concealed definition

CHL discussions that do not fit into more specific topics

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton


K.Mooneyham
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 1703
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:27 pm
Location: Vernon, Texas

Re: concealed definition

#16

Post by K.Mooneyham » Wed Jun 20, 2018 1:40 pm

You know what I find amusing? Being on topic and getting jumped on about it by folks discussing taping a flip-flop to a belt and using it for a holster. That's really rich. If I actually see someone do that, I'll be sure to let y'all know right away.


twomillenium
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 1504
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:42 pm
Location: houston area

Re: concealed definition

#17

Post by twomillenium » Wed Jun 20, 2018 5:10 pm

Soccerdad1995 wrote:
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".
The states definition of a handgun is a firearm designed to be shot with one hand. Soooo, I guess whether or not it is actually in a hand does not matter as much as the intended design.
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.


Topic author
NotRPB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 1072
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 8:24 am

Re: concealed definition

#18

Post by NotRPB » Thu Jun 21, 2018 8:38 am

K.Mooneyham wrote:
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.
My layman's opinion
in a 30.07 situation given above. Though there isn't a definition of "concealed handgun" anymore, there is still the
Intentional display in front of another person in a public place.
A shirt riding up momentarily while stooping over or reaching a top shelf isn't an intentional display probably. Burden of proof to prove intent is on the State.


Topic author
NotRPB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 1072
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 8:24 am

Re: concealed definition

#19

Post by NotRPB » Thu Jun 21, 2018 8:43 am

twomillenium wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 5:10 pm
Soccerdad1995 wrote:
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".
The states definition of a handgun is a firearm designed to be shot with one hand. Soooo, I guess whether or not it is actually in a hand does not matter as much as the intended design.
That's my position with belt or shoulder holsters = intended design> even when locked in the gun safe, it is still a belt holster (or shoulder holster). An elephant in a garage doesn't become a car even if you stick a ley in it.
I'd agree with the designed to be a belt holster is a belt holster, designed to be an ankle holster is an ankle holster (even if a small-headed person wore it as a headband) and a holster designed to be a shoulder holster is a shoulder holster, even if it was attached to a sock, that doesn't make it a shoe...>>> a shoe used as a belt holster though ... i don't know.

We might benefit from a few definitions

46.15 Non-Applicability
(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;

User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 23848
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: concealed definition

#20

Post by The Annoyed Man » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:02 am

Isn’t there a definition to be found in one of the pre-LTC CHL manuals?
Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself.—Hookalakah Meshobbab
I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes.—The Annoyed Boy

User avatar

warnmar10
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 499
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 11:57 am

Re: concealed definition

#21

Post by warnmar10 » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:17 am

K.Mooneyham wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 1:40 pm
... Being on topic and getting jumped on about it by folks discussing taping a flip-flop to a belt and using it for a holster. ...
Image

User avatar

Liberty
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 5807
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:49 pm
Location: Galveston
Contact:

Re: concealed definition

#22

Post by Liberty » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:28 am

I don't know the real definition of concealed, but I know it when I didn't see it.
Liberty''s Blog
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy


Topic author
NotRPB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 1072
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 8:24 am

Re: concealed definition

#23

Post by NotRPB » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:47 am

The Annoyed Man wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:02 am
Isn’t there a definition to be found in one of the pre-LTC CHL manuals?
Well, there never was a Texas definition of "in a concealed Manner"
A legal definition of “Concealed handgun” 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 that's gone:

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.
in a concealed manner, shoulder holster, and belt holster MAY need defining, if people are disagreeing what they mean.

Since concealed carry allows off body carry in a briefcase, purse, I'd assume off body open carry is allowed ( but maybe not necessarily prudent in most situations,( 1 Corinthians 6:12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: 1 Corinthians 10:23 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.)
but if a towel slips off (or if I forgot my towel at home, (or if I just don't cover it up with a dirty oil rag in the first place) my belt or shoulder holster in the seat next to me such that it is open carried off body in my automobile, ... I shouldn't be cited in my opinion) Even if my belt or shoulder holster laying in the seat next to me is intentionally displayed by it's act of laying there while I drive, it shouldn''t be construed as being illegal ..
Because ...
46.02 does not apply ...
46.15 Non-Applicability
(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;
Additionally
ec. 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and intentionally displays the handgun in plain view of another person in a public place. It is an exception to the application of this subsection that the handgun was partially or wholly visible but was carried in a shoulder or belt holster by the license holder.
My lay opinion is that if it's in a shoulder or belt holster, we're good as long as we're not where we are prohibited from being, whether it's "in a concealed manner" or not (whatever "in a concealed manner" means?)

I still have a guy arguing that we are "not allowed" to switch back and forth from open carry to concealed (as if we are not allowed to conceal carry in a belt holster he saw moments ago before we walked into HEB past the 30.07 sign when I untucked and concealed prior to entering ) but he can't locate a law prohibiting tucking or untucking a shirt yet ( I think he's one who moved here from California) :mrgreen:


twomillenium
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 1504
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:42 pm
Location: houston area

Re: concealed definition

#24

Post by twomillenium » Thu Jun 21, 2018 1:56 pm

NotRPB wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 8:43 am
That's my position with belt or shoulder holsters = intended design> even when locked in the gun safe, it is still a belt holster (or shoulder holster). An elephant in a garage doesn't become a car even if you stick a ley in it.
I'd agree with the designed to be a belt holster is a belt holster, designed to be an ankle holster is an ankle holster (even if a small-headed person wore it as a headband) and a holster designed to be a shoulder holster is a shoulder holster, even if it was attached to a sock, that doesn't make it a shoe...>>> a shoe used as a belt holster though ... i don't know.

We might benefit from a few definitions

46.15 Non-Applicability
(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;
Most ankle holsters qualify as belt holster, the state does not say "belt around the waist" holster. Anything that is designed to wrap around something then attach to itself is a belt in order to stay in place. I guess even Jethro Bodine's rope would be a belt by the way he used it.
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.

User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 23848
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: concealed definition

#25

Post by The Annoyed Man » Thu Jun 21, 2018 5:42 pm

NotRPB wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:47 am
The Annoyed Man wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:02 am
Isn’t there a definition to be found in one of the pre-LTC CHL manuals?
Well, there never was a Texas definition of "in a concealed Manner"
I’ll have to take your word for it. I seemed to remember that there was, but I’m not entirely certain what I had for breakfast this morning, so....... :mrgreen:
Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself.—Hookalakah Meshobbab
I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes.—The Annoyed Boy

Post Reply

Return to “General Texas CHL Discussion”