TexasCHLforum.com

The word we are looking for is "impared" .08 is the leagaly assumed point of imparement with alcohol. Some people are impared at .05 others at .10 etc. the law says if you are over .08 you are considered impared. You can still fail a field sobriety test and not be .08. Imparement is caused by other substances such as OTC drugs, RX drugs, and illegal drugs.

WildBill wrote:I understood your post. I was just trying to emphasize a point.

Alright, well thank you for your help, you were able to clear things up for me.

MoJo wrote:The word we are looking for is "impared" .08 is the leagaly assumed point of imparement with alcohol. Some people are impared at .05 others at .10 etc. the law says if you are over .08 you are considered impared. You can still fail a field sobriety test and not be .08. Imparement is caused by other substances such as OTC drugs, RX drugs, and illegal drugs.

Ha! I knew there was a word for what I was thinking of . I have been studying for finals for too long, I cant think straight anymore, at least these will be the last finals I will ever have to take

Actually, it is taught that impairment begins with the first drink (or inhalation, injection, etc). Intoxication is assumed on face value w/ alcohol (per se) at a BAC of .08 - but the legal standard of intoxication can be met at a lower BAC depending on the the degree of impairment. I know we are using the terminology different, but this is what courts/lawyers will be using and saying.

It is important to note that the term intoxication has pretty much nothing to do with how one feels, or accesses their own level of intoxication. It is an entirely legal term and concept. There are divided attention attention tests that can accurately determine if the impairment has reached the point of intoxication.

A good example of this is the coordination, reaction, and ultimately driving studies that are done at varying BAC's. Virtually everyone performs worse after consuming alcohol, even at a relatively low BAC like .04 .

paulhailes wrote:Ok, my question is, If I have my gun locked in a gunvault or similar lockable box while in my car, am I still carrying? The basis of my question is, say I go to a bar, since I know I will be drinking, and there is no legal limit for carrying while intoxicated, if I lock the gun in a lockbox am I still considered to be carrying?

Others have addressed the alcohol question but I'm not sure the contents of a locked container are "on or about" your person. I don't know recent case law but there's Hardy v. State back in 1897.

zero4o3 wrote:

WildBill wrote:

paulhailes wrote:My question was centered around having drank 1 or 2 beers. I miss spoke, or typed, earlier when I said intoxicated, I simply meant having any alcohol in my system what so ever.

I understood your post. I was just trying to emphasize a point.

its important to understand that being under .08 is not a safe zone. its how your body tolerates the alcohol that will ultimatly effect whether or not you are intoxicated

However, being under .08 on the breathylizer, or on the serum alcohol drawn at your local ER is important. You may be impaired, but not legally so. However, do you want to go through the hassle? I have been a nurse for 25 years, and in the ER for 17 of those. The people who are brought in for a blood draw seem to be treated as if they are guilty until proven innocent. They are miserable and hating their lives. They may lose their jobs, their ability to drive a car...and now you have a CHL to worry about as well. Just don't drink and drive...period. None. At all.

RJ

MoJo wrote:The word we are looking for is "impared" .08 is the leagaly assumed point of imparement with alcohol. Some people are impared at .05 others at .10 etc. the law says if you are over .08 you are considered impared. You can still fail a field sobriety test and not be .08. Imparement is caused by other substances such as OTC drugs, RX drugs, and illegal drugs.

The law (Texas Penal Code) says "intoxicated". From what I can see there is no reference to "impaired" in the law. There is a TXPC definition of "intoxicated". The standard is the same for driving and carrying... There is a significant amount of case law that someone MAY not be intoxicated if they are below 0.08 BAC. That doesn't mean that you automatically are not (intoxicated) if you are below 0.08. But it is not the "police officer's" discretion whether you are...it's a fact to be proved to the jury at trial.

(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.

My understanding there is zero tolerance for any alchoal while carrying.

kjolly wrote:My understanding there is zero tolerance for any alchoal while carrying.

Common misconception. Many people think it's wise to stay completely away from alcohol while carrying. Most of us were taught that alcohol and gunpowder don't mix. But there's nothing illegal about having a beer with your lunch while packing. (Some may not think it's a good idea, but it's not illegal.)

OK, Harping back to what I was taught about carrying and drinking at the DPS instructor school.

1. It is not illegal to drink while carrying.

2. It is illegal to be intoxicated (impaired) while carrying.

3. .08 is not the standard used to determine if you are intoxicated (impaired) in CHL cases.

4. If the various field sobriety tests show you are intoxicated (impaired) he's going to arrest you.

5. You will need the services of an attorney.

6. There will be a trial.

7. You may win, you may not.

My question is - - - Is a couple of beers with your barbecue worth the cost and hassell?

On a lighter note - - - "Mythbusters" had a show on how much alcohol it takes to cause impairment (not legal intoxication). Their tests showed as little as one shot of liquor or one beer slowed reaction time and cognitive thinking measurably in all the subjects tested. You may be able to watch this episode online or, they rerun these shows from time to time.

...one beer on an empty stomach, will produce slurring and lurching in some people...noticeable to others...I value my license more than a drink...won't drink at all rather than try to explain my decisions to a grand jury after admitting having drunk something...different strokes for different folks...it's about what you consider important...

gigag04 wrote: Virtually everyone performs worse after consuming alcohol, even at a relatively low BAC like .04 .

First, I am not condoning or condemning any type of alcoholic consumption of any kind, however, there was a couple mythbuster episode's on this very subject with some interesting results. I know "mythbusters" isn't the law, but still interesting. Couldnt find the particular one i was looking for on youtube, but they did tipsey vs. tired and and they had to drive in a circle for an hour straight or something. Anywho, I think it was torry that actually did better on the coarse while "tipsey".

Not saying I would ever drink and drive, just thought it interesting.

I don't drink and drive. I don't drink and carry. Keep it simple.

MoJo wrote:OK, Harping back to what I was taught about carrying and drinking at the DPS instructor school.

1. It is not illegal to drink while carrying.

2. It is illegal to be intoxicated (impaired) while carrying.

3. .08 is not the standard used to determine if you are intoxicated (impaired) in CHL cases.

4. If the various field sobriety tests show you are intoxicated (impaired) he's going to arrest you.

5. You will need the services of an attorney.

6. There will be a trial.

7. You may win, you may not.

My question is - - - Is a couple of beers with your barbecue worth the cost and hassell?

Except for #1 (open container law) all the other rules apply to driving exactly the same.

I think we got off topic. . . OP wasn't asking about alcohol and carrying, he used it as an example of a time when he should disarm. The replies were correct in saying, "If you can't carry, you can't drive." While true, we haven't addressed the core question.

I brainstormed a modification to the scenario. . . he is planning to get hammered in a bar and have his friend drive him home. His friend can't have "possession" of the firearm because of a shaky legal past, even though he's rehabilitated now. His friend won't be drinking. Before going into the bar, he wants to secure the firearm in a way that they do not violate the law on the way home.

It's an interesting theoretical question. . . I don't presume that he's looking to get himself into this situation, but merely wondering "when am I no longer 'carrying'". Pragmatic answers like, "get drunk at home" or "find new friends" circumvent the underlying question. If you don't like the alcohol part of the set up, pretend he's going to take a prescription medicine that would leave him legally "impaired" and thus incapable of legally carrying.

In which scenarios is he (and his friend) "disarmed" or at least "not carrying":
1. Firearm unloaded in trunk of car (ammo also in trunk)
2. Firearm unloaded in locked safe in console (ammo also in safe)
3. Firearm loaded in trunk of car
4. Firearm loaded in locked safe in console
5. Firearm unloaded in glove box (ammo in glove box)
6. Firearm unloaded in glove box (ammo in trunk)
7. Firearm unloaded in trunk of car (ammo in passenger compartment)

IANAL, but I'd guess that 1 and 7 might be safe, with everything else being a murky gray area that could lead to a long night and a lot of attorney fees.