CHL, Vehicle and Adult Beverage Question

[sjfcontrol]

Anyway, Keith, I wasn't really trying to bring up MPA/CHL priorities (although it may have sounded like it).
I'm really trying to get a handle on what is required to be declared under MPA.

[speedsix]

...absolutely NOT...while on your own property...CHL is preempted by the fact you have a right to carry openly or concealed on your property...CHL is NOT preempted by MPA...which was passed for the benefit of those who don't have a CHL...and you're not required to notify an officer about a gun under MPA...but it's good form not to lie to him if he asks...

[sjfcontrol]

...absolutely NOT...while on your own property...CHL is preempted by the fact you have a right to carry openly or concealed on your property...CHL is NOT preempted by MPA...which was passed for the benefit of those who don't have a CHL...and you're not required to notify an officer about a gun under MPA...but it's good form not to lie to him if he asks...

You have a right to carry (concealed) in your vehicle, too.

MPA does not "preempt" CHL -- the CHL exception is not needed due to MPA

PC46.15(b)(6) states that PC 46.02 does not apply to a person carrying a concealed handgun & license under Suibchapter H, Chapter 411. That is, CHL is an exception to 46.02

However, that exception is not needed, since PC46.02 ALREADY exempts carrying a handgun (under conditions) in a vehicle owned or under the person's control. There is no point in using an exception in the law if it's not needed. So I don't believe you're always carrying under a CHL.

[speedsix]

...there are those who believe both ways...we'll have caselaw someday...but since a traffic stop usually begins with "May I have your Driver's License." ....by law, the CHL is to be tendered, too...and there is no problem...or need to argue it further...

[sjfcontrol]

...there are those who believe both ways...we'll have caselaw someday...but since a traffic stop usually begins with "May I have your Driver's License." ....by law, the CHL is to be tendered, too...and there is no problem...or need to argue it further...

I have no "argument" with anything in that statement. The argument was not concerning the requirement to display a CH license.

[speedsix]

...the OFFICER...will have no need to argue whether or not you're carrying under CHL or MPA....WE can argue for PAGES...

[wgoforth]

If the handgun is within your reach, then you are presumed to be carrying under authority of your CHL, and you should notify the officer. "In the glove box" would be within reach in most situations.

If it is in the trunk, then you are not "carrying" it. You are only "transporting" it, and I don't see any reason to notify. Unless there is probable cause to conduct a search, it should not come up. And if there is, you can tell them about it then.

Crossfire -- consider the argument that while carrying in your car, you are not carrying under your CHL, but are carrying under the MPA. (I presume you're familiar with that argument, and yes, you still need to give the officer your CHL even though you're not carrying under it.)

Is someone carrying under the MPA required to declare their firearm if asked?

I'm gonna jump in with my .02¢.

I know there is no case law, and many will argue differently, but I believe if you have a CHL it overrides MPA and when the handgun is 'on or about your person', then you are always carrying under the authority of CHL. If you do NOT have a CHL, then you get MPA, but do not gain the other aspects of the CHL privileges.

Best I recall is we were told in Instructor training that that if you have CHL, then you cannot carry under MPA.. that you are judged by the "higher law" if that helps.

[sjfcontrol]

...the OFFICER...will have no need to argue whether or not you're carrying under CHL or MPA....WE can argue for PAGES...

[speedsix]

...I've heard that's great for the eye muscles....

[speedsix]

...the Boss took time to help me find a thread that corrected my thinking on this CHL/MPA thing... worth wading through...

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=45095&hilit=Chas.+speedsix+MPA+CHL" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Keith B]

...the Boss took time to help me find a thread that corrected my thinking on this CHL/MPA thing... worth wading through...

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=45095" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I stand corrected and bow to the greater authority. MPA trumps CHL.

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=45095&start=30#p548496" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[speedsix]

...while helping me, he said it in a clear and simple way: "... One is carrying under the authority of their CHL only when having a handgun on their person would be illegal if they didn't have a CHL." I can remember that one!!!

[Keith B]

...while helping me, he said it in a clear and simple way: "... One is carrying under the authority of their CHL only when having a handgun on their person would be illegal if they didn't have a CHL." I can remember that one!!!

Well, that is outside of the vehicle and not on your own property. A person can legally carry on their body in the vehicle under MPA.

[speedsix]

...yup...long as it's concealed...we just can't get away from requirement to display that way...if we're in our vehicle, carrying concealed under MPA, and we hold a CHL... we're covered by GC411.205 no wiggle room...

[wgoforth]

...while helping me, he said it in a clear and simple way: "... One is carrying under the authority of their CHL only when having a handgun on their person would be illegal if they didn't have a CHL." I can remember that one!!!

Well, that is outside of the vehicle and not on your own property. A person can legally carry on their body in the vehicle under MPA.

Technically yes...we were told though, what about if the officer asks you to step out? THEN you could have a problem.