TexasCHLforum.com

Hello all, I just joined the forum. I had a question that I was hoping you could help me with. I am a Law Enforcement Officer who also has a CHL. I was eating lunch yesterday with some friends from a neighboring Department and they were talking about a recent court decision that said a CHL supersedes a LEO's right to carry. In other words, if you are a LEO with a CHL and you carry your weapon on a prohibited property as defined by the government code, then you can be prosecuted. I have never heard of this, and cannot seem to find any information on it. Any help on this topic would be of great help. Thanks, and glad to be here.

Isn't LEOSA federal?

Federal always trumps state.

But I would not be surprised if you were discovered that some overzealous prosecutor in [insert large, liberal, Texas city name here] would try to hang you up.

Welcome to the forum.

While LEOSA is federal, you must follow state firearms laws as it relates to active or retired law enforcement officers.

Now, I have not heard of a case where a CHL overrides a LEO's right to carry by state law. it may be out there, but not familiar with one.

I would say that if you are active law enforcement, then you must follow your departments policy and state laws on off duty carry. The CHL may actually enhance your abilities to carry over what the department allows, but I can't see it would override your carrying off duty as a LEO.

Keith B wrote:Welcome to the forum.

While LEOSA is federal, you must follow state firearms laws as it relates to active or retired law enforcement officers.

Now, I have not heard of a case where a CHL overrides a LEO's right to carry by state law. it may be out there, but not familiar with one.

I would say that if you are active law enforcement, then you must follow your departments policy and state laws on off duty carry. The CHL may actually enhance your abilities to carry over what the department allows, but I can't see it would override your carrying off duty as a LEO.

I too have not heard of such a case and it would contradict the express language of most CHL provisions. We CHLs must comply with relevant laws "when we are carrying pursuant to the authority of" our license. When we do not need a CHL to legally possess a handgun, such as on our own property or property under our control, we do have have to comply with CHL related laws. The only exception is the duty to display our CHL to a LEO when requested for ID. That duty applies when we are armed, regardless of our location. Since LEOs can carry all over the State, you are never carrying pursuant to the authority of your CHL. I guess it could be argues that you do have a duty to show your CHL if asked for ID by another LEO.

Welcome to the Forum.
Chas.

Just a guess, but if your department specifically names one (or more) handguns as the guns you're authorized to carry off duty under authority of your TCOLE license, and you're carrying a different gun (that you personally own but have not qualified with for LE department authorized use) then I'd think your CHL (and associated off-limits areas) applies when you carry those "other" guns.

Thanks for the help and welcome guys. They were not able to provide any documentation to support there claim, and I have never heard of it. I'm starting to think it was one of those "a friend of a cousin of mine" stories.