Castle Doctrine in vehicle ???

[Poink88]

Are we allowed to carry loaded guns (in TX) inside a vehicle now even w/o CCL?

I was told that it is the case (part of castle doctrine) as long as it is concealed and remains inside the vehicle but thought I would get confirmation. I have always been keeping my ammo and gun in separate compartment when ever transporting.

Thank you.

 

[San Antone RR]

OK. You are asking 2 different questions:
1) transport of pistola in the vehicle is allowed without a CHL if the firearm is kept concealed. This can be on you or within the vehicle. There is no requirement to keep firearm unloaded and/or firearm and ammo separated. This has been allowed in this manner since 2007.

2) Castle Doctrine describes use of force to defend your home, business or vehicle.
Here isa link to the bill for that:80(R) SB 378 - Introduced version - Bill Text

Meat and potatoes for Castle Doctrine bolded:
Sec. 9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), a person is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force. The actor's belief that the force was immediately necessary as described by this subsection is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:
(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the force was used:
(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;
(B) unlawfully and with force removed, or was attempting to remove unlawfully and with force, the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment; or
(C) was committing or attempting to commit aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery;
(2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used; and
(3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used.
(b) The use of force against another is not justified:
(1) in response to verbal provocation alone;
(2) to resist an arrest or search that the actor knows is being made by a peace officer, or by a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction, even though the arrest or search is unlawful, unless the resistance is justified under Subsection (c);
(3) if the actor consented to the exact force used or attempted by the other;
(4) if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force, unless:
(A) the actor abandons the encounter, or clearly communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely abandon the encounter; and
(B) the other nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful force against the actor; or
(5) if the actor sought an explanation from or discussion with the other person concerning the actor's differences with the other person while the actor was:
(A) carrying a weapon in violation of Section 46.02; or
(B) possessing or transporting a weapon in violation of Section 46.05.
(c) The use of force to resist an arrest or search is justified:
(1) if, before the actor offers any resistance, the peace officer (or person acting at his direction) uses or attempts to use greater force than necessary to make the arrest or search; and
(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the peace officer's (or other person's) use or attempted use of greater force than necessary.
(d) The use of deadly force is not justified under this subchapter except as provided in Sections 9.32, 9.33, and 9.34.
(e) A person who has a right to be present at the location where the force is used, who has not provoked the person against whom the force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the force is used is not required to retreat before using force as described by this section.
(f) For purposes of Subsection (a), in determining whether an actor described by Subsection (e) reasonably believed that the use of force was necessary, a finder of fact may not consider whether the actor failed to retreat.

 

[TexasRedneck]

Yes, you are - as long as it's concealed. Under the modifications to the law, you'll be fine.

 

[Dcav]

IIRC it is called the motorist protection act.

 

[Poink88]

Thanks guys!

Do I still have to declare a loaded gun to any LEO for just a routine stop? Say while going through a border patrol check point in Falfurias from south heading north. I am afraid doing that might cause unnecessary delay.

 

[txinvestigator]

OK. You are asking 2 different questions:
1) transport of pistola in the vehicle is allowed without a CHL if the firearm is kept concealed. This can be on you or within the vehicle. There is no requirement to keep firearm unloaded and/or firearm and ammo separated. This has been allowed in this manner since 2007.

2) Castle Doctrine describes use of force to defend your home, business or vehicle.
Here isa link to the bill for that:80(R) SB 378 - Introduced version - Bill Text

Meat and potatoes for Castle Doctrine bolded:
Sec. 9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), a person is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force. The actor's belief that the force was immediately necessary as described by this subsection is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:
(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the force was used:
(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;
(B) unlawfully and with force removed, or was attempting to remove unlawfully and with force, the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment; or
(C) was committing or attempting to commit aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery;
(2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used; and
(3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used.
(b) The use of force against another is not justified:
(1) in response to verbal provocation alone;
(2) to resist an arrest or search that the actor knows is being made by a peace officer, or by a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction, even though the arrest or search is unlawful, unless the resistance is justified under Subsection (c);
(3) if the actor consented to the exact force used or attempted by the other;
(4) if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force, unless:
(A) the actor abandons the encounter, or clearly communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely abandon the encounter; and
(B) the other nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful force against the actor; or
(5) if the actor sought an explanation from or discussion with the other person concerning the actor's differences with the other person while the actor was:
(A) carrying a weapon in violation of Section 46.02; or
(B) possessing or transporting a weapon in violation of Section 46.05.
(c) The use of force to resist an arrest or search is justified:
(1) if, before the actor offers any resistance, the peace officer (or person acting at his direction) uses or attempts to use greater force than necessary to make the arrest or search; and
(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the peace officer's (or other person's) use or attempted use of greater force than necessary.
(d) The use of deadly force is not justified under this subchapter except as provided in Sections 9.32, 9.33, and 9.34.
(e) A person who has a right to be present at the location where the force is used, who has not provoked the person against whom the force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the force is used is not required to retreat before using force as described by this section.
(f) For purposes of Subsection (a), in determining whether an actor described by Subsection (e) reasonably believed that the use of force was necessary, a finder of fact may not consider whether the actor failed to retreat.

I highlighted the 2nd part of the Castle Doctrine for ya. The third thing the castle doctrine did was give immunity to a civil suit defendant who was justified under chapter 9.

 

[San Antone RR]

Thanks guys!

Do I still have to declare a loaded gun to any LEO for just a routine stop? Say while going through a border patrol check point in Falfurias from south heading north. I am afraid doing that might cause unnecessary delay.

Nope.

 

[txinvestigator]

I highlighted the 2nd part of the Castle Doctrine for ya. The third thing the castle doctrine did was give immunity to a civil suit defendant who was justified under chapter 9.

As pointed out, the Castle Doctrine has nothing to do with where or when you can carry a handgun.

Although you have been told by other posters here that you can carry a handgun in your car without a CHL, they really don't know if YOU can.

Google Texas Penal Code 46.02 to see when it would be unlawful for you to carry in your car.

If you do not have a CHL, you are under no obligation to inform a Peace Officer if you are carrying.

 

[San Antone RR]

Although you have been told by other posters here that you can carry a handgun in your car without a CHL, they really don't know if YOU can.

TXI, you are correct. I guess I assumed he wouldn't be asking if excluded by 46.02. We know about assumptions. Thanks, Sir.

 

[Poink88]

... they really don't know if YOU can.

Google Texas Penal Code 46.02 to see when it would be unlawful for you to carry in your car.

If you do not have a CHL, you are under no obligation to inform a Peace Officer if you are carrying.

Thanks. I checked it and yes I can!!! My record is spotless other than one speeding ticket 10 years ago.

 

[nalioth]

Are we allowed to carry loaded guns (in TX) inside a vehicle now even w/o CCL?

I was told that it is the case (part of castle doctrine) as long as it is concealed and remains inside the vehicle but thought I would get confirmation. I have always been keeping my ammo and gun in separate compartment when ever transporting.

Thank you.

You've been able to carry a loaded long gun in your automobile in Texas since I can remember w/o restrictions. Doesn't have be concealed or in any special containers or condition, either.

 

[Texan2]

Sec. 46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun, illegal knife, or club if the person is not:
(1) on the person's own premises or premises under the person's control; or
(2) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle that is owned by the person or under the person's control.
(a-1) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun in a motor vehicle that is owned by the person or under the person's control at any time in which:
(1) the handgun is in plain view; or
(2) the person is:
(A) engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic;
(B) prohibited by law from possessing a firearm; or
(C) a member of a criminal street gang, as defined by Section 71.01.
(a-2) For purposes of this section, "premises" includes real property and a recreational vehicle that is being used as living quarters, regardless of whether that use is temporary or permanent. In this subsection, "recreational vehicle" means a motor vehicle primarily designed as temporary living quarters or a vehicle that contains temporary living quarters and is designed to be towed by a motor vehicle. The term includes a travel trailer, camping trailer, truck camper, motor home, and horse trailer with living quarters.
(b) Except as provided by Subsection (c), an offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(c) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree if the offense is committed on any premises licensed or issued a permit by this state for the sale of alcoholic beverages.

 

[codeman]

Post Deleted

 

[txinvestigator]

Let’s be clear gentlemen, long guns (rifles and shotguns) are unrestricted, but hand guns are restricted. You’re both right.

lol, I don't think they were directing their posts at each other.

 

[Texan2]

I was just making sure that the gentleman with the questions was able to see what the law actually said.

 

[Randman]

laws? we don't need no stinking laws..... LOL

 

[TheDan]

So what if a person is convicted of a felony in TX and completed his sentence more than 5 years ago, drives a motor home, and also lives in said motor home. Can he carry in his vehicle? Just asking about TX law, not federal.

These threads are fun

 

[TexasRedneck]

IIRC, the courts have held that a motor home is, in fact, a residence.

 

[Texas1911]

So what if a person is convicted of a felony in TX and completed his sentence more than 5 years ago, drives a motor home, and also lives in said motor home. Can he carry in his vehicle? Just asking about TX law, not federal.

These threads are fun

By federal law he cannot possess a firearm.

By state law he may possess firearm, and he cannot possess it outside of his residence.

Texas Gun Laws - Our Texas Gun Laws made Simple!

 

[Poink88]

By federal law he cannot possess a firearm.

By state law he may possess firearm, and he cannot possess it outside of his residence.

Texas Gun Laws - Our Texas Gun Laws made Simple!

Who trumps who in this case?