TexasCHLforum.com

Have your wife put it in her purse.

First I'll say a drunk should no more use a gun than drive a car.

But as to your situation . . . as already pointed out, TX law prohibits you from carrying while intoxicated.

If you are showing outward signs of being intoxicated - staggering or passing out, slurred speech, etc., that could probably be construed as evidence of intoxication.

If you are NOT showing overt signs of intoxication, and if you are NOT driving, I am not aware of any TX requirements that you submit to a BAC or field sobriety test. In this instance, short of an LEO willing to perjure himself, I don't see how they could nick you for intoxicated carry.

HankB wrote:First I'll say a drunk should no more use a gun than drive a car.

But as to your situation . . . as already pointed out, TX law prohibits you from carrying while intoxicated.

If you are showing outward signs of being intoxicated - staggering or passing out, slurred speech, etc., that could probably be construed as evidence of intoxication.

If you are NOT showing overt signs of intoxication, and if you are NOT driving, I am not aware of any TX requirements that you submit to a BAC or field sobriety test. In this instance, short of an LEO willing to perjure himself, I don't see how they could nick you for intoxicated carry.

You are correct, only under DWI laws is a person required to submit to a breath test.

However, a LEO does not have to administer a field sobriety test to arrest for non-DWI offenses. I arrested people for PI without ANY test simply based on their actions. However, as you pointed out, if his actions didn't indicate intoxication there would be no arrest anyway.

my 2 cents,alcohol and firearms do not mix,why do people feel they need to indulge in alcoholic beverages to have a good time regarrdless of the excuse.If you wanta drink lock the weapon up if you wanta carry for protection lock the alcohol up, simple

If you are going to drink do not carry.

When you signed up and got the permit you assumed much more responsibility than just strapping on a firearm.

What happens if you are required to use that weapon. The question is not am I legal to carry. The question is are you in FULL control of your EMOTIONS and MOTOR SKILLS.

This is not Nascar, or some video camera on the side lines of a football game. We do not need to spend time trying out think the laws or to try and find a loop hole that will get us by.

Everytime you carry it, always remember you may have to use it.

I do not want to attack anyone on this forum, so please do not take this the wrong way.
When I read some of the post, my first thought is; Is this person really ready to be armed in public, and be in control of a firearm.

When that weapon goes bang out on the street someone is going to get hurt, someone may loose thier life. Be prepared to live with that and the events that caused it.

45 4 life wrote:If you are going to drink do not carry.

If that's your opinion and advice that's fine.

But see below from the FAQ on the DPS website.

Q: Can I carry a handgun if I am drinking alcohol?

A: "Carrying" while drinking is not prohibited, but it is a criminal offense to carry while intoxicated.

45 4 life wrote:What happens if you are required to use that weapon. The question is not am I legal to carry. The question is are you in FULL control of your EMOTIONS and MOTOR SKILLS.

So, it's safe to assume you are just as emphatic about not carrying if:
- you've got a cold
- you haven't had enough coffee
- you've had too much coffee
- you're bone tired after a shift of overtime
- you just had a serious argument and are still upset
- you're an Oklahoma fan

It is foolish to try to define "FULL control of your EMOTIONS and MOTOR SKILLS". There are people with medical or physical issues who are never in full control of their motor skills, due to either medication or deterioration.

So what? A Parkinson's patient, a stroke victim, and a tippler all enjoy the same right to self defense that the Carrie Nation brigade enjoys.

It seems that replies are still being posted in reference to my original posting, so as a clarification so I'm not erroneously labeled as the drunk with a gun:

I thought that .08 was very easy to get to. I don't drink much in public, what do I know. The couple of times that I would end up somewhere after work, whether happy hour with coworkers, or at a restaurant with the wife, I'd throw it in the trunk. The difference this time was that I wasn't going to have a trunk as we were planning on taking an SUV, and the whole interior is pretty much "within reach".

Anyway, TXI has pointed out that it's not easy to get to .08, and the couple of drinks that I was going to have would amount to not much at all. Upon this clarification of what it takes a 200lb man to get to .08, I wasn't concerned with it being in the vehicle any longer and the original question was nullified for my purposes, though it obviously still served a purpose to discuss and learn, which is good. I wasn't planning on, and didn't, get anywhere close to .08. Using a calculator I found on the Wisconsin DPS website, I was around a .01. With the quantity of food we all had and water I drank, it was probably lower than that.

Further clarification: I wasn't planning on carrying on me, or finding a "loophole". I was concerned with being able to have a couple of glasses of wine with dinner, over the course of about 5-6 hours (Vietnamese wedding, the food just keeps and keeps and keeps on coming), maybe one or two afterwards at most, and then being prepared for the one hour drive home and coming into my house after midnight. With all the food we had, I never even felt what I drank, and drank more water than alcohol by far.

If you want to argue whether one drink is one too much, that's your opinion, not law. Everyone has their opinions to guide them. That's good, that's what we all should do. In response, my $.02 is that if a couple of drinks with a boatload of food over several hours changes your emotional state, temper, etc., you've got problems, unless you weigh 90Lbs. I carry most of the time, have been mad at people some of the time just like any human(driving in Houston), and the LAST LAST LAST thing on my mind is my weapon. It reminds me of the anti-gun argument someone I know stated. He said he doesn't want a gun in the house because: What about when they (him and his spouse) are fighting with each other? Holy cow I said, if they would resort to shooting each other just because of an argument, they shouldn't be together! The problem's not in the gun, it's in the person. I hope there's no sharp knives in that house!

Anyway, like I said, it all went well. Thanks for all of the educational responses and for taking the time. I especially had forgotten about the FAQ on the DPS website. That combined with the official definition of "intoxicated" pretty much gives an official answer, though some will argue that point as well I'm sure and I don't care for this to turn into another "drinking while carrying" post, as educational as it was.

MBGuy,
I think everyone here understands from your last few posts that you overestimated the alcohol necessary to get to .08, and that you now plan to put the gun in the trunk.

Please understand that you've just given everyone here something to discuss, and they're tearing it apart with the zeal of a child on Christmas morning. This is both entertaining and educational for most people on this forum. It's nothing personal.

While the debate is all very interesting, my advice to my students always is:

"When in doubt, don't carry."

It's a simple Risk vs. Benefit analysis. Is the possibility of your CHL being suspended or revoked, spending the night in jail and the legal expense of fighting a Class "A" misdemeanor (or worse) worth carrying your weapon?

While I know that we never know when we'll need our gun, life is about playing the odds. If for any reason an officer asks for your ID, you'll be forced to present your CHL. Because you're a CHL holder, the officer will associate the weapon with you.

Is it worth the risk? Is the wedding in a really seedy part of town? Is it a long drive home? Would spending the night in a hotel room be an option?

Again, when in doubt...

Just as a point of interest...

http://www.coppellgazette.com/articles/ ... 01news.txt

Four Plano officers face federal lawsuit
By Stephanie Flemmons, Staff Writer
(Created: Wednesday, November 14, 2007)


A Driving While Intoxicated arrest has led to the unveiling of what Tray Boswell believes was a “set-up� by four Plano police officers and his ex-wife.

A federal lawsuit was filed against Plano officers Ron Kress, Michael Nunns, Scott Copeland and Jon Britton.

Boswell’s attorney Don Tittle said the lawsuit is in the initial stages and a dollar amount has not been determined.

On Oct. 18, 2006, Boswell was arrested and charged with a DWI by Kress and other police officers.

According to court documents, probable cause did not exist for the detention or arrest of Boswell, nor was he intoxicated at the time.

Boswell claims the four officers and his ex-wife, Sarah Boswell, planned the conspiracy to charge him with a crime, he said he did not commit. “There is a lot of police misconduct,� Tittle said. “It is beyond outrageous. The Plano Police Department didn’t even bother to conduct an internal investigation.�

During Boswell’s DWI trial, his criminal attorney Phillip Linder, requested the cell phone records from Sarah Boswell. The records indicated that numerous phone calls were made between Sarah Boswell and the police officers over a number of weeks. The calls were initiated by both parties.

Kress, Copeland and Britton claimed they had never met Sarah Boswell despite records showing the calls between the officers’ personal cell phones, both before, during and immediately after Boswell’s arrest.

“It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what was going on,� Tittle said. “The charge was tried and the district attorney dismissed the case, due to evidence supporting the conspiracy.�

He said Boswell is a musician and his ex-wife knew his routine.

Court records state, at the time Boswell was going through a divorce. There were child custody issues in controversy during the divorce proceeding. Boswel claims his ex-wife used her connection with Nunns to encourage an arrest in an effort to gain leverage against him in their ongoing divorce.

Plano City Attorney Dianne Wetherbee said the officers conducted themselves in an appropriate manner involving the incident.

“We will vigorously defend them,� Wetherbee said.

A few months before Boswell’s DWI arrest, he claims he was illegally detained and then released 30 minutes later.

Court records state Copeland detained Boswell without probable cause and issued two traffic citations. Phone records state on that day, at least four phone calls were made from Sarah Boswell to Copeland, despite their claim of never meeting before.

Boswell has requested a trial by jury, which will take place at the Sherman Division of the Eastern District of Texas.

The Plano Police Department denied comment. Sarah Boswell could not be reached.