Less Lethal Alternatives, Legal with CHL?

Discussion in 'Gun Legislation' started by scobech, May 27, 2008.

  1. scobech

    scobech New Member

    16
    0
    1
    Mar 4, 2008
    I have a question regarding the carrying of less lethal weapons (e.g., knife or club) while also carrying a legally concealed handgun. The only discussion of this topic I could find online dated from 2004 and did not comprehend the latest changes to the Texas law.

    Section 46.02 of the Texas Government Code covers the carrying of illegal weapons such as a “handgun, illegal knife or club.” It’s the section you would be prosecuted under if you were caught “carrying a concealed weapon”.

    Section 46.15 (and this changed in 2007) states in part:

    What that says to me is that if I have a CHL good for an automatic, and am carrying said auto, I can also legally carry a club and/or a knife with a blade over 5.5 inches. I cannot be prosecuted under 46.02 since it “does not apply”.

    While I do carry a folding knife, the blade is nowhere near 5.5 inches so that’s not an issue. I do however sometimes also carry a collapsible baton and I consider it a useful force multiplier in situations where using a handgun would be excessive. I would think that most LEO’s would consider the availability of less lethal alternatives to be a “good” thing; but I could be wrong!
     


  2. JKTex

    JKTex Well-Known

    2,018
    0
    36
    Mar 11, 2008
    DFW, North Texas
    We tend to over complicate laws. A CHL has nothing whatsoever to do with anything but handguns.

    What you quote above, is very clear.

    The handgun, not a knife, club, broomstick, brick etc. That simply says it does not apply to a person carrying a handgun that is legally what the person is licensed (CHL) to carry.

    It doesn't make any other weapon legal.

    However, I don't think I've ever seen where carrying any other "legal" weapon is a problem. If it's legal for you to carry, it's still legal for you to carry while you're carrying a legal handgun which you are licensed to carry.
     
  3. scobech

    scobech New Member

    16
    0
    1
    Mar 4, 2008
    Point is, a club is not legal*. You could be prosecuted under 46.02. However, 46.15 says that 46.02 does not apply if you have a CHL and are carrying the appropriate handgun.

    Sometimes a pistol is just too much. My wife and I were confronted by an aggressive panhandler who was drunk/high and would not leave us alone. I wasn't going to shoot the poor SOB, but letting him see the ouchy stick extend with a flick of the wrist caused him to turn and walk away. It's just another option to de-escalate a confrontation.

    *Except for uniformed security guards who have had fifteen hours of training etc. I'm not one of those.
     
  4. JKTex

    JKTex Well-Known

    2,018
    0
    36
    Mar 11, 2008
    DFW, North Texas
    Maybe I'm missing a point but it sounds like you may be contradicting what your 1st post appears to say but maybe also sounds like you're agreeing with me in a way, but maybe none of the above. :confused: I think maybe, I'm not understanding what your point is.

    My point: A CHL does not make any weapon, illegal or not, legal.

    The act of carrying a handgun without a CHL is illegal, but that doesn't make the handgun illegal.

    If a club is illegal, it's illegal....period. If a knife is illegal, it's illegal....period. But if either is legal to buy and own, then the weapon itself is not illegal. Carrying either one may be illegal though. I'm not into clubs or knives so I don't have a clue. I do know that certain characteristics can make one illegal, that's about it for my banger/sticker knowledge. :D

    Neither if those have anything to do with a CHL (Concealed Handgun License) or a handgun. A CHL only makes carrying a legally possessed handgun, legal to carry under certain conditions.
     
  5. JKTex

    JKTex Well-Known

    2,018
    0
    36
    Mar 11, 2008
    DFW, North Texas
    Oh, to your point about non-lethal "tools" :D I agree. There are others like pepper spray, taser etc. If I "know" the BG is or can only beat me up, I'd much rather use one of those to keep them from doing so. But then again, I can't predict the future or know what they're capable of. Hopefully, drawing prepared to fire will gain a swift and obvious retreat and them alive. :banger:
     
  6. scobech

    scobech New Member

    16
    0
    1
    Mar 4, 2008
    You're correct in that while a club may be legal, carrying it isn't (unless you have a CHL, sez I). I still think my reading of the law is correct, but IANAL so maybe plain English isn't.

    Also, don't get bogged down in the title of the law (i.e., Concealed 'Handgun' License). The title doesn't necessarily describe everything that's contained within the text of the act, especially after the legislature gets done with their amendments. Someone once said that if they ever brought back hanging, the enacting legislation would be called the "Spinal Re-alignment and Oxygen Conservation Act". :rofl:

    Any other opinions?
     
  7. juwaba98

    juwaba98 Well-Known

    1,732
    0
    36
    May 9, 2008
    North Zulch, TX
    I've not studied the law as closely as you appear to have done, nor was I present when the law was written, amended or interpreted but I cannot by any stretch of my imagination see how a Concealed Handgun License applies to any weapon other than a handgun. It is not named a concealed weapons license. When I took the class there was absolutely nothing that indicated such. Granted this was before the current sessions but I don't see why we would go through the training only on handguns if the permit suddenly allows us to arm ourselves with anything we choose. If this were the case would we not have had to go through some form of training at least if not also proficiency tests? Just my thoughts...........say what you will.
     
  8. scobech

    scobech New Member

    16
    0
    1
    Mar 4, 2008
    Ignore the law's title; read the law's text (which I helpfully quoted in the OP :)).

    Actually reading the entire thing could cause blindness.
     
  9. juwaba98

    juwaba98 Well-Known

    1,732
    0
    36
    May 9, 2008
    North Zulch, TX
    but what exactly is contained in 46.02? you left that out. You quoted the portion that you believe means it does not apply to a CHL. But what doesn't apply is not in the OP. While your attempt at helpfulness is appreciated it would appear that your mind is set and this isn't really a discussion at all. The fact you admit to quoting in part gives me hope for the discussion however, so I will bite again and say that from what I gave found so far (and yes I'm still digging) I think it sounds intended to protect you from prosecution for the use of a handgun that you are licensed to possess, not from whatever weapon previously illegal to carry but through a CHL now indeed can carry. I'll get back if I manage to dig up more.
     
  10. juwaba98

    juwaba98 Well-Known

    1,732
    0
    36
    May 9, 2008
    North Zulch, TX
    Found IT

    The portion you quoted, right down to the number 5 in parenthesis, applies to a uniformed armed security guard---- or a LEO or active military or other state or fed gov't agency

    now the law states that if you are on your property you pretty much may do what you wish. However it is still illegal in public to carry any of the weapons listed whether concealed or not. If you do indeed read the law in its entirity and follow the way it is written meaning the flow of sections, subsections, and provisions therein you'll have removed the blinders you spoke of and see it the way it's meant not the way you'd hoped. Sorry to be a spoil sport.
     

Share This Page