TexasCHLforum.com

Thought it was significant the Dallas Morning News started their article on the Rep Driver - Castle Doctine Bill - started on Page 1 and carried over the article conclusion to Page 2A.

2A...most appropriate don't you agree!!

Support the Castle Doctrine by phoning or writing your State Leg Reps/Senators today!!

Related:

[center]From James Dark at TRSA...
Legal gun owners under cloud

as District Attorneys defy Texas Legislature[/center]

Law abiding handgun owners who carry their gun in their car may still face arrest or confiscation of the gun because many district attorneys have refused to implement a law passed by the legislature last session over their opposition.

“It appears that some District Attorneys, and the District Attorney’s Association, think that they are above the law,� said James Dark of the Texas State Rifle Association. “The law is now very clear that a person who is not a criminal can carry a handgun in the car, but District Attorneys have instructed police officers to ask a litany of invasive and unneeded questions, or even just make an arrest or confiscate the gun. If officers follow these instructions, they will clearly violate the rights of Texans carrying guns legally.�

An unusual coalition of gun rights, criminal justice and constitutional rights groups today released a study, entitled Above The Law, of the state’s implementation of HB 823, a new gun law clarifying a driver’s rights. The coalition filed hundreds of open records requests for any directives issued by District Attorneys to their local police departments.

“We launched this study because we had indications from the Texas District and County Attorneys Association itself that they were not ready to accept the passage of this new law,� said report author Scott Henson of the Texas Criminal Justice Coalition. “They want to position themselves as tough on crime, but they are willing to sacrifice the rights of law abiding citizens. We saw what they said publicly, and wanted to find out what they were actually telling police officers.�

The coalition found that some DAs are telling police departments to investigate gun owners using procedures developed before this law passed, when the status of “traveling� with a gun was unclear. One County Attorney advised police officers to arrest for "unlawful carrying" as before and let the prosecutor's office "sort out the legal niceties."

“Our study found that some officers have been instructed to ask motorists where they are coming from and where they are going and how long they’ve been on the road,� said Henson. “They have been told to look in the car for groceries or luggage. It simply doesn’t matter whether you have groceries or luggage in your car, or whether you drove a mile or 500 miles.�

“These roadside investigations of law abiding Texans are unnecessary, intrusive, and could be unconstitutional,� said Will Harrell of the ACLU of Texas. “Especially since it appears that a Texan’s freedom to drive with a gun in the car may still vary from county to county—the exact problem that this new law should have fixed.�

“We strive for the greatest clarity in the law so that law abiding citizens and police officers will both understand and abide by that law,� said Ana Yanez Correa, Executive Director, Criminal Justice Coalition. “We are happy to work with the District Attorneys to ensure that they fully understand motorist’s rights under the law and respect those rights.�

“The intent of the new law is clear,� said Dark, “but the coalition will support legislation to make it even more clear that law abiding Texans can carry a handgun in the car, if necessary. And we hope that the District Attorneys will learn that it’s not their job to enforce the laws they wish were passed by the legislature, but only the ones that are actually on the books.�

HB 1815 was filed last week to address the problem. For more information on HB 1815, contact the capitol office of Representative Carl Isett, 463-0676.
To read this study, entitled Above The Law, go to tsra.com.

yeah, no doubt. DA's don't get the benefit of needing to learn.
they shoulda "learned" in college, and the years of lawyering before they were made a DA.
I mean, if WE don't follow the law, WE go to Jail!
if THEY don't follow the law, "we hope they learn????????"

I fail to see the logic....

Skipper5 wrote: From the article:
Law abiding handgun owners who carry their gun in their car may still face arrest or confiscation of the gun because many district attorneys have refused to implement a law passed by the legislature last session over their opposition.

I don't believe "implement" is the right term. District Attorneys don't "implement" a law that says something is perfectly legal. A better phrase would be, "many district attorneys have refused to recognize a law..."

That's the "neutral journalism" term. Personally, I'd say they've violated the law.

The apparent fact that DAs have been instructing officers on this is also troublesome. DAs are not in the police chain of command.

KBCraig wrote:

Skipper5 wrote: From the article:
Law abiding handgun owners who carry their gun in their car may still face arrest or confiscation of the gun because many district attorneys have refused to implement a law passed by the legislature last session over their opposition.

I don't believe "implement" is the right term. District Attorneys don't "implement" a law that says something is perfectly legal. A better phrase would be, "many district attorneys have refused to recognize a law..."

That's the "neutral journalism" term. Personally, I'd say they've violated the law.

The apparent fact that DAs have been instructing officers on this is also troublesome. DAs are not in the police chain of command.

Absolutely. A district attorney will not be charged under federal civil right violations ( Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law}
after a LEO arrests someone knowing that the act was no illegal.

The cop can be.

IF YOUR POST DISAPPEARED:

One post with profanity & abreviations for STRONG profanity.
It was deleted & the 2 that quoted the profane one.

Lets remember the 10 yr old daughter rule gentlemen.

Now back to the topic at hand.

Because the article quoted my, and our, old nemesis, Marsha McCartney, I of course wrote to DMN about it.

Jim, I wrote the DMN also...

How much do DAs paid for? Whats the reason why they dont recognize that Law? Could it be politics?

Skipper5 wrote: “These roadside investigations of law abiding Texans are unnecessary, intrusive, and could be unconstitutional,� said Will Harrell of the ACLU of Texas. “Especially since it appears that a Texan’s freedom to drive with a gun in the car may still vary from county to county—the exact problem that this new law should have fixed.�

An ACLU organization saying something that makes sense? They must not have gotten the memo from the national office that says that only CRIMINALS and ATHEISTS have rights.

jimlongley wrote:Because the article quoted my, and our, old nemesis, Marsha McCartney, I of course wrote to DMN about it.

My lettter got published, with some editing, this morning.

I actually got two letters published this week, this one and one about wal-Mart. Being jobless seems to increase my letter writing.

We need right to defend ourselves, not run

Re: "Bills would arm owners with right to use deadly force – Legislature: Residents would not have to try to flee first," Wednesday news story.

Marsha McCartney says people defending themselves are not going to jail – "That's just not the case," she says – but that's just not true.

Many Texans who have defended themselves from criminals bent on violent actions found themselves held up to scrutiny as suspects and had to expend funds to defend themselves. Ms. McCartney conveniently forgets that they exist.

Gordon Hale III was arrested for his self-defense shooting of Kenny Tavai and had to wait for a grand jury to no-bill him. Four other Texans were acquitted at jury trial, people who would not have had to go through what they did if this "castle" law were in effect.

The Rev. Peter Johnson says, "The solution to violence is not more violence," and he may be right, but the only response to a violent attacker is adequate self-defense, not retreat.

Texans need the right to defend ourselves, not the obligation to run away.

Jim Longley, Allen

Jim, mine got published as well, with some minor editing. It was interesting that they "sandwiched" the anti letter bewteen us.

'Shoot-first' characterization is a scare tactic

Marsha McCartney of the North Texas Brady Campaign relies on scare tactics by referring to this bill as a "shoot-first bill." She paints a picture of homeowners basically firing at will at anyone coming on their property.

Regardless of what she wants us to believe, House Bill 284 does not change any of the required legal justifications for using deadly force in self-defense. The legal justification must be met, or that person would be subject to prosecution.

Similar scare tactics were used against the current concealed handgun license bill. Opponents offered images of carnage in the streets; none of those dire predictions came true.

Phillip Herbst, Rockwall

What if these anti Bill homeowners are burgalarize and held at gun point or even assaulted, they will surely be a wake up in their conscience.

Two to one in the letters, and no Marsha letter? Wow! Is DMN changing its politics, or are they just lulling us into a false sense of security like some of the democraps?

Jim and SW, congrats on getting your respective letters printed. They were well thought out and to the point. At least the DMN had a 2 to 1 ratio of pro to anti! The DMN also printed an Op-Ed piece on Friday where they support the passage of HB 284! I've also seen several local newscasts that were very favorable in their coverage of this bill.