Texas Law Shield and Open Carry laws

[Bithabus]

Better call 911 first

 

[peeps]

i stand corrected! lol

 

[Mreed911]

Do you have a citation on that? "Does not apply" sure sounds like an exception to me, especially since the Texas PC does use the phrase "defense to prosecution" in many sections where that is the intent -- like displaying a handgun when used in one's defense.

Penal Code Chapter 2 (emphasis mine)

Sec. 2.02. EXCEPTION. (a) An exception to an offense in this code is so labeled by the phrase: "It is an exception to the application of . . . ."
(b) The prosecuting attorney must negate the existence of an exception in the accusation charging commission of the offense and prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant or defendant's conduct does not fall within the exception.
(c) This section does not affect exceptions applicable to offenses enacted prior to the effective date of this code.

PC 46.15 is not labeled as an exception.

Sec. 2.03. DEFENSE. (a) A defense to prosecution for an offense in this code is so labeled by the phrase: "It is a defense to prosecution . . . ."
(b) The prosecuting attorney is not required to negate the existence of a defense in the accusation charging commission of the offense.
(c) The issue of the existence of a defense is not submitted to the jury unless evidence is admitted supporting the defense.
(d) If the issue of the existence of a defense is submitted to the jury, the court shall charge that a reasonable doubt on the issue requires that the defendant be acquitted.
(e) A ground of defense in a penal law that is not plainly labeled in accordance with this chapter has the procedural and evidentiary consequences of a defense.

The listed 'reasons' listed in 46.15 are all defenses that are not required to be negated when being charged with an offense and are deliberated/decided on by a jury (or trier of fact) based on reasonable doubt.

While it would be easy to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that one had a valid CHL at the time a weapon was carried (or was a Peace Officer, or any other itemized piece of 46.15), it doesn't even have to be CONSIDERED until it's your attorney's time at trial to present your defense.

Changing this has been considered by the legislature before but never been adopted.

Technically, and ONLY technically, it's just as illegal for a police officer to carry a weapon as it is a civilian with a CHL. The ability to do so rests on a balance between good judgement of police agencies, county attorneys and district attorneys.

As far as I know, Cantu is still the controlling law on this (defense vs. exception) in Texas, but I'm willing to be wrong if someone knows more on this.

 

[Big Dipper]

Thanks Mike!

Seems a strange way to interpret English, but I see how it came to be.

 

[Mreed911]

Thanks Mike!

Seems a strange way to interpret English, but I see how it came to be.

It's frustrating and it is only likely to come out in pissing matches which is why the advice earlier holds: be polite, be respectful, even when they're wrong because in the moment they have ALL the power. Fight after the fact through meaningful complaints that include the right people such that we might actually see this get changed in 2017 much like we finally saw a similar change for NFA items this go-round.

 

[TheDan]

Seems a strange way to interpret English, but I see how it came to be.

It looks like English, but it's actually legalese.

 

[karlac]

It looks like English, but it's actually legalese.

Especially if "is" is not defined therein.
Too much depends upon it ...

 

[Naruto]

My time is precious and expensive. If I'm stopped longer than 60 seconds for police to review my CHL, they go on my time and I start billing the city for my time at $300/hr.

 

[cpileri]

Im sticking with TLS.
Nothing has changed, they only cover legal uses of the handgun for CHL holers.
if caselaw provides that this open carry stuf is legal as described in some posts in this thread, then they will cover it. Right now, they are playing it safe.
C-

 

[ATX117]

Finally, Gov. Abbott to sign gun legislation at Red's in Pflugerville.

Gov. Greg Abbott to sign new gun laws at Red?s Indoor Range | KXAN.com

 

[glock221]

You are correct. So much misinformation. You don't have to display your license to open carry.

You must have it with you. The Open carry bill and Campus bill was sign today by Governor

Abbott. it goes in effect 1/01/16. That amendment was offer by a Democrat and voted down.

It is the same law as conceal carry. Campus carry remains concealed. You can be stopped if someone complains but

complaining with the officer request and showing him your license should get you on your way. The General public

isn't use to see the open carry of handguns. It will take some time to get use to. The 30.06 sign the same the 51%

is the same the . If someone has a conceal only with out another sign you can open carry. You must have you another sign with it.

 

[Renegade]

 

[peeps]

What are all those radio looking devices on his desk?

 

[Koinonia]

Recording devices for news networks.

 

[peeps]

Recording devices for news networks.

Thanks

 

[Davetex]

My time is precious and expensive. If I'm stopped longer than 60 seconds for police to review my CHL, they go on my time and I start billing the city for my time at $300/hr.

Good luck with that. Let us know how it works out.

 

[BIGPAPIGREG]

My time is precious and expensive. If I'm stopped longer than 60 seconds for police to review my CHL, they go on my time and I start billing the city for my time at $300/hr.

possibly followed closely with-->

 

[glock221]

Senator Joan Huffman from Huston sold you out she strip it from the bill. It was put in the bill two different ways but HB 910 would have failed if they didn't strip
a cop couldn't stop you to ask for your license. The cops put out a all out assault to get that amendment strip. They gave in but told them they will pass HB910 which the Governor signed Saturday
13th along with Campus Carry.

glock221

 

[Mreed911]

Senator Joan Huffman from Huston sold you out she strip it from the bill.

Actually, it likely would have passed the Senate as-is if she'd left that in, since it was overwhelmingly voted FOR by the house. Then it would have been straight to the governor. You're right, though, Huffman is in fact a traitor.

 

[McClintock]

This is what I heard:

"Therefore, this means that a police officer can approach somebody who they observe openly carrying a handgun in a holster in a shoulder or belt holster and detain them and ask for ID. This is because a police officer who observes a person openly carrying a handgun has reasonable suspicion to believe and may even have probable cause to arrest that person for violating the general weapons law of Texas, Texas penal code 46.02 that states that a person is not allowed to carry a handgun, illegal knife or club. So, upon being approached by a police officer an individual who is carrying a handgun in a shoulder or belt holster should then present their handgun license to the officer showing that they are protected by the defense provided in Texas penal code 46.15."

I cannot believe that Texas Law Shield just sold us out like that. Have they never heard of the Fourth Amendment?!

The only place you see the fourth amendment applied is when questioning somebody about their legal/citizenship status. Then suddenly you hear all about "unreasonable search and seizures"