TexasCHLforum.com

That was my recollection.

That's a Class C on me, I allowed them access. AFAIK, there is no accumulation. I could draw multiple tickets and they will still be Class C's. Not like DUI, 3rd one's a felony.

What's the penalty, if any, that can be applied against the minor?

switch wrote:That was my recollection.

That's a Class C on me, I allowed them access. AFAIK, there is no accumulation. I could draw multiple tickets and they will still be Class C's. Not like DUI, 3rd one's a felony.

What's the penalty, if any, that can be applied against the minor?

None that I'm aware of.

sjfcontrol wrote:

switch wrote:I was told in another forum that that juvenile could be charged if under 18 w/a gun. They were talking about TX laws too, not fed.

I'm surprised that DPS has NEVER covered that w/instructors. :(

It's covered in class...

Penal Code Sec. 46.13. MAKING A FIREARM ACCESSIBLE TO A CHILD. (a) In this section:
(1) "Child" means a person younger than 17 years of age.

(b) A person commits an offense if a child gains access to a readily dischargeable firearm and the person with criminal negligence: . . . .

Please note the law you quote applies to the adult who made the firearm accessible, not to the juvenile possessing the firearm.

Not aware of accumlating/escalating penalties for me?

Or not aware of a charge applicable to the minor?

switch wrote:Not aware of accumlating/escalating penalties for me?

Or not aware of a charge applicable to the minor?

Well, both.

Javier730 wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:

twomillenium wrote:A class C and pay the fine. What about the endangering a minor charge? Have you consulted your psychiatrist? If not you should and if you don't have one then get one.

Really? Consulting a lawyer might be more enlightening.

sounds like something an anti would say.

Sounds like something a non thinker would say. We live in a world of laws, whether we agree with some or all of them, the laws still apply to us. There are laws that in some situations prohibit common sense and the punishment is greater than the value. I know that we would prefer that our minor daughters not work til midnight but in the event they need to, I would do everything in my power to legally supply her with some sort of safety. Even if it meant I stayed up and picked her up of escorted her.
As for as consulting an attorney or psychiatrist, do both. Sometimes a single action breaks more than one law and sometimes the punishment could result in a B misdemeanor for one law and a felony for another which could result in suspension, revocation or even illegal to own a firearm. So, IMHO, your elevator must not go all the way to the top to intentionally endanger your ability to protect yourself or family by taking the easy way out. There are ways to protect your loved ones, and they might not be to your preference, but that does not justify ignoring the law intentionally.

Too late to make a long story short, but there are consequences for all actions. What are the odds of the outcome to be good or bad? That is for each individual to decide for themselves.

As far as being anti naw I guarantee you are probably more anti than I. I just try to act within the law unless I feel I am truly justified.

46.13 is titled 'Making a Firearm Accessible to a Child'.

I think it is designed to punish people that leave a gun laying around the house, loaded, allowing small children access.

I don't think it was intended to punish a parent that gave his 16 year old a gun for protection. I realize it could be used for that.

All I'm saying is it's a Class C, like a speeding ticket. I'll take the ticket, plead my case before the judge and pay the fine, if necessary.

I realize some of you never break the law, never speed, never roll through a stop sign, etc. Bully for you. I had a CHL student tell me her husband said if she did not get a speeding ticket at least once a year, she was driving too slow. :)

twomillenium wrote:

Javier730 wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:

twomillenium wrote:A class C and pay the fine. What about the endangering a minor charge? Have you consulted your psychiatrist? If not you should and if you don't have one then get one.

Really? Consulting a lawyer might be more enlightening.

sounds like something an anti would say.

Sounds like something a non thinker would say. We live in a world of laws, whether we agree with some or all of them, the laws still apply to us. There are laws that in some situations prohibit common sense and the punishment is greater than the value. I know that we would prefer that our minor daughters not work til midnight but in the event they need to, I would do everything in my power to legally supply her with some sort of safety. Even if it meant I stayed up and picked her up of escorted her.
As for as consulting an attorney or psychiatrist, do both. Sometimes a single action breaks more than one law and sometimes the punishment could result in a B misdemeanor for one law and a felony for another which could result in suspension, revocation or even illegal to own a firearm. So, IMHO, your elevator must not go all the way to the top to intentionally endanger your ability to protect yourself or family by taking the easy way out. There are ways to protect your loved ones, and they might not be to your preference, but that does not justify ignoring the law intentionally.

Too late to make a long story short, but there are consequences for all actions. What are the odds of the outcome to be good or bad? That is for each individual to decide for themselves.

As far as being anti naw I guarantee you are probably more anti than I. I just try to act within the law unless I feel I am truly justified.

You guarantee I am more anti than you are yet you suggest the op might have some mental illness because he wants his daughter to be and to defend herself while in her vehicle.

Javier730 wrote:

twomillenium wrote:

Javier730 wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:

twomillenium wrote:A class C and pay the fine. What about the endangering a minor charge? Have you consulted your psychiatrist? If not you should and if you don't have one then get one.

Really? Consulting a lawyer might be more enlightening.

sounds like something an anti would say.

Sounds like something a non thinker would say. We live in a world of laws, whether we agree with some or all of them, the laws still apply to us. There are laws that in some situations prohibit common sense and the punishment is greater than the value. I know that we would prefer that our minor daughters not work til midnight but in the event they need to, I would do everything in my power to legally supply her with some sort of safety. Even if it meant I stayed up and picked her up of escorted her.
As for as consulting an attorney or psychiatrist, do both. Sometimes a single action breaks more than one law and sometimes the punishment could result in a B misdemeanor for one law and a felony for another which could result in suspension, revocation or even illegal to own a firearm. So, IMHO, your elevator must not go all the way to the top to intentionally endanger your ability to protect yourself or family by taking the easy way out. There are ways to protect your loved ones, and they might not be to your preference, but that does not justify ignoring the law intentionally.

Too late to make a long story short, but there are consequences for all actions. What are the odds of the outcome to be good or bad? That is for each individual to decide for themselves.

As far as being anti naw I guarantee you are probably more anti than I. I just try to act within the law unless I feel I am truly justified.

You guarantee I am more anti than you are yet you suggest the op might have some mental illness because he wants his daughter to be and to defend herself while in her vehicle.

Again you need to reread and then use your matter between your ear holes. I NEVER said the op had a mental illness because he wants his daughter to be safe. I read what I wrote and even read my replies, I can partially see how slow thinkers might misread these posts so I typed this reply extra slow.

P.S. I even know that I can come across as being an a**, but I assure you it is mostly (I said mostly) unintentional.

twomillenium wrote:Have you consulted your psychiatrist? If not you should and if you don't have one then get one.

twomillenium wrote:As for as consulting an attorney or psychiatrist, do both.

Please take some time and look up what a psychiatrist does then please explain to "slow thinkers" like myself how a psychiatrist would help the op or anyone in the ops situation.

Javier730 wrote:

twomillenium wrote:Have you consulted your psychiatrist? If not you should and if you don't have one then get one.

twomillenium wrote:As for as consulting an attorney or psychiatrist, do both.

Please take some time and look up what a psychiatrist does then please explain to "slow thinkers" like myself how a psychiatrist would help the op or anyone in the ops situation.

Consulting a psychiatrist does not mean one has a mental illness. Consulting an attorney may help one see the benefit of not running afoul of the law. I am not trying to argue with you. I do think, giving a pistol to a minor for self defense is not only illegal in more than one way but a bit looney or at least not thought out very well.
Go in peace and God Bless Texas.

twomillenium wrote:

Javier730 wrote:

twomillenium wrote:Have you consulted your psychiatrist? If not you should and if you don't have one then get one.

twomillenium wrote:As for as consulting an attorney or psychiatrist, do both.

Please take some time and look up what a psychiatrist does then please explain to "slow thinkers" like myself how a psychiatrist would help the op or anyone in the ops situation.

Consulting a psychiatrist does not mean one has a mental illness. Consulting an attorney may help one see the benefit of not running afoul of the law. I am not trying to argue with you. I do think, giving a pistol to a minor for self defense is not only illegal in more than one way but a bit looney or at least not thought out very well.
Go in peace and God Bless Texas.

I understand what you're saying about how giving a minor a firearm is not thought out well and how it can get you in legal problems. I just don't understand how a psychiatrist would benefit. I think a lawyer would suffice. My comment saying it sounded like something an anti would say was not my way of trying to start an argument, it truly sounded to me like something an anti would say. Offending you and getting you to bite back was not my intention.

It's academic for me. My youngest is 22.

However, it's a situation some of my students will face. I want to give them the best advice possible. I used to recommend the give them an unloaded gun and separate magazine. (Not readily dischargeable. :) )

I just realized that is only a Class C. I'd like to know what the fine is. Less that $500 is interesting but not too helpful. Frankly, $200 for walking past a 30.06 sign sounds cheap to me. :)

It sounds crazy to accuse someone of being loony because they chose to allow their child to be able to defend themselves.

As to the argument:'You should obey the law.' I guess you think Black's should still have to ride in the back of the bus. Maybe we should still subjects of the Queen of England. It's nice to know where you stand if it does come to civil (or uncivil) disobedience.

The government has no business telling me how to raise/arm my kids.

twomillenium wrote:Again you need to reread and then use your matter between your ear holes. I NEVER said the op had a mental illness because he wants his daughter to be safe.

twomillenium wrote:Consulting a psychiatrist does not mean one has a mental illness

twomillenium wrote:I do think, giving a pistol to a minor for self defense is not only illegal in more than one way but a bit looney or at least not thought out very well.

This is what makes the "matter between my earholes" come to the conclusion that you suggested the op had some mental illness when he mentioned giving his minor daughter a firearm to defend herself.

Javier730 wrote:

twomillenium wrote:Again you need to reread and then use your matter between your ear holes. I NEVER said the op had a mental illness because he wants his daughter to be safe.

twomillenium wrote:Consulting a psychiatrist does not mean one has a mental illness

twomillenium wrote:I do think, giving a pistol to a minor for self defense is not only illegal in more than one way but a bit looney or at least not thought out very well.

This is what makes the "matter between my earholes" come to the conclusion that you suggested the op had some mental illness when he mentioned giving his minor daughter a firearm to defend herself.

I AM GLAD WE AGREE!!