Got it in!!

[gigag04]

Well, I hope you never have an issue with your TX CHL because I think you guys are painting a rosier picture than what would actually happen in a routine traffic stop:

Officer: "Sir, can I see your drivers license?"
You: "Yes sir, also I want to let you know I have a CHL and am carrying a concealed handgun"
Officer: "Ok, can I see your CHL"
You: "Sure, here you go"
Officer: "Sir, this is a Utah CHL. We are in Texas. You are a resident of Texas. Where is your Texas CHL?"
You: "Umm, it was <revoked/suspended/expired>. That's why I have the Utah CHL as backup"
Officer: "So you mean to tell me that your Texas CHL is <revoked/suspended/expired> and you're carrying concealed?"
You: "Yes sir, but it's ok because I have my Utah CHL. Look here's a printout from internet about reciprocity...."
Officer: "Sir, please place your hands behind your back"
You: "But a Utah CHL is valid in TX! Call your supervisor. Look at the memo"
Officer: "Right, I'll get right on the phone call to my supervisor. And I think I misplaced that memo. Let's discuss this more down at the station."

So...is it safe to say that this emphatic statement is merely speculation as you have never encountered this scenario?

[Pinkycatcher]

I have zero law experience other than the fact that I follow it and I follow it to the letter. I don't look for loop holes and ways to get around the law. If TX says that I need to attend a class and prove I'm proficient in shooting to carry a handgun, I'm more than happy to do so.

Texas Law states that an out of state license that we have an agreement with is sufficient to carry in the state of Texas under the laws pertaining to a Texas CHL holder.

So I would be following the law to the letter if I carried under a suspended Texas license with a Utah CCL if Utah has not revoked theirs.

[bdickens]

Sure. I have 4 years of CHL experience. I have over 20 years of firearm experience. I have over 30 years of residency in Texas. I've lived in TX when CHL wasn't an option. I have zero law experience other than the fact that I follow it and I follow it to the letter. I don't look for loop holes and ways to get around the law. If TX says that I need to attend a class and prove I'm proficient in shooting to carry a handgun, I'm more than happy to do so. I would never obtain an out of state CHL so I can have a backup, my TX CHL is revoked/suspended, or TX simply wouldn't issue me one. I'm just a simple guy and not an expert in anything related to CHL and don't claim to be.

As far as LEO encounters, I've been pulled over by police exactly 3 times since obtaining my CHL. Each time I have been carrying and each time I have presented my CHL. I've had no issues and had one officer thank me for informing him. I have been stopped by a TX Game Warden twice. Once while carrying and once not. Again, I presented my CHL while carrying and no issues. I have also discussed this issue with two LEO friends of mine, a TX Game Warden (not one of the ones that confronted me), and a TX Ranger (not the ones currently in first place). All were in support of CHL. All agreed that if carrying, it is best mentioned to the authority figure whether or not required to do so. Mostly out of respect and curtousy, but it alleviates any potential issues if the stop is more than routine.

Um.....

Am I missing something?

[Kevinf2349]

Um.....

Am I missing something?

Maybe the fact that you don't always have to have broken the law to get pulled over by the police? I have been pulled over a couple of times for no apparent reason. One time for just being in a part of town I shouldn't have been when I got 'geographically challenged' in a strange city another was to do a spot check on documentation (which I had).

Right or wrong, constitutional or not, it happens.

[bdickens]

Three times in four years?

[Kevinf2349]

Three times in four years?

Yeah I see where you are coming from.

In my case it was twice in 23 years for 'no reason'

(I have been stopped an additional time for trying to get back to Texas too quickly back in 1999, they didn't buy the Y2K excuse either )

[Pinkycatcher]

Three times in four years?

Yeah I see where you are coming from.

In my case it was twice in 23 years for 'no reason'

(I have been stopped an additional time for trying to get back to Texas too quickly back in 1999, they didn't buy the Y2K excuse either )

In my case it was 5 times in 5 years for 'reason'! I mean why do those cops pull me over? I only go over the speed limit every time they do! Those jerks!

I deserve it when I do get pulled over. Though I did get one of the lame reasons once, I ran a stop sign (well, speedily rolled through) and got pulled over, the officer gave me the "what if someone else ran it at the same time" talk, which is absurd in my opinion, so many things would happen different with that. C'mon, just tell me I broke the law, and give me my ticket and send me on my way, don't try to guilt trip me with a tired old argument.

[Kevinf2349]

The dichotomy is : Do you follow the law and risk a road rage incident, or do you follow the crowd and risk a ticket?

[Keith B]

The dichotomy is : Do you follow the law and risk a road rage incident, or do you follow the crowd and risk a ticket?

You follow the law and get a bumper sticker or trailer hitch cover like my Father-In-Law has that says:

Retired
Now go around

[Kevinf2349]

The dichotomy is : Do you follow the law and risk a road rage incident, or do you follow the crowd and risk a ticket?

You follow the law and get a bumper sticker or trailer hitch cover like my Father-In-Law has that says:

Retired
Now go around

SOunds like a plan to me.

[Bart]

Three times in four years?

Depending on his skin color that could indicate a very safe driver who religiously follows traffic laws.

[bdickens]

Three times in four years?

Depending on his skin color that could indicate a very safe driver who religiously follows traffic laws.