concealed definition

CHL discussions that do not fit into more specific topics

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton


Topic author
NotRPB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 8:24 am

concealed definition

#1

Post by NotRPB » Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:31 pm

something I haven't thought about in years, but was asked recently by someone to show them Texas legal definition of concealed or concealed handgun or concealed carry.

(which may be relevant with an ankle holster or carrying past certain signs) but is pretty much irrelevant on say, city property in a belt or shoulder holster.

Anyway, the definition seems to have been repealed

Texas legal definition of concealed was repealed because Texas no longer has "concealed carry" so it is irrelevant if carrying in a belt or shoulder holster, but applies to ankle holsters and other holsters which must be concealed by a licensee to carry a handgun holder)

The legal definition was Repealed but it used to be
https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/government ... 1-171.html
Texas Government Code - GOV'T § 411.171. Definitions

In this subchapter:
(3) “Concealed handgun” means a handgun, the presence of which is not openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable person.


NOW:

https://texas.public.law/statutes/tex._ ... on_411.171
Texas Government Code Sec. 411.171 Definitions
In this subchapter:
(3) Repealed by Acts 2015, 84th Leg., R.S., Ch. 437 , Sec. 50, eff. January 1, 2016.

This is why I cannot find a definition in Texas law now

(But ...does a Texas definition of "concealed" exist elsewhere any more?
Because the term is still used... so what does
"in a concealed manner" mean ?


Penal Code 46.15 Nonapplicability
https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/docs ... /PE.46.htm
Sec. 46.15. NONAPPLICABILITY.
(b) Section 46.02 does not apply to a person who:

6) is carrying:

(A) a license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, to carry a handgun; and

(B) a handgun:

(i) in a concealed manner; or

(ii) in a shoulder or belt holster;
-(Interestingly, The State of MT definition is pretty loose http://jeffersoncounty-mt.gov/documents ... MCA_45.pdf
Definition:

A permit is required if you will be concealing a weapon in an incorporated
town (city)

Concealed weapon includes any weapon that is wholly or partially covered by clothing or
wearing apparel.
)


So apparently you need a permit if your shirt partly covers your handgun and you must get a permit there if you want to drape say, a sock, necktie or pantyhose over part of your pistol's grip


Topic author
NotRPB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 8:24 am

Re: concealed definition

#2

Post by NotRPB » Mon Jun 18, 2018 10:17 am

But seriously

(does a Texas definition of "concealed" exist elsewhere any more?
Because the term is still used... so what does
"in a concealed manner" mean ?

I had breakfast with the HAM club this morning, which includes Volunteer Firemen, retired Police, current Peace officers and a LTC instructor ... and we're trying to figure out what a "concealed manner" is

One guy defers to Websters dictionary, another discussing Non-applicability section and all of us learning about Volunteer Emergency Services personnel and the volunteer Firemen and the CERT(only if Activated)/ARES activation? RACES

And ... a handgun in a belt holster in a licensee's the car in plain sight (either holster mounted somewhere. or laying in the passenger seat or floorboard)
Sec. 46.15. NONAPPLICABILITY.
(b) Section 46.02 does not apply to a person who:

6) is carrying:

(A) a license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, to carry a handgun; and

(B) a handgun:

(i) in a concealed manner; or

(ii) in a shoulder or belt holster;
A question arose on Volunteer Emergency Services personnel, Credentials:
CERT if activated has an ID
SOME Hams have a card for ARES (I don't know about RACES)
Hams have pocket card licenses
AND THEN there's that "AND ANY PERSON/individual" ;language ...

User avatar

Keith B
Moderator
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 17915
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:29 pm

Re: concealed definition

#3

Post by Keith B » Mon Jun 18, 2018 12:58 pm

Many states and the Feds use 'in a concealed manner'. Basically, it extends from the old definition of on your person to in close proximity like in your vehicle under the seat, in the seat covered with a cloth, etc.

Open carry is defined clear enough that any other method if partially covered would be in a 'concealed manner'.
Keith
Texas LTC Instructor, Missouri CCW Instructor, NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun Instructor and RSO, NRA Life Member

Psalm 82:3-4

User avatar

jmorris
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1161
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 4:41 pm
Location: Cibolo
Contact:

Re: concealed definition

#4

Post by jmorris » Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:26 pm

NotRPB wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 10:17 am
....

And ... a handgun in a belt holster in a licensee's the car in plain sight (either holster mounted somewhere. or laying in the passenger seat or floorboard)
....
It was asked in my Jan 2016 LTC instructor class if this worked. The DPS answer was no. What I believe is the basis? If the holster is not on a belt, it is not a belt holster, it's just a holster. This was never explicitly stated but implied several times. At one point a DPS instructor picked up a styrofoam cup and tape, put the cup on his side and wrapped tape around it and him. This was now a belt and a belt holster. Take the cup off the "belt" and it was no longer a holster.

Similar to the reasoning (I believe) why a tactical, drop-leg holster is not a valid open carry holster. It's not attached to a belt, it's attached to straps which are attached to a belt. The instructor said they'd conferred with the AG on that one. BTW, I did ask at the instructor update this year if a drop leg was still invalid and the DPS instructor said it was.
Jay E Morris
Guardian Firearm Training, NRA Pistol, LTC
NRA Lifetime/Recuiter
Cibolo, TX


Topic author
NotRPB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 8:24 am

Re: concealed definition

#5

Post by NotRPB » Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:54 pm

jmorris wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:26 pm
NotRPB wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 10:17 am
....

And ... a handgun in a belt holster in a licensee's the car in plain sight (either holster mounted somewhere. or laying in the passenger seat or floorboard)
....
It was asked in my Jan 2016 LTC instructor class if this worked. The DPS answer was no. What I believe is the basis? If the holster is not on a belt, it is not a belt holster, it's just a holster. This was never explicitly stated but implied several times. At one point a DPS instructor picked up a styrofoam cup and tape, put the cup on his side and wrapped tape around it and him. This was now a belt and a belt holster. Take the cup off the "belt" and it was no longer a holster.

Similar to the reasoning (I believe) why a tactical, drop-leg holster is not a valid open carry holster. It's not attached to a belt, it's attached to straps which are attached to a belt. The instructor said they'd conferred with the AG on that one. BTW, I did ask at the instructor update this year if a drop leg was still invalid and the DPS instructor said it was.
so, by that officer's logic, it re-becomes a belt holster when I snap the snaps around the seatbelt in the passenger seat beside me when I drive, so it can be open carried again in a belt or shoulder holster... because it once again is attached to a belt.... that's what I hear. However, it doesn't work as an ankle holster, nor bellyband holster, it was "designed to be, and is" a belt holster even if I'm wearing Sansabelt pants and attach it to a bandolier (which I guess, if what it's attached to "defines it" that makes it a shoulder holster if what its attached to goes over one shoulder?) :headscratch :confused5 :headscratch :lol: :mrgreen: :lol::

Found an article that didn't answer it

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/news/20 ... ross-texas
Police brace for 911 calls as open carry starts Jan. 1 across Texas

Meanwhile Taylor, who has conducted dozens of training sessions for police statewide, said officers have many legitimate questions about how to enforce the new law. They want to know whether the holster has to be worn on the person’s body or whether a gun can be holstered but carried in someone’s hand or placed on a table. The law doesn’t specify that the holster needs to be worn on the body.
Last edited by NotRPB on Mon Jun 18, 2018 6:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.


ninjabread
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 569
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2017 7:12 pm

Re: concealed definition

#6

Post by ninjabread » Mon Jun 18, 2018 6:00 pm

If you attach it to the shoulder belt, is it a belt holster or a shoulder holster? :banghead:
This is my opinion. There are many like it, but this one is mine.


Topic author
NotRPB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 8:24 am

Re: concealed definition

#7

Post by NotRPB » Mon Jun 18, 2018 6:04 pm

ninjabread wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 6:00 pm
If you attach it to the shoulder belt, is it a belt holster or a shoulder holster? :banghead:
:smilelol5: "rlol"

Thinking of that DPS officer's analysis which "he says" came from the AG ?
CONCEALED carry doesn't have to be ON BODY carry, can be OFF BODY carry, not worn ... Examples: inside a briefcase/purse, so I assume . according to that DPS officer's opinion ...as long as a belt is attached to the belt holster it could be off body, like on a seatbelt or an even an extra old worn out belt that doesn't fit me anymore with the belt holster "on" attached to > the belt laying on the car seat ...
The law doesn’t specify that the holster (or belt) needs to be worn on the body.
??? So then it's ok ????
(actually the law didn't say a belt needed to be attached, nor a shoulder needed to be attached either, a shoulder holster on a dislocated shoulder .... ouch hurts to think about it... a shoulder holster wrapped around the waist is a what? (I have one holster ...that can be worn as a belt holster or a shoulder holster") ...


I have belt holsters and
I have shoulder holsters ...

I have one holster ...that can be worn as a belt holster or a shoulder holster"
So, I actually have a "belt or shoulder holster"
I think maybe that's the only ones allowed? .. a "belt or shoulder holster" (joking)

Grammar :willynilly:


Topic author
NotRPB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 8:24 am

Re: concealed definition

#8

Post by NotRPB » Mon Jun 18, 2018 8:07 pm

What I'm posting here is related but sort of off topic, except it occured at the same breakfast table. One of the Hams with a local VFD is writing Volunteer Fire Dept Policy manual ( I think he recently became a LTC instructor too) concerning the Volunteer Emergency Services Personnel and he's asked other volunteer Dept for theirs but hasn't gotten any positive responses yet.

I think he's planning to require monthly range time from the Volunteers that are licensed to carry if they want to carry on duty... or something like that (overheard but was busy eating breakfast right then) Sounded like a good idea to me. I have not looked into the Volunteer Emergency Services stuff as deeply as I should have yet.
Last edited by NotRPB on Thu Jun 21, 2018 8:25 am, edited 1 time in total.


K.Mooneyham
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 1694
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:27 pm
Location: Vernon, Texas

Re: concealed definition

#9

Post by K.Mooneyham » Tue Jun 19, 2018 10:35 am

Well, I'm glad I stumbled across this post. It somehow escaped me that the official definition of concealed had been removed from the Penal Code. However, 30.06 applies to concealed carry. So, without an official definition of concealed, what is the criteria for arrest if one carries past the sign? What about 30.07? The former would seem more clearcut than the latter. You had a handgun on you, you were licensed, and you carried past the 30.06 sign. But if you had the handgun covered by say, an untucked shirt, and it became momentarily visible when bending over, etc, and someone called the police on you for violating 30.07 without your knowledge, is that grounds for arrest when the intent was not to make it visible? Have we come full circle back to it being a matter of loose interpretation? Some older members of this forum will remember a posting about a person who went through a terrible experience over something similar. I am certainly no fan of making laws that apply specifically, but then not defining the parameters for said specific law. The whole point of the legendary Code of Hammurabi wasn't that it was nice to people, but that for the first (known) time, the laws were written down for all (who could read) to see.


twomillenium
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 1491
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:42 pm
Location: houston area

Re: concealed definition

#10

Post by twomillenium » Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:02 am

K.Mooneyham wrote:
Tue Jun 19, 2018 10:35 am
Well, I'm glad I stumbled across this post. It somehow escaped me that the official definition of concealed had been removed from the Penal Code. However, 30.06 applies to concealed carry. So, without an official definition of concealed, what is the criteria for arrest if one carries past the sign? What about 30.07? The former would seem more clearcut than the latter. You had a handgun on you, you were licensed, and you carried past the 30.06 sign. But if you had the handgun covered by say, an untucked shirt, and it became momentarily visible when bending over, etc, and someone called the police on you for violating 30.07 without your knowledge, is that grounds for arrest when the intent was not to make it visible? Have we come full circle back to it being a matter of loose interpretation? Some older members of this forum will remember a posting about a person who went through a terrible experience over something similar. I am certainly no fan of making laws that apply specifically, but then not defining the parameters for said specific law. The whole point of the legendary Code of Hammurabi wasn't that it was nice to people, but that for the first (known) time, the laws were written down for all (who could read) to see.
If the officer chose to make you defend yourself it would result in receiving a ticket. The arrest would come if you were asked or told to leave the premises and your did not immediately do so, resulting in an arrest for trespass, not for the 07 or 06 infraction. BTW, the unintentional act of a concealed handgun becoming momentarily visible is not an infraction. This action would have to be proven as intentional. (IMO varying by the liberalness of the county this occurred in) Although, it could result in the licensee being asked to leave and they must do so immediately as not to become guilty of trespass.
I am not an attorney and this is not legal advice. This is only how I understand the way it was explained to me.
Texas LTC Instructor, NRA pistol instructor, RSO, NRA Endowment Life , TSRA, Glock enthusiast (tho I have others)
Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit, wisdom is knowing not to add it to a fruit salad.

You will never know another me, this could be good or not so good, but it is still true.


K.Mooneyham
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 1694
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:27 pm
Location: Vernon, Texas

Re: concealed definition

#11

Post by K.Mooneyham » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:19 am

twomillenium wrote:
Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:02 am
K.Mooneyham wrote:
Tue Jun 19, 2018 10:35 am
Well, I'm glad I stumbled across this post. It somehow escaped me that the official definition of concealed had been removed from the Penal Code. However, 30.06 applies to concealed carry. So, without an official definition of concealed, what is the criteria for arrest if one carries past the sign? What about 30.07? The former would seem more clearcut than the latter. You had a handgun on you, you were licensed, and you carried past the 30.06 sign. But if you had the handgun covered by say, an untucked shirt, and it became momentarily visible when bending over, etc, and someone called the police on you for violating 30.07 without your knowledge, is that grounds for arrest when the intent was not to make it visible? Have we come full circle back to it being a matter of loose interpretation? Some older members of this forum will remember a posting about a person who went through a terrible experience over something similar. I am certainly no fan of making laws that apply specifically, but then not defining the parameters for said specific law. The whole point of the legendary Code of Hammurabi wasn't that it was nice to people, but that for the first (known) time, the laws were written down for all (who could read) to see.
If the officer chose to make you defend yourself it would result in receiving a ticket. The arrest would come if you were asked or told to leave the premises and your did not immediately do so, resulting in an arrest for trespass, not for the 07 or 06 infraction. BTW, the unintentional act of a concealed handgun becoming momentarily visible is not an infraction. This action would have to be proven as intentional. (IMO varying by the liberalness of the county this occurred in) Although, it could result in the licensee being asked to leave and they must do so immediately as not to become guilty of trespass.
I am not an attorney and this is not legal advice. This is only how I understand the way it was explained to me.
I understand what you are saying. However, violating 30.07 is easy; openly carry a handgun in a belt or shoulder holster, and simply walk past the sign. But if the place had a 30.07, and you were concealed, could you conceivably be arrested for it becoming unconcealed, since there doesn't seem to be an official definition of what concealed means? Or, is that a moot point now? And in the scenario I'm speaking of, no one asks you to leave prior to calling the police. They spot your handgun and immediately get on the phone to the police without saying a word to you.


Topic author
NotRPB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 8:24 am

Re: concealed definition

#12

Post by NotRPB » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:55 am

ninjabread wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 6:00 pm
If you attach it to the shoulder belt, is it a belt holster or a shoulder holster? :banghead:
Still a great question
According to the quoted DPS guy who was teaching Instructors, this is a belt holster?
But a real belt holster isn't a belt holster unless it's "on" a belt? (Yet the belt doesn't have to be being worn and can be laying in the car seat next to you?
Walmart sells these "belt holsters" like 2 for $5. in the shoe department ... I'll stock up on them
By his definition, and illustration with TAPE masking tape holding/attaching a Glock to a belt is a "belt holster" ... I got a roll of Tape holsters already.
Image


Topic author
NotRPB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 8:24 am

Re: concealed definition

#13

Post by NotRPB » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:01 am

jmorris wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:26 pm
NotRPB wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 10:17 am
....

And ... a handgun in a belt holster in a licensee's the car in plain sight (either holster mounted somewhere. or laying in the passenger seat or floorboard)
....
It was asked in my Jan 2016 LTC instructor class if this worked. The DPS answer was no. What I believe is the basis? If the holster is not on a belt, it is not a belt holster, it's just a holster. This was never explicitly stated but implied several times. At one point a DPS instructor picked up a styrofoam cup and tape, put the cup on his side and wrapped tape around it and him. This was now a belt and a belt holster. Take the cup off the "belt" and it was no longer a holster.

Similar to the reasoning (I believe) why a tactical, drop-leg holster is not a valid open carry holster. It's not attached to a belt, it's attached to straps which are attached to a belt. The instructor said they'd conferred with the AG on that one. BTW, I did ask at the instructor update this year if a drop leg was still invalid and the DPS instructor said it was.
so an off body belt holster in the seat or floorboard is ok if attached to a belt...or seatbelt

or tape the pistol to an off-body belt with painters/masking tape and lay it on the car seat and the tape becomes the holster for off body open carry? ( I think that won't work, even if the DPS officer definition applies)

similar to off body concealed in a purse in the floor or passenger seat I suppose?

I personally rarely off body carry n the car, else I cover it with a towel or newspaper etc, but a guy is playing devil's advocate with me and I'm playing along and sort of relaying/extending that logic to conclusions to see how it plays.
We need a definition of In a Concealed manner to satisfy him. He is one figuring that a bulge under a shirt isn't concealed if the observer already knows you're a licensee and he's looking for bulges.


Topic author
NotRPB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 8:24 am

Re: concealed definition

#14

Post by NotRPB » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:19 am

twomillenium wrote:
Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:02 am
K.Mooneyham wrote:
Tue Jun 19, 2018 10:35 am
Well, I'm glad I stumbled across this post. It somehow escaped me that the official definition of concealed had been removed from the Penal Code. However, 30.06 applies to concealed carry. So, without an official definition of concealed, what is the criteria for arrest if one carries past the sign? What about 30.07? The former would seem more clearcut than the latter. You had a handgun on you, you were licensed, and you carried past the 30.06 sign. But if you had the handgun covered by say, an untucked shirt, and it became momentarily visible when bending over, etc, and someone called the police on you for violating 30.07 without your knowledge, is that grounds for arrest when the intent was not to make it visible? Have we come full circle back to it being a matter of loose interpretation? Some older members of this forum will remember a posting about a person who went through a terrible experience over something similar. I am certainly no fan of making laws that apply specifically, but then not defining the parameters for said specific law. The whole point of the legendary Code of Hammurabi wasn't that it was nice to people, but that for the first (known) time, the laws were written down for all (who could read) to see.
If the officer chose to make you defend yourself it would result in receiving a ticket. The arrest would come if you were asked or told to leave the premises and your did not immediately do so, resulting in an arrest for trespass, not for the 07 or 06 infraction. BTW, the unintentional act of a concealed handgun becoming momentarily visible is not an infraction. This action would have to be proven as intentional. (IMO varying by the liberalness of the county this occurred in) Although, it could result in the licensee being asked to leave and they must do so immediately as not to become guilty of trespass.
I am not an attorney and this is not legal advice. This is only how I understand the way it was explained to me.
This is what I've been trying to explain to the "Devils Advocate" guy ... Mens Rea (per Attorney Google, I didn't bother Black's Law Dictionary but > https://thelawdictionary.org/criminal-intent/ ) (the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime, as opposed to the action or conduct of the accused.)

The proving of intent burden the State will have to prove won't be easy to prove on a bulge still covered by a shirt anyway, (except those fishnet shirts?) even if the shirt accidentally raises at Walmart when you reach the top shelf to get a box to help a short elderly lady. (I've done that)
Last edited by NotRPB on Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:32 am, edited 1 time in total.


Soccerdad1995
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 3432
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:03 pm

Re: concealed definition

#15

Post by Soccerdad1995 » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:25 am

By the same logic, is a handgun still a handgun if it's not being held in your hand? Or is it a handgun while I am holding it, and a non-distinct firearm while sitting in my holster, or safe, or range bag, only to magically become a handgun again as soon as I grab it with my hand? Or is it just holsters that have this magically ability to change their basic nature as soon as they touch something else?

It's dangerous to decide that things morph into different things based on what they are attached to, or how they are used. The thing doesn't change. If we don't like it being used in a certain way, then outlaw that use, but don't try to change it into a different thing that is now illegal, but will become legal again later, etc., etc.

Also, what is the legal definition of a "belt". Is it something that wraps entirely around your body? If so, a seat belt wouldn't count (unless you consider the seat to be part of the seat belt. But an ankle holster attached to a belt that wraps entirely around your leg should count, right? Maybe we need to start calling that a belt instead of a strap.

Or we could just get rid of all this craziness and refine the legal definitions. If the intent of the law is to keep people from stuffing a gun in their pants or otherwise carrying it in an unsafe manner, then simply change the 30.07 section to say "holster". If we don't want a holstered gun visible on the passenger seat, then say "holstered gun carried on a person's body".
Ding dong, the witch is dead

Post Reply

Return to “General Texas CHL Discussion”