TexasCHLforum.com

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."

I suggest you NOT get a Utah license, then.

jeeperbryan wrote: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."

Absolutely wrong, it would go something like this:
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: "Officer, I do not need a Texas CHL to be carrying under the authority of a CHL, in fact Texas has an agreement with the state of Utah where we recognize each others conceal carry permits."
Officer: "I'm not sure lemme call it in to my supervisor"
You: "Of course, I also have here the memo sent down from the governor stating that all holders of a Utah CHL are subject to the sames rights and regulations as that of a Texas CHL"
Officer: "Thank you, have a nice day."

And, as somebody else in a different thread pointed out -- at a traffic stop you're also covered by the MPA, and don't need a CHL from either (any) state.

jeeperbryan wrote: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."

Pinkycatcher wrote:

jeeperbryan wrote: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."

Absolutely wrong, it would go something like this:
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: "Officer, I do not need a Texas CHL to be carrying under the authority of a CHL, in fact Texas has an agreement with the state of Utah where we recognize each others conceal carry permits."
Officer: "I'm not sure lemme call it in to my supervisor"
You: "Of course, I also have here the memo sent down from the governor stating that all holders of a Utah CHL are subject to the sames rights and regulations as that of a Texas CHL"
Officer: "Thank you, have a nice day."

LOL, very wishful thinking and a bit ignorant. But based on your years of CHL experience, law experience, and extensive internet research, I'm sure you're an expert in LEO-CHL encounters. I hope that you never find yourself in this situation.

I don't mean to be a jerk about this, but I think it's ignorant to inform people on a TX CHL forum that they can go out and get another states CHL and expect our LEOs to understand reciprocity. While you may be entirely legal and following the law/memo, I don't think it's a good idea to use another states CHL when your TX CHL has been revoked/suspended/expired. If you need a Utah CHL to carry in states that TX CHL is not recognized, then by all means I see the validity. But to use a Utah CHL as a backup or loophole to carry in TX is not smart. In fact, that is how we will run into reciprocity issues in the future. If TX has enough people carrying Utah licenses because they had their TX license revoked, don't you think TX might reconsider reciprocity?

Funny that this topic is making news in TX and another thread started. Alot of unhappy people in Austin about Utah's relaxed requirements. So we could very well see a change in reciprocity:
http://texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=35565

sjfcontrol wrote:And, as somebody else in a different thread pointed out -- at a traffic stop you're also covered by the MPA, and don't need a CHL from either (any) state.

That's fantastic. What if you're not "traveling"? What if you're at the mall and LEO is questioning you?

I think it would go more like this.

Hand cop DL and insurance.

Cop goes back to car and runs his TCIC check and finds nothing

Cop writes ticket or warning. Cop gives it to me.

We both go our separate ways.

bayouhazard wrote:I think it would go more like this.

Hand cop DL and insurance.

Cop goes back to car and runs his TCIC check and finds nothing

Cop writes ticket or warning. Cop gives it to me.

We both go our separate ways.

Again, stupid advice and wishful thinking.

If you're carrying and an officer is comfronting you it is best to inform the officer and present your CHL. Regardless of whether it is required by law to do so or if you feel it is your god given right to carry, it is at least a courtesy to the LEO. If the LEO finds out you're carrying and didn't tell him....he's not gonna be happy. He just might find a random bag of drugs in your car.

What if you're printing or your made by an LEO for carrying? You're going to have to present your CHL in this case.

jeeperbryan wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:And, as somebody else in a different thread pointed out -- at a traffic stop you're also covered by the MPA, and don't need a CHL from either (any) state.

That's fantastic. What if you're not "traveling"? What if you're at the mall and LEO is questioning you?

The MPA has nothing to do with "traveling". Traffic stops are the most common form of officer/civilian interaction. How may times have you, or anybody you know been "questioned" at a mall by a real officer? (Not Paul Blart)

In fact, there is an argument (not one I'm making, just repeating it) that goes like this:
If you are not driving, you are not required to have or present an ID (or drivers license) to an officer, even if he requests one. (You do have to tell him your name, though.) It follows, then, that you also don't have to present a CHL. Take that for what it's worth.

jeeperbryan wrote:Again, stupid advice and wishful thinking.

Maybe. But I got to tell you it matches my experience carrying in several states for more than five years.

In another thread, sss said he has no problems with a Florida CWL in Houston.

jeeperbryan wrote:he's not gonna be happy. He just might find a random bag of drugs in your car.

Wow.

Just wow!

jeeperbryan wrote: LOL, very wishful thinking and a bit ignorant. But based on your years of CHL experience, law experience, and extensive internet research, I'm sure you're an expert in LEO-CHL encounters. I hope that you never find yourself in this situation.

Can you please post your years of CHL experience, law experience, any research you've done, and your level of experience in LEO-CHL encounters? I'm very curious as to your reasoning and strong stance you've taken. Also curious as to your first hand encounters of the situation you describe. I think this well help everyone see where you're coming from...

Bart wrote:

jeeperbryan wrote:Again, stupid advice and wishful thinking.

Maybe. But I got to tell you it matches my experience carrying in several states for more than five years.

In another thread, sss said he has no problems with a Florida CWL in Houston.

jeeperbryan wrote:he's not gonna be happy. He just might find a random bag of drugs in your car.

Wow.

Just wow!

Obviously the random bag was a joke. I'm glad you've had great experiences. And I'm sure there's lots of people with out of state licenses that have had no issues.

gigag04 wrote:

jeeperbryan wrote: LOL, very wishful thinking and a bit ignorant. But based on your years of CHL experience, law experience, and extensive internet research, I'm sure you're an expert in LEO-CHL encounters. I hope that you never find yourself in this situation.

Can you please post your years of CHL experience, law experience, any research you've done, and your level of experience in LEO-CHL encounters? I'm very curious as to your reasoning and strong stance you've taken. Also curious as to your first hand encounters of the situation you describe. I think this well help everyone see where you're coming from...

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.

The reason that I'm taking such a strong stance is because I've seen a few members recommend out of state licenses for the wrong reasons. If someone comes out and says "I need a Utah license so I can carry in Washington, etc..." I have absolutely no problem. But most of what I've heard is "I need a Utah license in case my TX CHL is lost/revoked/suspended" or "I need a Utah license because they're taking too long to process my TX one" or "I need a Utah license because I don't want to go through the hassle of a long class and qualification at a shooting range". All the wrong reasons for obtaining an out of state license. With the rush of new TX CHLs in the past couple of years, many of whom come this forum for advice, I think it is irresponsible for us to promote these reasons. If anything, we should be promoting the TX CHL and lobbying for changes in our next session.

If they fix the CHL problems there would be no incentive to get another state's license for the "wrong" reason.