Are you required to inform you're CCW?

[Jumping Frog]

I'd like to discuss further one aspect of your response regarding identification.

You do have to identify to a peace officer (Texas peace officer as defined in Article 2.12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure - this does not include federal officers) or magistrate (as defined in Article 2.09 of the CCP - note the inclusion of mayors and city recorders) if he asks. The law says:

Sec. 411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY LICENSE. If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder's person when a magistrate or a peace officer demands 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.

I do not read that the same way as you.

There are two pre-conditions:

1. If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder's person . . . .
2. when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification,

With one resulting requirement:

• 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.

There are limited circumstances when a peace officer can demand a person to display identification. As you noted, incident to arrest. The way I read it, if they do not have the authority to demand identification, then they do not meet the requirements to display the CHL in addition to the Texas DL/ID.

Of course, as I noted previously, if a peace officer has reasonable articulable suspicion to justify an investigative detention because the LEO believes someone carrying, and that person refuses to identify himself, then that will play out with a frisk and arrest. A CHL is simply better off identifying himself and avoiding the whole drama.

Also, you seemed to view an officer asking me for my name as the same as demanding identification. Maybe that is how an LEO views it, but I wouldn't. If someone asked me for my name, I would not assume that I need to provide my CHL and DL. If someone asks for my drivers license, then I would certainly provide both.

[sjfcontrol]

Also, you seemed to view an officer asking me for my name as the same as demanding identification. Maybe that is how an LEO views it, but I wouldn't. If someone asked me for my name, I would not assume that I need to provide my CHL and DL. If someone asks for my drivers license, then I would certainly provide both.

This is also the way I read it. If he simply asks for my name, no CHL notification is needed. If he asks for my drivers license (or ID), it is.

[4t5]

Say under the circumstance of not being detained, PO asks for ID and you show your TXDL and CHL. PO asks if you are armed and you reply that you do not want to talk to him. What happens next? He can't force you to answer the question. It also seems that he can't legally frisk you either.

[RSJ]

Say under the circumstance of not being detained, PO asks for ID and you show your TXDL and CHL. PO asks if you are armed and you reply that you do not want to talk to him. What happens next? He can't force you to answer the question. It also seems that he can't legally frisk you either.

He will find reason for a terry frisk. He can also take the gun away if he feels a need to do so.

[sjfcontrol]

Say under the circumstance of not being detained, PO asks for ID and you show your TXDL and CHL. PO asks if you are armed and you reply that you do not want to talk to him. What happens next? He can't force you to answer the question. It also seems that he can't legally frisk you either.

He will find reason for a terry frisk. He can also take the gun away if he feels a need to do so.

But unless he arrests you, he has to give it back when your business is concluded.

[4t5]

He will find reason for a terry frisk.....

God Bless America!

[puma guy]

If I understand SR's opinion correctly you are required to provide ID/CHL if asked by a peace officer. Since a non CHL is not required to provide ID without cause I guess that's a right we surrender by possesing the CHL. Am I wrong in assuming answering the question as to actually carrying a weapon is optional?

Here's the scenario. I attend a gun show at a city owned civic center that is improperly posted with 30.06. I buy my ticket the see the 30.06 at the door. I enter the premises and am stopped by a uniformed LEO who asks if I have a gun on my person. Am I legally obligated to inform them? If I say yes I am in violation (in the mind of the LEO) of the 30.06 and guilty of tresspass. I also have the right to not incriminate myself so there is a conflict here. and Can I simply ignore the question? I simply leave to not force the issue. What action could the LEO legally pursue?
Edit: I type too slowly.

But initiating Terry frisk has to be based on the premise that a crime is being commited or suspected of being commited and there is no crime.

[RSJ]

Say under the circumstance of not being detained, PO asks for ID and you show your TXDL and CHL. PO asks if you are armed and you reply that you do not want to talk to him. What happens next? He can't force you to answer the question. It also seems that he can't legally frisk you either.

He will find reason for a terry frisk. He can also take the gun away if he feels a need to do so.

But unless he arrests you, he has to give it back when your business is concluded.

I worked on a case that took MONTHS to get a gun back. It is not always easy. Theory and "rights" aren't the same in practice as on paper.
You can beat the case, but you'll still take the ride.

Again, simple as this.
Officer contact:
Me: Hello Officer, just to let you know, I have my CHL and am carrying [at 3:00 on my side], how would you like to proceed?
LEO: No problem, just don't mess with it, or reach. I will take your CHL/DL and be back in a minute. OR he will instruct as to how to carefully let him take the weapon
Me: Yes sir.
(time passes)
LEO: Other questions begin here, where you coming from... or Do you know how fast you were going or etc
Me: [from then on] Sir, I respectfully do not answer questions without an atty.

^ That is a short and sweet way to 1. Obey the law 2. beat any obstructing or compliance issues 3. Be respectful

If you choose other routes, that is YOUR choice. Trying to argue or refuse to offer the weapon will likely end in more tickets, arrests for obstructing, or other charges.
You will go to jail, be (intrusively) fingerprinted, give your SSN, address, personal info, have to bond out (sometimes <48 hrs later), and have to appear in court. Don't forget a defense attorney will charge $100-400 per hour, and most counties boast a 90-98% conviction ratio.

[RSJ]

If I understand SR's opinion correctly you are required to provide ID/CHL if asked by a peace officer. Since a non CHL is not required to provide ID without cause I guess that's a right we surrender by possesing the CHL. Am I wrong in assuming answering the question as to actually carrying a weapon is optional?

Here's the scenario. I attend a gun show at a city owned civic center that is improperly posted with 30.06. I buy my ticket the see the 30.06 at the door. I enter the premises and am stopped by a uniformed LEO who asks if I have a gun on my person. Am I legally obligated to inform them? If I say yes I am in violation (in the mind of the LEO) of the 30.06 and guilty of tresspass. I also have the right to not incriminate myself so there is a conflict here. and Can I simply ignore the question? I simply leave to not force the issue. What action could the LEO legally pursue?

YMMV, but I don't carry anytime I enter a 30.06. In fact, I do what I can to take my business to non 30.06 businesses. That having been said, in your scenario: Yes, ANY TIME you make contact with an officer in an official capacity (e.g. being stopped, questioned, or the LEO in your hypo) you are legally required to inform of your CHL/Weapon. There is apparently no direct penalty for "not" informing. As far as what you COULD do.... sometimes it helps to offer your ID and repeat a time or two "Officer, am I under arrest or am I free to go?" Keep in mind, you have to put this in practical play. If the officer is unfamiliar with the invalidity of an improper 30.06, you risk taking a ride downtown. In my opinion it just isn't worth the ride for simply showing your CHL and offering the location of the firearm.

[Heartland Patriot]

Say under the circumstance of not being detained, PO asks for ID and you show your TXDL and CHL. PO asks if you are armed and you reply that you do not want to talk to him. What happens next? He can't force you to answer the question. It also seems that he can't legally frisk you either.

He will find reason for a terry frisk. He can also take the gun away if he feels a need to do so.

But unless he arrests you, he has to give it back when your business is concluded.

I worked on a case that took MONTHS to get a gun back. It is not always easy. Theory and "rights" aren't the same in practice as on paper.
You can beat the case, but you'll still take the ride.

Again, simple as this.
Officer contact:
Me: Hello Officer, just to let you know, I have my CHL and am carrying [at 3:00 on my side], how would you like to proceed?
LEO: No problem, just don't mess with it, or reach. I will take your CHL/DL and be back in a minute. OR he will instruct as to how to carefully let him take the weapon
Me: Yes sir.
(time passes)
LEO: Other questions begin here, where you coming from... or Do you know how fast you were going or etc
Me: [from then on] Sir, I respectfully do not answer questions without an atty.

^ That is a short and sweet way to 1. Obey the law 2. beat any obstructing or compliance issues 3. Be respectful

If you choose other routes, that is YOUR choice. Trying to argue or refuse to offer the weapon will likely end in more tickets, arrests for obstructing, or other charges.
You will go to jail, be (intrusively) fingerprinted, give your SSN, address, personal info, have to bond out (sometimes <48 hrs later), and have to appear in court. Don't forget a defense attorney will charge $100-400 per hour, and most counties boast a 90-98% conviction ratio.

A 90-98% conviction rate in total, or specifically for firearms-related, or what? Also, it would seem that they are all either VERY, VERY carefully picking who they arrest and charge OR they are "making sure" (you know, the old "did you know your taillight is broken" as the nightstick whacks it sort of thing) that you will get convicted...so, what is the implication here? My curiosity is peaked.

[RSJ]

Say under the circumstance of not being detained, PO asks for ID and you show your TXDL and CHL. PO asks if you are armed and you reply that you do not want to talk to him. What happens next? He can't force you to answer the question. It also seems that he can't legally frisk you either.

He will find reason for a terry frisk. He can also take the gun away if he feels a need to do so.

But unless he arrests you, he has to give it back when your business is concluded.

I worked on a case that took MONTHS to get a gun back. It is not always easy. Theory and "rights" aren't the same in practice as on paper.
You can beat the case, but you'll still take the ride.

Again, simple as this.
Officer contact:
Me: Hello Officer, just to let you know, I have my CHL and am carrying [at 3:00 on my side], how would you like to proceed?
LEO: No problem, just don't mess with it, or reach. I will take your CHL/DL and be back in a minute. OR he will instruct as to how to carefully let him take the weapon
Me: Yes sir.
(time passes)
LEO: Other questions begin here, where you coming from... or Do you know how fast you were going or etc
Me: [from then on] Sir, I respectfully do not answer questions without an atty.

^ That is a short and sweet way to 1. Obey the law 2. beat any obstructing or compliance issues 3. Be respectful

If you choose other routes, that is YOUR choice. Trying to argue or refuse to offer the weapon will likely end in more tickets, arrests for obstructing, or other charges.
You will go to jail, be (intrusively) fingerprinted, give your SSN, address, personal info, have to bond out (sometimes <48 hrs later), and have to appear in court. Don't forget a defense attorney will charge $100-400 per hour, and most counties boast a 90-98% conviction ratio.

A 90-98% conviction rate in total, or specifically for firearms-related, or what? Also, it would seem that they are all either VERY, VERY carefully picking who they arrest and charge OR they are "making sure" (you know, the old "did you know your taillight is broken" as the nightstick whacks it sort of thing) that you will get convicted...so, what is the implication here? My curiosity is peaked.

All offenses. http://www.dallasnews.com/news/communit ... e-9970.ece" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
a 2010 article cites 99.8% conviction ratio including plea agreements. Dallas Morning News says the DA has a 87-88% chance of beating anyone at trial.

[puma guy]

If I understand SR's opinion correctly you are required to provide ID/CHL if asked by a peace officer. Since a non CHL is not required to provide ID without cause I guess that's a right we surrender by possesing the CHL. Am I wrong in assuming answering the question as to actually carrying a weapon is optional?

Here's the scenario. I attend a gun show at a city owned civic center that is improperly posted with 30.06. I buy my ticket the see the 30.06 at the door. I enter the premises and am stopped by a uniformed LEO who asks if I have a gun on my person. Am I legally obligated to inform them? If I say yes I am in violation (in the mind of the LEO) of the 30.06 and guilty of tresspass. I also have the right to not incriminate myself so there is a conflict here. and Can I simply ignore the question? I simply leave to not force the issue. What action could the LEO legally pursue?

YMMV, but I don't carry anytime I enter a 30.06. In fact, I do what I can to take my business to non 30.06 businesses. That having been said, in your scenario: Yes, ANY TIME you make contact with an officer in an official capacity (e.g. being stopped, questioned, or the LEO in your hypo) you are legally required to inform of your CHL/Weapon. There is apparently no direct penalty for "not" informing. As far as what you COULD do.... sometimes it helps to offer your ID and repeat a time or two "Officer, am I under arrest or am I free to go?" Keep in mind, you have to put this in practical play. If the officer is unfamiliar with the invalidity of an improper 30.06, you risk taking a ride downtown. In my opinion it just isn't worth the ride for simply showing your CHL and offering the location of the firearm.

YMMV - had to look that one up! I am not willing to be a test case for improper 30.06 posting. I already understand I can be requested to provide ID/CHL if asked. My question revolved specifically around being asked if I am CCW, not provinding ID. In the scenario I posed the sign was actually inside the building, but it really doesn't matter. If I am asked by a peace officer if I am carrying in that scenario can I simply ignore him/her and walk away and what recourse would the LEO legally have if I simply walked away?

[CrimsonSoul]

Not sure if it was stated but while you are required to inform an officer if you are carrying (show him your CHL) there is no penalty for not showing him. Basically they repealed the law by taking out the penalty for not informing which is weird. I still inform though usually makes encounters more likely to end in your favor ticket wise.

[RPB]

Further distinction ... to explain that I'll not answer a private security guard, and may or may not answer a LEO (Depends ...is the LEO a Peace Officer)

In one post above it was stated "only a LEO do you have to answer"

There's a difference in Law Enforcement Officer and Peace Officer ... Example: a park ranger (some are, some aren't)


http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/D ... m/CR.2.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Art. 2.12. WHO ARE PEACE OFFICERS. The following are peace officers:

The following are peace officers:
(13) municipal park and recreational patrolmen and security officers;
(19) county park rangers commissioned under Subchapter E, Chapter 351, Local Government Code;


etc

(a) The following named criminal investigators of the United States shall not be deemed peace officers,
(1) Special Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation;

(2) Special Agents of the Secret Service;

(3) Special Agents of the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement;

(4) Special Agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives;

(5) Special Agents of the United States Drug Enforcement Administration;

(6) Inspectors of the United States Postal Inspection Service;
(d) A commissioned law enforcement officer of the National Park Service is not a peace officer under the laws of this state, except that...

(e) A Special Agent or Law Enforcement Officer of the United States Forest Service is not a peace officer under the laws of this state, except that the agent or officer has the powers of arrest, search, and seizure as to any offense under the laws of this state committed within the National Forest System. In this subsection, "National Forest System" has the meaning assigned by 16 U.S.C. Section 1609.


etc

http://www.lcra.org/asklcra/AskLCRAAnsw ... cat_id=484" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Q: Who are the LCRA Rangers, and what authority do they have?
A: LCRA Rangers are licensed peace officers ...

http://www.lcra.org/community/ps/rangers30plus.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[sjfcontrol]

Say under the circumstance of not being detained, PO asks for ID and you show your TXDL and CHL. PO asks if you are armed and you reply that you do not want to talk to him. What happens next? He can't force you to answer the question. It also seems that he can't legally frisk you either.

He will find reason for a terry frisk. He can also take the gun away if he feels a need to do so.

But unless he arrests you, he has to give it back when your business is concluded.

I worked on a case that took MONTHS to get a gun back. It is not always easy. Theory and "rights" aren't the same in practice as on paper.

Not sure what "case" you're talking about. That would imply the individual was arrested, if there was a "case" to work on. If an arrest was made, then GC 411.206 would come into play...

GC §411.206. SEIZURE OF HANDGUN AND LICENSE. (a) If a peace officer arrests and takes into custody a license holder who is carrying a handgun under the authority of this subchapter, the officer shall seize the license holder's handgun and license as evidence.
(b) The provisions of Article 18.19, Code of Criminal Procedure, relating to the disposition of weapons seized in connection with criminal offenses, apply to a handgun seized under this subsection.
(c) Any judgment of conviction entered by any court for an offense under Section 46.035, Penal Code, must contain the handgun license number of the convicted license holder. A certified copy of the judgment is conclusive and sufficient evidence to justify revocation of a license under Section 411.186(a)(4).

I'm talking about the LEO's ability to take control of your firearm during the course of a traffic stop, or some other interaction where no arrest takes place. In those circumstances, GC 411.207 comes into play...

GC §411.207. AUTHORITY OF PEACE OFFICER TO DISARM.
(a) A peace officer who is acting in the lawful discharge of the officer's official duties may disarm a license holder at any time the officer reasonably believes it is necessary for the protection of the license holder, officer, or another individual. The peace officer shall return the handgun to the license holder before discharging the license holder from the scene if the officer determines that the license holder is not a threat to the officer, license holder, or another individual and if the license holder has not violated any provision of this subchapter or committed any other violation that results in the arrest of the license holder.