TexasCHLforum.com

A hypothetical: suppose you are in a public place like a park or riverside picnic spot. You have a gun in your car or truck 75 or so yards away, but no gun on your person.

If a LEO askes you for ID are you REQUIRED to show your CHL? I expect I would show mine anyway, I'm just curious about whether I was required to.

Thanks in advance for the help.

I have always shown both whether I am carrying at the time or not. It shows that you are one of the good guys and not a problem maker.

alphonso wrote:A hypothetical: suppose you are in a public place like a park or riverside picnic spot. You have a gun in your car or truck 75 or so yards away, but no gun on your person.

If a LEO askes you for ID are you REQUIRED to show your CHL?

No.

GC §411.205. DISPLAYING LICENSE; PENALTY. (a) If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder's person when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder's driver's license or identification certificate issued by the department and the license holder's handgun license.

On or about one's person means in your hand, in a holster that you are wearing, in a bag that you are carrying, in the passenger compartment of a vehicle that you are in, etc.

- Jim

In this hypothetical situation, the answer is "no". You're only required to present the CHL along with your ID if you are carrying at the time.

All,

Thanks for the replies.

I wonder how close to my car I'd have to be for the gun theirin to be considered "on or about" my person. 100 feet, 50 feet, 5, feet?

Like I mentioned in my OP, I'd show the CHL anyway, I was just curious about whether I had to.

seamusTX wrote: in a bad that you are carrying, - Jim

Does this stament fall under the premis that you ran out of bullets and had to throw your weapon and impale him with it and are carrying him to the cops.

j/k

alphonso wrote:All,

Thanks for the replies.

I wonder how close to my car I'd have to be for the gun theirin to be considered "on or about" my person. 100 feet, 50 feet, 5, feet?

Like I mentioned in my OP, I'd show the CHL anyway, I was just curious about whether I had to.

About your person means within your immediate access.

alphonso wrote:I wonder how close to my car I'd have to be for the gun theirin to be considered "on or about" my person. 100 feet, 50 feet, 5, feet?

That's debatable. If the car were unlocked and you could reach in and get it, it could be assumed to be about your person. Having it in the trunk or locked in a toolbox in the bed of a pickup truck is not.

There was a case where the cops arrested two men driving in a car with an illegal short shotgun under the seat. The Supreme Court ruled that neither could be found guilty, since the police couldn't prove that either had put it there or knew it was there (no fingerprints). I can't remember the citation.

seamusTX wrote: in a bad that you are carrying, - Jim

I meant bag, of course.

- Jim

Ok here's one for you. Cops were holding a bunch of underaged kids for drinking once. They needed someone 21 or older to take them home and apparently I was the guy for the job. I took my pistol out and left it in the car, went to the officer and gave her my ID (no CHL) as I was sure she wanted to make sure I was over 20.

So then if I offer my ID to the officer before they "demand" to see it, then would you have to show both if you were armed?

Not sure about the application of the question or why someone would do that, just more interested in the technicalities of the law.

Will938

You volunteered to take responsibility for a bunch of underage drunks?

Will938 wrote:

So then if I offer my ID to the officer before they "demand" to see it, then would you have to show both if you were armed?

I would say no since the officer didn't ask for ID.

...when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification...

They didn't ask, so you don't have to disclose...

I've always felt it's a bad ideal to argue points of law on the side of the street with any LEO. Since I paid for the thing so I would'nt have to care, so I'll just show my ID and not worry about it.

Also, if you are 1000 yards from the car, there is realy nothing to keep the LEO from waiting untill you drive off.

Frost wrote:Will938

You volunteered to take responsibility for a bunch of underage drunks?

It wasn't as if I didn't know any of them. And yes I did, I took them home.

edit: Whats the worst that could happen, I take them home, they go out later and get busted. The cop, who probably can't remember my full name much less my address, might be involved somehow. And if she was then what law did I break? I did as she specified, what else can you do?

Um, I think Frost was kidding.

I was once a resident adviser and had to deal with young drunkards.

- Jim

edit: Whats the worst that could happen, I take them home, they go out later and get busted. The cop, who probably can't remember my full name much less my address, might be involved somehow. And if she was then what law did I break? I did as she specified, what else can you do?

That's why she wanted your ID. Whenever we turn someone loose and hand them over to another person we always write up a report listing the circumstances of what we did and to whom we gave them to. We list out name, DOB, address, etc.

For example: let's say some one's Intoxicated in Public (PI). We can either arrest them or turn them over to a responsible adult. If we turn them over to an adult we better have that information and it had better be documented. Let's say the "responsible party" and the drunk get into an argument and the "responsible party" kicks them out of his car. Mr. Drunk then stumbles into the roadway and gets killed. Witnesses then say that the police had Mr. Drunk in custody and let him go. If we don't have documentation that we turned him over to someone else then our agency (and the officers involved) will be hung out to dry.

Let me give you another example of where I think our city is skating on very thin ice in regards to major financial exposure. Every day we stop many drivers that have all of these offenses: no proof of financial responsibility (insurance), an expired inspection sticker, no drivers license, no current registration. Per our policy we DO NOT take these drivers to jail unless they have warrants (and then there are even exceptions to this) because the county jail is too crowded and is under State review.

So let's say that I've stopped someone like this and have written them multiple tickets for all of these violations and then cut them loose per departmental policy. Two miles down the road this same driver runs a red light, hits a car and kills all of the occupants -say a mother and several small children. When the police show up to investigate the accident they pull a hand full of tickets from the driver's shirt pocket which he just received a few minutes before he wiped out the family. This would go into their accident report or misc. report.

If I'm the attorney that represents the surviving family members I would file a lawsuit against the city that wrote him those tickets and my argument would be: you (the police officer that wrote the ticket and the city that dictated this policy) allowed an unlicensed driver, with no insurance, in an unregistered and uninspected vehicle to drive on the road and now look what happened. It hasn't happened yet (the lawsuit) but a lot of us have been saying for years that it will someday.

It's the same with our infamous "no chase" policy. If you refuse to stop then we can't chase you unless you meet certain guidelines - mainly a known violent felon. So let's say we're behind a drunk driver and we try to stop him or her and they refuse. We now must let them go. Let's say that a few miles down the road he runs head on into a car and kills a family. Does our department have any liability - I think so and if it was my family that got killed I would sue the city for failure to act.

Anyway, a long way around the barn but perhaps this explains why she probably wanted your DL.