TexasCHLforum.com

A couple of months ago a friend who has a CHL called to warn me of a DPS office in our area that had scolded him for not informing him he had a CHL permit when he was stopped of a speeding violation. The fiend said that he was stopped because he was going over the speed limit, he was not carrying so he didn't let the office know of his CHL status. The office checked his driver's license and came back very upset about not being told about the CHL. My fiend informed the officer that he was not carrying and that he was told by his instructor that he did not have to announce if he was not carrying. The office told my friend that the instructor was wrong and that he was required by law to let him know that he had a CHL any time he was stopped.

I was also told and have read that if I don't have a gun with me I don't have to let the office know that I have a CHL. Have I been misinformed?

wrinkles wrote:A couple of months ago a friend who has a CHL called to warn me of a DPS office in our area that had scolded him for not informing him he had a CHL permit when he was stopped of a speeding violation. The fiend said that he was stopped because he was going over the speed limit, he was not carrying so he didn't let the office know of his CHL status. The office checked his driver's license and came back very upset about not being told about the CHL. My fiend informed the officer that he was not carrying and that he was told by his instructor that he did not have to announce if he was not carrying. The office told my friend that the instructor was wrong and that he was required by law to let him know that he had a CHL any time he was stopped.

I was also told and have read that if I don't have a gun with me I don't have to let the office know that I have a CHL. Have I been misinformed?

No Sir, you are correct. You are NOT required (by law) to produce your CHL if you are not carrying (have with you) your weapon.

I promote the idea of always showing it anytime you are asked for I.D. by an LEO for just the reason you cite above (a scolding). I consider it a "courtesy" on my part.

flintknapper wrote:

wrinkles wrote:A couple of months ago a friend who has a CHL called to warn me of a DPS office in our area that had scolded him for not informing him he had a CHL permit when he was stopped of a speeding violation. The fiend said that he was stopped because he was going over the speed limit, he was not carrying so he didn't let the office know of his CHL status. The office checked his driver's license and came back very upset about not being told about the CHL. My fiend informed the officer that he was not carrying and that he was told by his instructor that he did not have to announce if he was not carrying. The office told my friend that the instructor was wrong and that he was required by law to let him know that he had a CHL any time he was stopped.

I was also told and have read that if I don't have a gun with me I don't have to let the office know that I have a CHL. Have I been misinformed?

No Sir, you are correct. You are NOT required (by law) to produce your CHL if you are not carrying (have with you) your weapon.

I promote the idea of always showing it anytime you are asked for I.D. by an LEO for just the reason you cite above (a scolding). I consider it a "courtesy" on my part.

wrinkles wrote:I was also told and have read that if I don't have a gun with me I don't have to let the office know that I have a CHL.

Why would you NOT show your CHL along with your DL even if you are not armed?

As you can see, the LEO is going to find out that you have one anyway therefore, go ahead and extend him/her the courtesy of letting them know up front.

Texas Government code § 411.205. DISPLAYING LICENSE; PENALTY.
(a) 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. A person who fails or refuses to display
the license and identification as required by this subsection is
subject to suspension of the person's license as provided by
Section 411.187.

As the bolded part says, you are only required to display your CHL if you have a gun with you at the time, even if it is not on your person. People without a CHL legally carrying in their cars have no duty to notify.

That said, I would probably at least let the officer know I am issued a CHL to avoid any unpleasantness. I wouldn't necessarily hand over my CHL with my DL as I would if I were carrying.

shaggydog wrote:

wrinkles wrote:I was also told and have read that if I don't have a gun with me I don't have to let the office know that I have a CHL.

Why would you NOT show your CHL along with your DL even if you are not armed?

As you can see, the LEO is going to find out that you have one anyway therefore, go ahead and extend him/her the courtesy of letting them know up front.

Because he does not legally have to??? (just a guess)

Advised by my CHL to always show the CHL license (turn on dome light, hands on steering wheel, don't do anything stupid) but it is not the law.

I've decided I'm going to print the troublesome bits out on business cards and carry them. Course, I've got the 2007 update with markings on my laptop, which I have with me 95% of the time. Oh, or on my PDA. He might just ticket me for being a nerd though.

GC §411.205. DISPLAYING LICENSE; PENALTY. (a) 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. A person who
fails or refuses to display the license and identification as required by
this subsection is subject to suspension of the person's license as
provided by Section 411.187.

Agreed that you don't have to provide the CHL if not carrying. But if I was just stopped, presumably for some violation, why would I want to purposely aggravate the officer deciding whether to issue a citation?

If you present the CHL and DL immediately, carrying or not, everything remains low key and if the violation wasn't too egregious, there is a very good chance that only a warning will be issued.

If you are not carrying and do not present your CHL and he finds out when he runs your DL, his blood pressure goes up and he is now less friendly as he tries to determine why you didn't inform him. I would say the chances of a citation have gone up.

So stand your ground, guys. Don't hand over the CHL when you aren't required to and let us know how it goes.

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.

Mike1951 wrote:Agreed that you don't have to provide the CHL if not carrying. But if I was just stopped, presumably for some violation, why would. I want to purposely aggravate the officer deciding whether to issue a citation? .

I don't view this as purposely aggravating the officer. The law is plain....and the officer should not take offense to a citizen obeying the law. Additionally, the officer should KNOW the law.

If you present the CHL and DL immediately, carrying or not, everything remains low key and if the violation wasn't too egregious, there is a very good chance that only a warning will be issued.

Maybe, some here have experienced otherwise.

If you are not carrying and do not present your CHL and he finds out when he runs your DL, his blood pressure goes up and he is now less friendly as he tries to determine why you didn't inform him. I would say the chances of a citation have gone up.

Why? Either I don't have the weapon with me (therefor not required to show CHL) or....I do have it with me and forgot. If the officer cares either way....he can simply ask me. This is communication, dialog, information gathering. Does it make LEO mad to communicate these days? If so...they need to be doing something else.

So stand your ground, guys. Don't hand over the CHL when you aren't required to and let us know how it goes.

It should go just like any other traffic stop. And if goes anything less than that (courteous/professional...both parties, and I can prove it had something to do with me having a CHL), I will be in the Chiefs office getting it sorted out before the officer can say "quit that".

We are not the bad guys.

Longtooths wrote:Because he does not legally have to??? (just a guess)

It’s called “courtesy�. Why make a stressful situation any more so simply because “you legally can�. That is, at best, an immature philosophy.

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

shaggydog wrote:

Longtooths wrote:Because he does not legally have to??? (just a guess)

It’s called “courtesy�. Why make a stressful situation any more so simply because “you legally can�. That is, at best, an immature philosophy.

I suppose my question would be: What is it about approaching a person that you KNOW has a CHL that makes it a "Stressful situation"?

Statistically, your about as likely to have a problem with this person as you are someones 80 yr. old grandmother.

We already have plenty of accounts of LEO disarming CHL's for what seemed to be no other reason than "they could". I believe this stems from a mindset that "some" officers get..that any gun that isn't their gun is bad to have around. This can grow into a general mistrust of every person they come in contact with.

I have to question if that is a healthy attitude...and how well that serves the public (most of whom are law abiding and respectful). CHL's are not the bad guys (normally). Most stops that start out professionally and courtesously...tend to stay that way. This applies to both sides.

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

I do the same thing Jason and have advised my Daughter to do so as well....but not for the reason you cite. I think it is just good habit...and may save the officer a minute or two out of his/her day.

However, I wonder just what it is the officer is going to "discover" that makes it so urgent for you disclose it.

Answer: He/She will discover you are a mostly law abiding citizen with a CHL (A GOOD GUY)! Now theres a good reason to get their feathers all ruffled! (sarcasm off).

I guess I don't get it.

Why would you not be carrying?