it is a very important constitutional issue. As a former military guy I feel that this is wrong to just say "ok...since I'm going up against the State I must just grovel and let it happen". So you think you can carry in Texas w/ your CHL? What if an anti-gun cop arrests you and charges with UCW? Oh by the way it's a Class A. But Travis County DA has a "pen and a phone". She'll jail you despite your CHL... I'm curling up in fetal position.

[thetexan]

the PC 49.01(2)statute states...

(2)“Intoxicated” means:
(A) not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties by reason of the
introduction of alcohol, a controlled substance, a drug, a dangerous drug, a
combination of two or more of those substances, or any other substance into
the body; or
(B) having an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more.
---
B is easy, cut and dried, quantitative, razor sharp. You have either .08 or you don't. A is more of an issue but also easy, cut and dried, quantitative, razor sharp. You either have the NORMAL use of mental or physical faculties or you don't. And that is all the prosecutor has to prove. Normal is normal. ANYTHING less than normal as presented to a judge or jury meets the definition.

I teach all of my students to steer way clear of any alcohol while carrying because it is so easy to violate the rule. One sip of a beer could be used to demonstrate that by its introduction you lost some of the normal use of your faculties. If B was the only element then you could drink as long as you stayed below .08. This is only referring to the exactness of the law notwithstanding the application of good judgement.

My rule is when carrying...no alcohol...at all...period...none...like it was poison.

tex

[Charlies.Contingency]

My rule is when carrying...no alcohol...at all...period...none...like it was poison.

tex

I agree, I have people ask me all the time, "try this wine" or some other offering, and I always refuse. My reasoning is departmental policies, but when not under those restrictions, I still avoid it, unless I go lock up my gun, which I prefer not to do. Only on private property in which I was staying, have I ever broken that rule, and I wasn't carrying anywhere afterwards anyway. My advice, do as tex does, avoid it like poison if you have your gun on you... it's not worth it.

[ScottDLS]

the PC 49.01(2)statute states...

(2)“Intoxicated” means:
(A) not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties by reason of the
introduction of alcohol, a controlled substance, a drug, a dangerous drug, a
combination of two or more of those substances, or any other substance into
the body; or
(B) having an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more.
---
B is easy, cut and dried, quantitative, razor sharp. You have either .08 or you don't. A is more of an issue but also easy, cut and dried, quantitative, razor sharp. You either have the NORMAL use of mental or physical faculties or you don't. And that is all the prosecutor has to prove. Normal is normal. ANYTHING less than normal as presented to a judge or jury meets the definition.

I teach all of my students to steer way clear of any alcohol while carrying because it is so easy to violate the rule. One sip of a beer could be used to demonstrate that by its introduction you lost some of the normal use of your faculties. If B was the only element then you could drink as long as you stayed below .08. This is only referring to the exactness of the law notwithstanding the application of good judgement.

My rule is when carrying...no alcohol...at all...period...none...like it was poison.

tex

Presumably you tell people not to DRIVE after consuming ANY alcohol, or consume any in a public venue (PI).

If any amount of alcohol is enough to make you intoxicated under the law, then it is essentially illegal to consume alcohol anywhere in Texas other than in your own home or a private residence.

[Saffron]

I teach all of my students to steer way clear of any alcohol while carrying because it is so easy to violate the rule. One sip of a beer could be used to demonstrate that by its introduction you lost some of the normal use of your faculties. If B was the only element then you could drink as long as you stayed below .08. This is only referring to the exactness of the law notwithstanding the application of good judgement.

My rule is when carrying...no alcohol...at all...period...none...like it was poison.

I hope you also tell your students to leave their guns at home if they take drugs that have ANY effect on them. If it's not a placebo, it must have SOME EFFECT on their mental or physical faculties. All a prosecutor has to show is they were taking a prescription or OTC medicine while carrying a gun and they could go to prison for a long time. Right?

IT'S TOO RISKY!!

[cb1000rider]

The FAA publishes a list of "allowed" and "not allowed" drugs for pilots, if that's a basis for a rational no-no list.

[Saffron]

I don't want to be the test case.

[Charlies.Contingency]

I teach all of my students to steer way clear of any alcohol while carrying because it is so easy to violate the rule. One sip of a beer could be used to demonstrate that by its introduction you lost some of the normal use of your faculties. If B was the only element then you could drink as long as you stayed below .08. This is only referring to the exactness of the law notwithstanding the application of good judgement.

My rule is when carrying...no alcohol...at all...period...none...like it was poison.

I hope you also tell your students to leave their guns at home if they take drugs that have ANY effect on them. If it's not a placebo, it must have SOME EFFECT on their mental or physical faculties. All a prosecutor has to show is they were taking a prescription or OTC medicine while carrying a gun and they could go to prison for a long time. Right?

IT'S TOO RISKY!!

There is a good arguable case, that you were taking your "hydro" for your broken arm. It's less excusable to be drinking alcohol. That would be stretching it a bit, but you could be technically correct, though it's a very shallow case IMO. Is somebody going to arrest me for taking prescribed pain killers as instructed by my physician, for my injured hand or knee, I'm quite certain that my physician's account, that he cleared me for work, which entitles carrying a gun, I will walk away free.

Sadly you may be correct, as you can beat the rap, but not the ride. Always a good idea to carry your prescriptions on you too, those that take controlled substances as prescribed. I've seen a lot of pill poppers arrested for "PI."

[Keith B]

Prescribed or OTC medication for pain can affect you and make you intoxicated. However, even taking things like hydrocodone may not make you intoxicated if properly used to control the pain due to the medication going to the pain receptors and increase the number of them in the brain. The person may be able to function fine with them.

I had a double-hernia repair and was prescribed opioids for the pain. My thinking and reaction time was totally the same while taking them, but my ability to react was impacted by the incisions and ability to move quickly. I had no issue with being armed at that time because the meds were doing what they were supposed to and not affecting my logical reasoning and reaction time.

However, pain meds and alcohol can be handled differently by the body by dulling the senses and slowing reaction times. Everyone is different in how it impacts them. My Mother-In-Law is a teetotaler and does not drink at all. She is not against it, but just doesn't do it. I saw her drink half a small glass of wine and she was loopy. Others may not be noticeably affected by that amount. As people become accustomed to drinking they may take more and more to get them to the level where they are visibly intoxicated.

I arrested an individual for DWI one night who blew a .43 (yes, no typo). He should have been comatose, but was actually functioning fairly well. I had arrested others who were at .15 who were not functioning nearly as well. The person was a seasoned alcoholic and when he was at .25 he would appear to be sober because he had adapted to the level of alcohol in his system, even though you could smell it on him.

[cb1000rider]

I arrested an individual for DWI one night who blew a .43 (yes, no typo). He should have been comatose, but was actually functioning fairly well. I had arrested others who were at .15 who were not functioning nearly as well. The person was a seasoned alcoholic and when he was at .25 he would appear to be sober because he had adapted to the level of alcohol in his system, even though you could smell it on him.

Curious - how'd you know he was a seasoned alcoholic? My understanding is that a recent drink can make you blow off-the charts, but I don't know how it works in reality...