Carrying of OC spray..

[Velocity]

During the recent legal seminar for CHL holders, there was a question on legality of carrying OC/pepper spray since "chemical dispensing devices" are prohibited under PC 46.05. We'd even reviewed a "2001-2003" (I think) book on CHL (and related) laws, and I couldn't find the passage describing the definition of a "chemical dispensing device" that I knew I'd seen before.

After reviewing a more recent (2003-2004) issue of the same publication, I DID find the relevant passage (emphasis mine), under PC 46.01 (Definition of "Weapons"), section 14 describes "Chemical dispensing device" as "a device, other than a small chemical dispenser sold commercially for personal protection that is designed, made or adapted for the purpose of dispensing a substance capable of causing an adverse psychological or physiological effect on a human being"

In non-legalise -- small OC spray canisters are not prohibited for carry under PC 46.05. Note that this would not allow carry of a larger can of OC spray (I've seen 3-5 ounce cans

So -- my question is what does everyone think about the wisdom of carrying OC spray when you have a CHL and are legally armed?

Personally, I think OC spray is a better alternative when a non-lethal situation is encountered, and the legal repercussions would likely be far less than than would be encountered after a shooting. I personally carry a small can of Fox Labs OC spray, which my research has shown is one of the best around...

However, I've also read opinions that it could be used against you --literally (backspray or grab and spray), OR in legal proceedings after a shooting ("but judge - he obviously had a less-lethal alternative - he chose not to use it, but gunned down my client who was merely asking large sums of money while innocently brandishing a knife, which is clearly not a prohibited weapon under 46.05!" - you get the idea).

Opinions? Obviously, everything is a balance of risk, but I'm curious to know what others think.....

[txinvestigator]

The large cannisters they are referring to are the kind you can't really easily conceal. Like the large ones here....

http://www.safetyrus.com/pepper-spray.html


I believe that you should have a lesser means of force available to you. Legal issues aside for a minute, if I can use OC and stop an incident rather than have it escalate and force me to use deadly force, then I believe I have an obligation to do that.

OC can be used in instances where DF is not authorized also. As a person trained and exposed to it, and one who has observed MANY people trained and exposed, I can reliably tell you it is very effective. Works against dogs too.

[ghentry]

Thanks for following up with this post. It was I that asked the question in class.

I just purchased pepper spray for my wife and myself two weeks ago. I think there would definitely be situations where it would be much easier in court to defend your shooting if you had attempted to use less than lethal methods prior to the shooting.

An example: My wife works downtown and there are many homeless people that are mentally ill. Some can become very violent with no provocation. If she were to be attacked bare handed by someone much larger than her and she were to use deadly force, I could see how the media could paint her as "killing an innocent man that was mentally unstable and couldn't afford his medication". I would much rather her have the option to use LTL and flee than her only recourse to be a bullet and have to live with the aftermath.

[Paladin]

From Harris County DA's Office "Texas Weapons Laws":

dao-web.dao.hctx.net/ie/TEXAS%20WEAPONS%20LAWS.pdf

"A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly possesses,
manufactures, transports, repairs, or sells:
...
8 a chemical dispensing device;
...

(e) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree"


"“Chemical dispensing device� means a device, other than a small chemical dispenser sold commercially for personal protection, that is designed, made, or adapted for the purpose of dispensing a substance capable of causing an adverse psychological or physiological effect on a human being.

Briggs v. State, 746 S.W.2d 331 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1988, pet ref’d) Tear gas grenade manufactured for United States Armed Forces for use as a riot control device, activated by pulling pin, with no user control over direction of spray, not sold for personal protection violates statute. This does not apply to the small “key chain� type sprayers designed for personal protection.""

---------------------------------------

As I read it, if it's sold for personal protection and has user control over the direction of the spray it's okay.


If the device is not okay, it's a felony to sell or possess it in the first place.

[Greybeard]

In first DPS instructor skul back in '95, they encouraged us to encourage our students to carry OC as a "less than lethal" option. I subsequently went to an instructor certification class on the stuff and had to take a direct hit in the face. It made a believer out of me.

[txinvestigator]

In first DPS instructor skul back in '95, they encouraged us to encourage our students to carry OC as a "less than lethal" option. I subsequently went to an instructor certification class on the stuff and had to take a direct hit in the face. It made a believer out of me.

Ain't it fun???