People that are good at finding quotes of laws; little help?

[dicion]

Here's what some Texas prosecutors say about it: http://tdcaa.infopop.net/4/OpenTopic?a= ... 7431004602" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Summary: they believe that "traveling" is a full exemption to UCW. To use the example cited in the post at tdcaa, you can climb on your motorcycle, strap a .45 to your hip, and ride with it openly so long as you are "traveling".

That having been said, these are simply the opinions of SOME prosecutors in Texas and you could easily find yourself arrested and facing one who disagrees with this interpretation. IANAL and I would rely on the traveling defense at your own risk.

SA-TX

Thanks for the link, very good info!

However, if it gets to the prosecutor level, that means you've already been cuffed, taken the ride, and spent some time in the pokey for it.
I think most of us would prefer case law or more clearly defined wording to prevent the ride to begin with

[LJM]

'Take the Ride & Argue it with the judge' scenario

I could not help but respond to this statement as I have seen it Quite a bit. I had a disagreement recently with a citation I had recieved ( non Gun Related) and went to see the "Judge" to discuss it. I was told to contact the officer that had issued the citation and talk to him because the "judge" did not have a clue but "if it was issued it must be true!" small town . what can I say Payed it and left.

[srothstein]

As stated before, the 'Traveling' exemption has existed for 46.02 for quite some time, and before the MPA, it was the only way to have a loaded weapon within reach, in your vehicle, legally without a CHL.

Problem is, as also stated, it is not defined in the statutes. From what I've heard about various cases, some judges said it had to be a certain number of counties crossed, others had a mileage requirement, others had a time requirement. As far as I know, there is not any district court Case Law defining it, so it remains undefined to this day.

The current case law on this, dating from a 1909 (IIRC) case, is that traveling is a fact to be determined by the trier of facts (jury if there is one, judge if no jury). Based on that case, traveling is whatever your attorney can convince the jury it is.

Annnyways, in regards to the ORIGINAL Question, whenever I look up anything Texas State Law related, I start here:

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I recommend always using that, as any other sites that have the law posted, may have an older, out of date version. The versions on the legislature page are always the most current.

As with Excaliber, I agree with Dicion on always using this site. But, there is one very important caveat to the part about it always being the most current. New laws take effect on Sep. 1 after the legislature passes them (normally, a few take effect on different dates). The state takes until about January or February to get this site updated. So, for a few months, you really need to have a copy of Lexis-Nexis' Penal Code. I always buy it on disk because it has better search capabilities than the state site. It is almost always out by Sep. 1.