Laws on pepper spray

[Burt Gummer]

No they are not. The law is in the penal code, and if you actually READ the law it is clear. The LAW makes no distinction between OC , CS, or CN. That was not a dictionary, it was the Penal Code. That is the little book where the laws are that the police and district attorney's must obey.


Other than the term "small" what, exactly, is gray about the definition of a Chemical Dispensing device?

"My county" must follow the penal code, as do all 254 counties in Texas. There is no distinction between OC, CS, or CN.

Wow you win. I guess we have been doing it wrong for the past few years. Best of luck to you in your endeavors.

 

[txinvestigator]

Wow you win. I guess we have been doing it wrong for the past few years. Best of luck to you in your endeavors.

I'll tell ya what, Burt. Show me in the law ANYTHING that would support what you allege YOUR county does, even copies of court documents, and I'll concede.

 

[Burt Gummer]

I'll tell ya what, Burt. Show me in the law ANYTHING that would support what you allege YOUR county does, even copies of court documents, and I'll concede.

Its not a battle and I do not have to "prove" my experience by supplying court documents to you. It is obvious that you do not deal with the courts and criminal judges regularly. I have been arresting folks and attending court on many different offenses. I am speaking from personal experience and you are telling me that I did not do what I have done for years. I am curious though which DA's you have spoken to in your county about these definitions?

I deal with our arrest review detectives who deal with the judges directly and they tell us which charges are pursued and which ones are dropped in Travis County. And, it seems that you have a misconception, in that each county does NOT have to follow Penal Code to the letter. Each county can enforce the laws less restrictively but cannot make it MORE restrictive. The DA and county court determine which charges are pursued and which are not. Recently we had issues with UCW and we deal with things differently like Ped in the Roadway, Fail To Maintain Single Marked Lane etc than what the Penal and Transportation Code state.

You seem like a smart guy who can Google and post lots of definitions but I am speaking from practical experience in my job. If there are other LEO's who work in Travis County here, THEY can feel free to speak up and contradict me with their personal experiences.

txinvestigator, I am not going to debate you on my personal experiences. You can say that something DOES NOT exist or IS NOT WHAT IT SAYS IN THE BOOK but I have experiences to the contrary.
I get no joy or benefit from having a keyboard commando battle with you. Continue to post whatever you have read and think to be true and I will continue to post my personal experiences. Theres enough room for us all on the wwwatriot:

 

[popgun]

How about a can of wasp spray? The kind that shoots 25 ft.

 

[Burt Gummer]

How about a can of wasp spray? The kind that shoots 25 ft.

Oh no, per the book its a chemical dispensing device.

 

[txinvestigator]

Its not a battle and I do not have to "prove" my experience by supplying court documents to you. It is obvious that you do not deal with the courts and criminal judges regularly.

Your powers of deductive reasoning are defective then.

I have been arresting folks and attending court on many different offenses.

WOW. Guess what, I arrested people for "many different offenses" too, for a decade. As a PI, I deal with LE and the courts on a regular basis now. Why, I testified in a burglary case just this summer.

I am speaking from personal experience and you are telling me that I did not do what I have done for years.

I am telling you there is no basis to charge person for Prohibited Weapon bacause they posses CS or CN, AND I have show proof of that. You have not shown ANY counter proof. I don't care how misguided your beliefs are, but I will correct you when you come on a public forum and spread that misbelief that could affect others.

I am curious though which DA's you have spoken to in your county about these definitions?

I have spoken to several ADAs in Dallas, Tarrant and Collin counties about several of these legal issues.

I deal with our arrest review detectives who deal with the judges directly and they tell us which charges are pursued and which ones are dropped in Travis County.

DO they also tell you which non-existent charges are also pursued?

And, it seems that you have a misconception, in that each county does NOT have to follow Penal Code to the letter. Each county can enforce the laws less restrictively but cannot make it MORE restrictive.

Exactly right. So where does the penal code make CS or CN illegal?

The DA and county court determine which charges are pursued and which are not.

Charges that are IN the penal code. Not made up ones.

Recently we had issues with UCW and we deal with things differently like Ped in the Roadway, Fail To Maintain Single Marked Lane etc than what the Penal and Transportation Code state.

So for those offense ya'll make stuff up rather than follow the penal or transportation code? Sure ya do.

txinvestigator, I am not going to debate you on my personal experiences. You can say that something DOES NOT exist or IS NOT WHAT IT SAYS IN THE BOOK but I have experiences to the contrary.

Well, I can say anyting I want on the internet, but proving your case is different. I have shown you the law. Can you show me ANY evidence?


Trying to call me names because you were wrong just makes you look silly.

DAs and courts cannot just make shit up. They are required to follow the penal code in all of Texas. Again, show me under what law a person could be prosecuted for carrying an CS or CN canister.

Here, I'll even post the relevant laws for ya;

Texas Penal Code
Sec. 46.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:

(14) "Chemical dispensing device" means a device, other than a small chemical dispenser sold commercially for personal protection, that is designed, made, or adapted for the purpose of dispensing a substance capable of causing an adverse psychological or physiological effect on a human being.

Sec. 46.05. PROHIBITED WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly possesses, manufactures, transports, repairs, or sells:

(8) a chemical dispensing device;

The section in red tells us what is NOT a chemical dispensing device. The area in italics tells us that a CDD has to be capable of dispensing a substance. It does not include the term chemical. However, in your first post in this thread you said that OC was legal because it is not a chemical. As shown, it would not have to be to be illegal. Secondly, it IS a chemical.

So tell us all what part of that would allow your DA to charge a person for carrying CN or CS. You didn't claim that "in your county" small tear gas was illegal, you made a blanket statement. Show me that law.

Also, you wrote that OC was listed as a food product. Can you show us that list?

Everyone else, sorry for the distraction; the law is clear, as long as the device you carry is a small chemical dispenser sold commercially for personal protection, then it is legal for you to carry whether it be CS, CN or a device with a combination of chemicals.


And for the record, I am a 10 year LE veteren, I currently hold a TCLEOSE (Texas Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and Education) Instructor's certification, a Texas Department of Public Safety Private Security Board Classroom and Firearm's Instructor certification, a Texas CHL Instructor's certification as well as numerous other certifications.

When one is reading anecdotal stories, especially on the internet, always research the source of the information. When someone simply insists that something is a certain way without being able to supply evidence or a source, even after being SHOWN contrary evidence, always do your own research before taking or limiting your actions.

There was a LEO on another forum who insisted that HIS jursdiiction prosecuted people for running red lights who entered an intersection on yellow but did not clear the intersection until red. He insisted even after multiple people showed him the law. He insisted there was some other law or way HIS jurisdiction could enforce a non-existent law.





.

 

[txinvestigator]

How about a can of wasp spray? The kind that shoots 25 ft.

Didn't Farrah Fawcett spray a guy in the face with some kind of bug spray in the movie Extremities?


PSSS. Per the book, it is not.

 

[Burt Gummer]

Your powers of deductive reasoning are defective then. WOW. Guess what, I arrested people for "many different offenses" too, for a decade. As a PI, I deal with LE and the courts on a regular basis now. Why, I testified in a burglary case just this summer. I am telling you there is no basis to charge person for Prohibited Weapon bacause they posses CS or CN, AND I have show proof of that. You have not shown ANY counter proof. I don't care how misguided your beliefs are, but I will correct you when you come on a public forum and spread that misbelief that could affect others. I have spoken to several ADAs in Dallas, Tarrant and Collin counties about several of these legal issues.

DO they also tell you which non-existent charges are also pursued? Exactly right. So where does the penal code make CS or CN illegal? Charges that are IN the penal code. Not made up ones. So for those offense ya'll make stuff up rather than follow the penal or transportation code? Sure ya do.


Well, I can say anyting I want on the internet, but proving your case is different. I have shown you the law. Can you show me ANY evidence?


Trying to call me names because you were wrong just makes you look silly.

DAs and courts cannot just make shit up. They are required to follow the penal code in all of Texas. Again, show me under what law a person could be prosecuted for carrying an CS or CN canister.

Here, I'll even post the relevant laws for ya;

The section in red tells us what is NOT a chemical dispensing device. The area in italics tells us that a CDD has to be capable of dispensing a substance. It does not include the term chemical. However, in your first post in this thread you said that OC was legal because it is not a chemical. As shown, it would not have to be to be illegal. Secondly, it IS a chemical.

So tell us all what part of that would allow your DA to charge a person for carrying CN or CS. You didn't claim that "in your county" small tear gas was illegal, you made a blanket statement. Show me that law.

Also, you wrote that OC was listed as a food product. Can you show us that list?

Everyone else, sorry for the distraction; the law is clear, as long as the device you carry is a small chemical dispenser sold commercially for personal protection, then it is legal for you to carry whether it be CS, CN or a device with a combination of chemicals.


And for the record, I am a 10 year LE veteren, I currently hold a TCLEOSE (Texas Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and Education) Instructor's certification, a Texas Department of Public Safety Private Security Board Classroom and Firearm's Instructor certification, a Texas CHL Instructor's certification as well as numerous other certifications.

When one is reading anecdotal stories, especially on the internet, always research the source of the information. When someone simply insists that something is a certain way without being able to supply evidence or a source, even after being SHOWN contrary evidence, always do your own research before taking or limiting your actions.

There was a LEO on another forum who insisted that HIS jursdiiction prosecuted people for running red lights who entered an intersection on yellow but did not clear the intersection until red. He insisted even after multiple people showed him the law. He insisted there was some other law or way HIS jurisdiction could enforce a non-existent law.





.

Great post. You are THE MAN who knows all.
I bow down to your superior knowledge and fervor in which you post. Interacting with you is pointless. I have been married for a long time and I know when an argument is going to be a loss no matter what I have done or tell you. It appears as if everybody on this board has already figured it out but since I am new I had to do learn the hard way.

Once again, best of luck with your business.

 

[txinvestigator]

Great post. You are THE MAN who knows all.
I bow down to your superior knowledge and fervor in which you post. Interacting with you is pointless. I have been married for a long time and I know when an argument is going to be a loss no matter what I have done or tell you. It appears as if everybody on this board has already figured it out but since I am new I had to do learn the hard way.

Once again, best of luck with your business.

Burt, it is simple, your poor attempts at subtle insults and antagonizing PM you sent aside, you cannot actually argue the facts. The facts are NOT as you stated, you messed up.

As a person who holds more certificates than I, (per your PM) you should be more professional than to continue to insist you are right in the face of positive evidence that you are wrong. A good instructor knows when to just say, "this time I was wrong". There is no shame in that.

It is like arguing with a street sign, then taking the wrong road. It appears as if everybody on this board has already figured it out that the law is the law, regardless of what someone keeps insisting with no proof.

We all make mistakes. As a married man, you should know that.

 

[Burt Gummer]

Burt, it is simple, your poor attempts at subtle insults and antagonizing PM you sent aside, you cannot actually argue the facts. The facts are NOT as you stated, you messed up.

As a person who holds more certificates than I, (per your PM) you should be more professional than to continue to insist you are right in the face of positive evidence that you are wrong. A good instructor knows when to just say, "this time I was wrong". There is no shame in that.

It is like arguing with a street sign, then taking the wrong road. It appears as if everybody on this board has already figured it out that the law is the law, regardless of what someone keeps insisting with no proof.

We all make mistakes. As a married man, you should know that.

Yes Dear.

 

[txinvestigator]

That's what I thought.

 

[Burt Gummer]

That's what I thought.

WE know you are always right. Especially when it involves someone elses experience and job. Ha.
Can I get the last word dear or it it too much to ask of you?

 

[Hoji]

Burt, you are wrong. As much as I enjoy poking sticks at Txinvestigator, and pointing out some of his flawed{ in my opinion} reasonings, he has this one nailed.

I too am an OC instructor and know the law, and Tx has it absolutely right.

I do know that TC will attempt to prosecute on a lot of BS charges, as a LEO YOU should know what is legal and what is not. There is no dictinction or exception for Travis County in the penal code.

You are wrong. Get over it and try to be a little more subtle when throwing insults.

 

[Burt Gummer]

Burt, you are wrong. As much as I enjoy poking sticks at Txinvestigator, and pointing out some of his flawed{ in my opinion} reasonings, he has this one nailed.

I too am an OC instructor and know the law, and Tx has it absolutely right.

I do know that TC will attempt to prosecute on a lot of BS charges, as a LEO YOU should know what is legal and what is not. There is no dictinction or exception for Travis County in the penal code.

You are wrong. Get over it and try to be a little more subtle when throwing insults.

Thanks.

 

[ReVrEnD_0341]

I am not familiar with the way laws are produced here in Texas. Since the State has set the laws for Chemical Control Devices, and it is pretty ambiguous, can a county and city not further restrict the use of such agents?

Other states, counties, and cities do this. Is it written somewhere that it is not done in Texas?

 

[txinvestigator]

I am not familiar with the way laws are produced here in Texas. Since the State has set the laws for Chemical Control Devices, and it is pretty ambiguous, can a county and city not further restrict the use of such agents?

Other states, counties, and cities do this. Is it written somewhere that it is not done in Texas?

The ONLY thing about Texas's Chemical DISPENSING Device law is that the lawful carry must be of a "small" device.

Texas cities have their own ordinances too, and they cannot restrict firearms further than state law. They can have laws about pepper spray, CS, CN etc.

If such laws had been alleged then we would have discussed them.

 

[Texas42]

The ONLY thing about Texas's Chemical DISPENSING Device law is that the lawful carry must be of a "small" device.

Texas cities have their own ordinances too, and they cannot restrict firearms further than state law. They can have laws about pepper spray, CS, CN etc.

If such laws had been alleged then we would have discussed them.

Where does it say that cities cannot make more restrictive laws?

Thanks, I just would like to see where it is. I don't doubt you.

 

[txinvestigator]

Where does it say that cities cannot make more restrictive laws?

Thanks, I just would like to see where it is. I don't doubt you.

There are a few exceptions.

Texas Local Government Code

TITLE 7. REGULATION OF LAND USE, STRUCTURES, BUSINESSES, AND RELATED ACTIVITIES

SUBTITLE A. MUNICIPAL REGULATORY AUTHORITY

CHAPTER 229. MISCELLANEOUS REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF MUNICIPALITIES

Sec. 229.001. FIREARMS; EXPLOSIVES. (a) A municipality may not adopt regulations relating to the transfer, private ownership, keeping, transportation, licensing, or registration of firearms, ammunition, or firearm supplies.
(b) Subsection (a) does not affect the authority a municipality has under another law to:
(1) require residents or public employees to be armed for personal or national defense, law enforcement, or another lawful purpose;
(2) regulate the discharge of firearms within the limits of the municipality;
(3) regulate the use of property, the location of a business, or uses at a business under the municipality's fire code, zoning ordinance, or land-use regulations as long as the code, ordinance, or regulations are not used to circumvent the intent of Subsection (a) or Subdivision (5) of this subsection;
(4) regulate the use of firearms in the case of an insurrection, riot, or natural disaster if the municipality finds the regulations necessary to protect public health and safety;
(5) regulate the storage or transportation of explosives to protect public health and safety, except that 25 pounds or less of black powder for each private residence and 50 pounds or less of black powder for each retail dealer are not subject to regulation; or
(6) regulate the carrying of a firearm by a person other than a person licensed to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, at a:
(A) public park;
(B) public meeting of a municipality, county, or other governmental body;
(C) political rally, parade, or official political meeting; or
(D) nonfirearms-related school, college, or professional athletic event.
(c) The exception provided by Subsection (b)(6) does not apply if the firearm is in or is carried to or from an area designated for use in a lawful hunting, fishing, or other sporting event and the firearm is of the type commonly used in the activity.
(d) The exception provided by Subsection (b)(4) does not authorize the seizure or confiscation of any firearm or ammunition from an individual who is lawfully carrying or possessing the firearm or ammunition.

 

[Texas42]

Thanks

 

[ReVrEnD_0341]

Texas cities have their own ordinances too, and they cannot restrict firearms further than state law. They can have laws about pepper spray, CS, CN etc.

If such laws had been alleged then we would have discussed them.

I know how the firearms restrictions are. Just wasn't sure about less lethal stuff. I've been trying to get someone on the horn with Travis county and Austin about this stuff, but have only received their voicemail.

I've been searching for documents online, but my google fu is weak. Looking for state, county(Travis), and Austin laws on OC, Tasers, Stun guns, batons, and the like.