TexasCHLforum.com

Some things were said in the town hall meeting that I didn't like, but that was primarily by the City Attorney, not the Chief or the DA. Overall, I was very pleased with the DA's position on issues and I don't think she will put up with unnecessary harassment of people openly carrying a handgun. On at least two occasions she stated that CHLs are law-abiding people and that there's no reason to fear them carrying handguns either openly or concealed.

In the early days of open-carry, we can expect more scrutiny from the public and the police. If, and that's a mighty big IF, people openly carrying are calm, non-confrontational, and statesmanlike when dealing with the police and public,then this scrutiny will quickly diminish. I must admit that I'm not overly optimistic. You can tell from Terry Holcomb's question about when the right to detain a person ends (i.e. as soon as the CHL has been displayed and confirmed), they he will be preaching that everyone should show their license, then walk away without answering any further questions. That's the type of conduct that will cause problems.

Chas.

MeMelYup wrote:

Pariah3j wrote:

hawk44 wrote:I believe they said that when asked for ID you had to provide your DL and your CHL. I seem to remember the state making the CHL a from of ID in the last session. So if I'm not driving all they should need is the CHL or do I have this incorrect ?

If I understand correctly, being detained does not warrant you having to ID, the failure to ID law would only come into effect once you were placed under arrest. You would have to show your LTC if you were open carrying but it has your TX DL number on it anyways, so I think that it becomes a moot point. Anyone else with a much better understanding of the law feel free to chime in...

GC §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.
---
Last amended by Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 1146 (H.B. 2730), Sec. 12A.02, eff. September 1, 2009.

Except consensual encounters don't require you to provide ID even if you are demanded for it... And even if you are being detained under reasonable suspicion, it is only an offense if you provide false information. Once there is probable cause to arrest, then it is an offense if you fail to ID

I thought that the HB 2739 allowed us to use it as ID when not related to a motor vehicle
Thanks
The meeting was not all that good, I was hoping for a better out line of checking licenses, with what he said they will not detain you while they run you for warrants. some how I see this happening and that is the problem to me, making min. or two into 10-15 min. this is where I'll feel harassed

Did anybody catch the DA saying she's plans to (keep) carry(ing) in her purse? I think it was while the lady was talking about her bra holster.

Why do they always want to be 4 stars...why not 5?

troglodyte wrote:Did anybody catch the DA saying she's plans to (keep) carry(ing) in her purse? I think it was while the lady was talking about her bra holster.

Yeah. I was pretty certain she carried or was at least pro-gun from the moment she started talking about things at the beginning.

casp625 wrote:

MeMelYup wrote:

Pariah3j wrote:

hawk44 wrote:I believe they said that when asked for ID you had to provide your DL and your CHL. I seem to remember the state making the CHL a from of ID in the last session. So if I'm not driving all they should need is the CHL or do I have this incorrect ?

If I understand correctly, being detained does not warrant you having to ID, the failure to ID law would only come into effect once you were placed under arrest. You would have to show your LTC if you were open carrying but it has your TX DL number on it anyways, so I think that it becomes a moot point. Anyone else with a much better understanding of the law feel free to chime in...

GC §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.
---
Last amended by Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 1146 (H.B. 2730), Sec. 12A.02, eff. September 1, 2009.

Except consensual encounters don't require you to provide ID even if you are demanded for it... And even if you are being detained under reasonable suspicion, it is only an offense if you provide false information. Once there is probable cause to arrest, then it is an offense if you fail to ID

Read the statute again. It says nothing about the type of encounter. If an officer requests your ID while you are carrying, then you MUST provide your CHL and your drivers license.

The ridiculous, attention seeking babies on YouTube will not be able to argue with police in Texas in the same way they can in other states. I personally don't think that checking people for IDs without true probable cause is the right way to go, but I also hate seeing people make gun owners look like idiots and give the police more trouble than they need.

Sorry about the rant.

Abraham wrote:At this point, I wonder how many that 'were going to OC' have been chilled into not OCing by virtue of expecting to be continuously stopped by LE and having to prove their CHL/LTC status?

Picture this: Throughout the course of the day while shopping in Houston, eating in restaurants, and so on, all the while OCing, you're stopped repeatedly by LE to prove your legality to OC.

Who would tolerate that indignity when they OC?

It certainly cooled my desire to OC when the Chief said the things he did. I don't feel that ''probable cause'' should be ignored by the police, but it looks like that is what will happen. Sad, very sad, that our constitutional rights seem to mean nothing to LE. Although I want to sometimes OC, I'll just continue to do so concealed.

TVegas wrote:

casp625 wrote:

MeMelYup wrote:

Pariah3j wrote:

hawk44 wrote:I believe they said that when asked for ID you had to provide your DL and your CHL. I seem to remember the state making the CHL a from of ID in the last session. So if I'm not driving all they should need is the CHL or do I have this incorrect ?

If I understand correctly, being detained does not warrant you having to ID, the failure to ID law would only come into effect once you were placed under arrest. You would have to show your LTC if you were open carrying but it has your TX DL number on it anyways, so I think that it becomes a moot point. Anyone else with a much better understanding of the law feel free to chime in...

GC §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.
---
Last amended by Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 1146 (H.B. 2730), Sec. 12A.02, eff. September 1, 2009.

Except consensual encounters don't require you to provide ID even if you are demanded for it... And even if you are being detained under reasonable suspicion, it is only an offense if you provide false information. Once there is probable cause to arrest, then it is an offense if you fail to ID

Read the statute again. It says nothing about the type of encounter. If an officer requests your ID while you are carrying, then you MUST provide your CHL and your drivers license.

The ridiculous, attention seeking babies on YouTube will not be able to argue with police in Texas in the same way they can in other states. I personally don't think that checking people for IDs without true probable cause is the right way to go, but I also hate seeing people make gun owners look like idiots and give the police more trouble than they need.

Sorry about the rant.

I was referring to:

Sec. 38.02. FAILURE TO IDENTIFY. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally refuses to give his name, residence address, or date of birth to a peace officer who has lawfully arrested the person and requested the information.
(b) A person commits an offense if he intentionally gives a false or fictitious name, residence address, or date of birth to a peace officer who has:
(1) lawfully arrested the person;
(2) lawfully detained the person; or
(3) requested the information from a person that the peace officer has good cause to believe is a witness to a criminal offense.

And technically, if those wanting to make YouTube videos were going to do that, all they would have to do is carry around a long gun where there is no LTC for it. Then they could fall back on Sec 38.02

I wasn't at the meeting and didn't watch the video of it.

That said, was there a mention or discussion of being checked for outstanding warrants when stopped and checked for current CHL/LTC when OCing?

If such fishing expeditions occur when stopped for proof of CHL/LTC when OCing, then I think that would be a deliberate effort to chill OCing...

Yes, I realize once Jan 1st arrives plus a bit of time passing all will be proven that no, the sky is not falling, or yes, the concern of OC harassment is real, ubiquitous and quite chilling.

I was impressed with the openness, courtesy and politeness of the Houston Police Chief. I live in Austin where things are a lot more tense.
If you have a CHL or LTC you have passed background checks and if you have behaved yourself there should be no warrants against you.
The stops only help us prevent criminals from believing they can also get away with OC.

kjolly wrote:I was impressed with the openness, courtesy and politeness of the Houston Police Chief. I live in Austin where things are a lot more tense.
If you have a CHL or LTC you have passed background checks and if you have behaved yourself there should be no warrants against you.
The stops only help us prevent criminals from believing they can also get away with OC.

While I somewhat agree, I am not worried about criminals open carrying... A majority will still just be illegally conceal carrying, because obviously they do not want to get caught. I am inclined to believe that we will only really see true law abiding citizens open carrying.

kjolly,

So you have no problem with a search for outstanding warrants after you've produced your current CHL/LTC status when OCing?

For those of us with very common names, how long does it take to "search for outstanding warrants?" How likely is it to come up with same name, different person false positives?

I've had no contact with LE here, thanks to 7 decades of habitual, responsible, law abiding, mostly sober conduct.

I would like to add there's no mention of the 'indignity' of being searched for outstanding warrants when you've proven you're entitled to OC.

Once that's done, you should immediately be on your way without further ado. Fishing expeditions are wrong. The attitude that you should be willing to go along with this treatment because hey, you're a law abiding citizen with nothing to worry about is accepting of police state type tactics.

JALLEN posted: "For those of us with very common names, how long does it take to "search for outstanding warrants?" How likely is it to come up with same name, different person false positives?"

Yes, and if fishing expeditions are allowed to become standard practice after you've produced your credentials to OC, then JALLEN's concerns will be become fact.

In addition, what if some in LE (and you know there are some...) decide to harass you with the search for outstanding warrants because they disagree with OC and will take any opportunity to stop and bother you when they see you OCing.