The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://mail.texaschlforum.com/
The legal interpretation the courts have been using is if it is within grabbing or lunging distance. If you can get the gun without having to unlock the glove box, or go to another area, it is generally considered to be on or about your person. Center consoles are generally considered on the person while passenger side glove boxes have gone both ways. Locked containers are almost always not considered on your person.ScubaSigGuy wrote:But, just for arguments sake what is the legal defintion of "on or about the license holder's person"? Especially as it relates to having a weapon in the center console or similarly hidden.
Who cares if he gets "antsy". Obey they law, and don't worry about the rest.nitrogen wrote:It'd be qa good idea to show your CHL when stopped, or showing ID even if youre not carrying. When your ID gets run, it'll come up that you're a CHL holder, and if you didn't previously display, the officer might get antsy.
Innocent people have died because LEOs "got antsy."txinvestigator wrote:Who cares if he gets "antsy".
seamusTX wrote:Innocent people have died because LEOs "got antsy."txinvestigator wrote:Who cares if he gets "antsy".
- Jim
Of course not. You know the secret police handshake.txinvestigator wrote:Yeah, If I leave my handgun at home, get pulled over, and don't show the cop my CHL, he might run my DL and began to fire into my car when the CHl returns on his radio.
While the vast majority of police officers are likewise competent, it would be a grave mistake to imagine that police officers are immune from the foibles and stresses can lead to unlawful shootings. ne study of 1,500 incidents involving police use of deadly force concluded that deadly force was not justified in 40% of the incidents, and was questionable in another 20%. Using evidence from the Chicago Police Department's internal investigations, one scholar found 14% of killings by Chicago officers to be "prima facie cases of manslaughter or murder" and "Several others presented factual anomalies sufficient to suggest that a thorough investigation might well have revealed such prima facie cases." Not a single one of those was prosecuted--or even reprimanded for shootings in plain violation of official policy.
Whenever a New York City police officer fires a gun (outside of a target range), police officials review the incident. About 20% of discharges have been determined to be accidental, and another 10% to be intentional discharges in violation of force policy. In other words, only 70% of firearms discharges by police are intentional and in compliance with force policy. In Los Angeles, 75% of shootings by police officers led to discipline of the officer or retraining because the officer had made an error.
Not trying to start an arguement, but how do stats from Chicago PD, NYPD & LAPD affect/reflect on Texas LEOs?seamusTX wrote:Of course not. You know the secret police handshake.txinvestigator wrote:Yeah, If I leave my handgun at home, get pulled over, and don't show the cop my CHL, he might run my DL and began to fire into my car when the CHl returns on his radio.
From "Shall Issue": The New Wave of Concealed Handgun Permit Laws by By Clayton E. Cramer & David B. Kopel (http://rkba.org/research/cramer/shall-issue.html#c36)While the vast majority of police officers are likewise competent, it would be a grave mistake to imagine that police officers are immune from the foibles and stresses can lead to unlawful shootings. ne study of 1,500 incidents involving police use of deadly force concluded that deadly force was not justified in 40% of the incidents, and was questionable in another 20%. Using evidence from the Chicago Police Department's internal investigations, one scholar found 14% of killings by Chicago officers to be "prima facie cases of manslaughter or murder" and "Several others presented factual anomalies sufficient to suggest that a thorough investigation might well have revealed such prima facie cases." Not a single one of those was prosecuted--or even reprimanded for shootings in plain violation of official policy.
Whenever a New York City police officer fires a gun (outside of a target range), police officials review the incident. About 20% of discharges have been determined to be accidental, and another 10% to be intentional discharges in violation of force policy. In other words, only 70% of firearms discharges by police are intentional and in compliance with force policy. In Los Angeles, 75% of shootings by police officers led to discipline of the officer or retraining because the officer had made an error.
- Jim
As I have said about statistics, the freeway near my house is safe for 10 year olds to ride their bicycles. statistics show that NO 10 year old has EVER been killled or injured riding their bicycle there.Mithras61 wrote:Not trying to start an arguement, but how do stats from Chicago PD, NYPD & LAPD affect/reflect on Texas LEOs?seamusTX wrote:Of course not. You know the secret police handshake.txinvestigator wrote:Yeah, If I leave my handgun at home, get pulled over, and don't show the cop my CHL, he might run my DL and began to fire into my car when the CHl returns on his radio.
From "Shall Issue": The New Wave of Concealed Handgun Permit Laws by By Clayton E. Cramer & David B. Kopel (http://rkba.org/research/cramer/shall-issue.html#c36)While the vast majority of police officers are likewise competent, it would be a grave mistake to imagine that police officers are immune from the foibles and stresses can lead to unlawful shootings. ne study of 1,500 incidents involving police use of deadly force concluded that deadly force was not justified in 40% of the incidents, and was questionable in another 20%. Using evidence from the Chicago Police Department's internal investigations, one scholar found 14% of killings by Chicago officers to be "prima facie cases of manslaughter or murder" and "Several others presented factual anomalies sufficient to suggest that a thorough investigation might well have revealed such prima facie cases." Not a single one of those was prosecuted--or even reprimanded for shootings in plain violation of official policy.
Whenever a New York City police officer fires a gun (outside of a target range), police officials review the incident. About 20% of discharges have been determined to be accidental, and another 10% to be intentional discharges in violation of force policy. In other words, only 70% of firearms discharges by police are intentional and in compliance with force policy. In Los Angeles, 75% of shootings by police officers led to discipline of the officer or retraining because the officer had made an error.
- Jim
I suspect & suggest that in parts of the country where firearm ownership is severely restricted (such as in these cities), incidents of PD use of deadly force are increased when a firearm is found in the possesion of the shot/deceased. Since such is not the case in Texas, these statistics are unlikely to hold up.
I don't know, and the only information I can find is from sources like the ACLU that would be dismissed in this discussion.Mithras61 wrote:Not trying to start an arguement, but how do stats from Chicago PD, NYPD & LAPD affect/reflect on Texas LEOs?
What the legislature did was perfectly logical. They made it legal to have a concealed handgun in your vehicle. It was always legal to have a long gun, or a handgun while traveling -- and you were not required to inform an officer during a traffic stop.wo5m wrote:I just thought that would have same stipulation's as a CHL as long as there are protections to guard against local DA's who don't like the law.
The ironic thing is that in the past, LEO's never knew whether a subject had a weapon during a traffic stop.seamusTX wrote:wo5m wrote: The CHL law is an anomaly. As I understand it, when the CHL law was being debated in the 1990s, some police officials were concerned about officers not knowing whether the driver had a weapon during a traffic stop. Therefore the legilature required CHL holders to identify themselves.
(Criminals, of course, rarely disclose this information.)
- Jim