TexasCHLforum.com

If I remember correctly, the MPA took two tries. The first attempt retained the "Defense to prosecution" language. The Harris county DA at the time declared that nothing had changed and that he wold continue to prosecute persons charged with having a handgun in their vehicle. The second round remove the "Defense to prosecution" language and made it not applicable.

I stand by my claim that carrying a concealed handgun with a LTC is not equivalent a member of the Texas State Guard passing a 30.06 sign with a concealed handgun. One is not applicable. The other depends on a defense to prosecution.

Unless the law says "It is a defense to prosecution" to have a LTC, it is not a defense to prosecution to have a LTC. The law prohibiting carry does not apply to a person with a CHL. No defense to prosecution is needed. No amount of mental gymnastics will alter that fact.

If you were arrested for for something for which you had a statutory exemption (which is something entirely different from a defense to prosecution), I would think that you have a false arrest case against someone.

The hypothetical case of a police officer having to use a "defense to prosecution" as opposed to a civilian is spurious. Prior to the CHL law, it was common for persons who were travelling to be arrested for carrying a handgun, in spite of have a defense to prosecution. I have never heard of a police office having to use such a defense.

The original SB 60 passed in 1995 did say that a CHL was a defense to prosecution. The law was changed in later legislatures.

The difference is significant. One can be arrested and charged for an offense in spite of the law providing a defense. One cannot be arrested for an offense that does not apply to that person.

Defense to prosecution IS exact language in TPC, such as is used in 46.02:

]It is a defense to prosecution under Subsections (a)(1)-(4) that the actor possessed a firearm while in the actual discharge of his official duties as a member of the armed forces or national guard or a guard employed by a penal institution, or an officer of the court.

A license to carry is not a defense to prosecution. The law prohibiting carry does not apply to a person with a LTC.

Where is TPC does it say that a LTC is a defense to prosecution?

A lot of people who were traveling while carrying a handgun got arrested, despite having a defense to prosecution. I think that the attitude of a blue county DA towards civilians versus police has to be taken into consideration.

TreyHouston wrote: Also, just to be clear. A TXSG member is no longer affected by 30.06 or 30.07 at all, on duty or not?

I don't think this is necessarily true. HB 435 provides a defense to prosecution to members of the TXSG for TPC 30.06 while in uniform and 30.06/30.07 while off duty. I think you can still be cited. If you were, you would have to raise that defense at trial.

In reality, must cops won't cite you. In reality, most DA's won't accept the charges when they learn that the defendant has a built in defense. There is no guarantee. I would not be surprised if the DA of a blue county (Harris?) pursued charges just because they don't like mere citizens carrying firearms.