Texas Gun Laws

[black2002la]

I may not be reading it clearly. but 46.15 confuses me. It says that 46.02 does not apply if (8) does that exclude 46.02 (1)?

 

[nalioth]

I may not be reading it clearly. but 46.15 confuses me. It says that 46.02 does not apply if (8) does that exclude 46.02 (1)?

It means you're exempt under TWO statutes.

 

[txinvestigator]

I may not be reading it clearly. but 46.15 confuses me. It says that 46.02 does not apply if (8) does that exclude 46.02 (1)?

Your question is not clear.

There is no 46.02 (1).

What 46.15 (b) (8) means is; if you meet the requirements of 46.15(b)(8), then 46.02 does not apply to you. It means you can carry a handgun, illegal knife or a club while you meet 46.15(b)(8).

 

[txinvestigator]

It means you're exempt under TWO statutes.

What two statutes?

 

[black2002la]

Sorry, I was reading it as one negated the other. Thank you for the clarification!

 

[nalioth]

What two statutes?

Don't mind me, we both got confused at your post with the laws in it.

 

[Old Man of the Mountain]

I am 47 years old, and the age of majority when I was in High School was 18. 17 for criminal justice matters.

Still is.

10 to be criminally responsible in the Juvenile Justice System)

14 to solo in a glider

14 to be employed (exceptions for things like TV and movies)

15 to obtain a Driver License (instruction permit)

16 to marry with parental consent

16 to obtain a Private Pilots license

17 To be an adult in the criminal justice system ( and can no longer be a runaway)

17 to Join the military with parental permission

18 to serve alcohol (16 in wine only package stores)

18 to get a driver license without other training

18 to join the military without parental consent

18 to Vote

18 to be a Texas Peace Officer IF he has 60 hours of college or an honorable discharge from the Military

18 to be an Armed Guard

18 to obtain a CHL if military

21 age to consume alcohol (unless accompanied by adult parent, spouse or guardian)

21 to obtain a CHL

21 Age to be a Texas Peace Officer

25 age to be a US representative

30 age to be a US Senator

35 age to be US President




More?

Unless it has been changed and I never heard about it, for Contract Law in Texas, a minor is under 21 years of age.

Anyone who enters into a contractual arrangement with an 18, 19, or 20 year old, is entering into an agreement with a minor, and a minor can not be held to a contract agreement, but a minor can hold the adult to the terms of the contract. The contract is non-binding to the minor, but is binding to the adult.

[URL="http://books.google.com/books?id=aUkmAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA85&dq=state+of+texas++contract+with+a+minor#PPA85,M1"][url]http://books.google.com/books?id=aUkmAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA85&dq=state+of+texas++contract+with+a+minor#PPA85,M1[/URL][/URL]

Way back when I went to High School in Pasadena, Texas, they taught this stuff, I just happen to remember things like this.

 

[txinvestigator]

Unless it has been changed and I never heard about it, for Contract Law in Texas, a minor is under 21 years of age.

Anyone who enters into a contractual arrangement with an 18, 19, or 20 year old, is entering into an agreement with a minor, and a minor can not be held to a contract agreement, but a minor can hold the adult to the terms of the contract. The contract is non-binding to the minor, but is binding to the adult.



[URL="http://books.google.com/books?id=aUkmAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA85&dq=state+of+texas++contract+with+a+minor#PPA85,M1"][URL="http://books.google.com/books?id=aUkmAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA85&dq=state+of+texas++contract+with+a+minor#PPA85,M1"][URL="http://books.google.com/books?id=aUkmAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA85&dq=state+of+texas++contract+with+a+minor#PPA85,M1"][url]http://books.google.com/books?id=aUkmAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA85&dq=state+of+texas++contract+with+a+minor#PPA85,M1[/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL]

Way back when I went to High School in Pasadena, Texas, they taught this stuff, I just happen to remember things like this.

That is from 1889. For at least 30 years the age of majority in Texas has been 18. AN 18 year old can enter into a binding contract.

From the CURRENT law;

Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code
Sec. 129.001. AGE OF MAJORITY. The age of majority in this state is 18 years.


Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985.




Sec. 129.002. RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES, OR OBLIGATIONS. A law, rule, or ordinance enacted or adopted before August 27, 1973, that extends a right, privilege, or obligation to an individual on the basis of a minimum age of 19, 20, or 21 years shall be interpreted as prescribing a minimum age of 18 years.

[URL="http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/SOTWDocs/CP/htm/CP.129.htm"][url]http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/SOTWDocs/CP/htm/CP.129.htm[/URL][/URL]


After reaching the age of majority, a person is permitted to vote, make a valid will, enter into binding contract, etc.

18 year olds can rent apartments, enter into deeds, and enter into other contracts.

We live under current law, not 19th century law.

 

[40Arpent]

Reminder to self: Never argue Texas law with txinvestigator.

 

[juwaba98]

Reminder to self: Never argue Texas law with txinvestigator.

Thought you already knew that. Most of us figured that out real quick like.

 

[40Arpent]

Most of us figured that out real quick like.

I did too. I just like to remind him every now and again that his expertise is extremely appreciated.

 

[Old Man of the Mountain]

That is from 1889. For at least 30 years the age of majority in Texas has been 18. AN 18 year old can enter into a binding contract.

From the CURRENT law;


[URL="http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/SOTWDocs/CP/htm/CP.129.htm"][URL="http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/SOTWDocs/CP/htm/CP.129.htm"][url]http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/SOTWDocs/CP/htm/CP.129.htm[/URL][/URL][/URL]


After reaching the age of majority, a person is permitted to vote, make a valid will, enter into binding contract, etc.

18 year olds can rent apartments, enter into deeds, and enter into other contracts.

We live under current law, not 19th century law.

So that was changed, was 21 years of age up until 1985, and was drooped to 18 years of age in 1985.

Not sure why they did that, as it did not grant any rights to 18 year olds, as they could already enter into a contract, but it took away the protection that a youngster had to change their mind if it turned out that being a youngster and not knowing any better, they had entered into a bad contractual agreement.

A lot of the folks that wind up in government are businessmen, and that change would seem to benefit a businessman, not a Texas youngster.

Thank you for pointing out that the law has been changed, I had no idea that it had or even would be changed, as I always considered that a good law.

The Texas Legislature took away the second chance provision in Texas Contract Law that had protected youngsters up until that time.

 

[Old Man of the Mountain]

I did too. I just like to remind him every now and again that his expertise is extremely appreciated.

Yes it is!

 

[txinvestigator]

So that was changed, was 21 years of age up until 1985, and was drooped to 18 years of age in 1985.

No. That law was last amended then. When I was a Junior in High School (1977) the age of majority was 18. I learned that in a Business Law class then. I entered into contracts long before 1985.

ANd why do you refer to these people as "youngsters" and believe they need societies protection? This law benefits these people as it allows them to control their lives.

 

[Stumpy]

yall, i got a question. i am 16 years old. wat guns can i carry in my pickup? can i carry rifles and shotguns? handguns? loaded or unloaded? could someone plz enlighten me.
(btw, i know i cant hav guns at a penal institution, school, etc.)

 

[Deacon John]

Please answer asap!

I'm a Louisiana resident, but I'll be traveling and camping in Texas (where my family lives) this next week. I don't have a CCL yet, so I'm wondering if it's still okay to carry a pistol concealed in my vehicle during the trip. I know it's legal if you're a resident, but will it be a problem if I'm crossing state lines?

 

[IXLR8]

Camera in rifle optics?

Is it illegal to use a video camera to view through a scope mounted on a rifle, for express purpose of recording the shot? With todays micro image sensors, it seems like a very easy solution to track shots while sighting in a rifle. I could be attached to a display or computer for recording purposes. I think for less than $100 and a laptop, this would be an interesting addition.

Comments anyone?

I was not sure exactly where to post this question.

 

[Danton]

I just took the CHL class and the instructors did their best to put the fear of God into the students regarding the use of handguns. We were relayed anecdotes - some completely fabricated, I'm sure - about all kinds of otherwise law-abiding CHL holders festering in prison for the better parts of their lives for making honest mistakes while defending themselves (stray rounds hitting bystanders, not giving an attacker enough time/warning to back down, etc). One thing in particular I found incredulous: We were told that if we use our weapons, and hit an attacker, we will be arrested - no exceptions - and have to post bond, retain an attorney to prove to the Grand Jury that we acted in self-defense, etc. It was my impression that TX is not a "mandatory homicide" state (like CA), where you're guilty of murder/attempted murder if you use a firearm until you prove your own innocence, regardless of the circumstances (i.e. the perp has more rights than the victim). Is this true? Any help in finding this legislation on-line is greatly appreciated. This is my first posting. Great site! Thanks.

 

[txinvestigator]

will[/i] be arrested - no exceptions - and have to post bond, retain an attorney to prove to the Grand Jury that we acted in self-defense, etc.

Completely not true.

It was my impression that TX is not a "mandatory homicide" state (like CA), where you're guilty of murder/attempted murder if you use a firearm until you prove your own innocence, regardless of the circumstances (i.e. the perp has more rights than the victim). Is this true?

A person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. In Texas, no person can be prosecuted for a felony except upon an indictment (also called a true bill) by a Grand Jury. Grand Juries do not decide on matters of guilt or innocence, nor do you have to prove to one that you were justified in your actions. By the same token, a no-bill by a GJ does not mean you were justified. A Grand Jury simply determines if there is probable cause for you to be tried for a crime.

In Texas, if you case the death of another individual by an intentional act, that is a homicide.

Texas Penal Code

Sec. 19.01. TYPES OF CRIMINAL HOMICIDE. (a) A person commits criminal homicide if he intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence causes the death of an individual.


Sec. 19.02. MURDER.


(b) A person commits an offense if he:
(1) intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual;
(2) intends to cause serious bodily injury and commits an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual

Shooting a person with a gun clearly falls within that statute. Without talking about self-defense yet, if you DO cause the death of another, then all the prosecution must do is prove the elements of one of the above to obtain a conviction.

Then how do we not go to jail if we do so in self -defense? Chapter 9 of the Texas Penal Code is called "Justification Excluding Criminal Responsibility". That is the self-defense, or use of force laws are located.

9.02 of that section reads; " It is a defense to prosecution that the conduct in question is justified under this chapter." What in the world does THAT mean. Let's take two scenarios;

1) Someone grabs your shirt, pulls his fist back and says thru clenched teeth, "I'm gonna kick your ass", but before he strikes you are able to palm heel him in the nose, ending the altercation.

2) You are standing inside the local stop and rob, a man appears in the doorway with a shotgun and announces, "I'm gonna kill all of you!", and you draw and fire, killing him.

In scenario 1, your hitting him in the nose meets the assault statute. (We will discuss self-defense in a minute). No where in the assault statute does it make an exception if the guy tried to hit you first.

In Scenario 2, you meet the murder statute.

We have to look at chapter 9 and see if there is an defense to our actions. This is where the phrase; "It is a defense to prosecution that the conduct in question is justified under this chapter," comes in.

In that phrase, our "conduct in question" is 1) striking him in the nose, and 2) shooting him dead. That is the conduct that is criminal, and we believe to be justified.

So we look at chapter 9, and IF chapter 9 gives a justification for our acts, then we have a "defense to prosecution" for our "conduct in question". With me so far?

What is a defense to prosecution? The penal code states,

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.

Basically what all of that means is you have to provide evidence that you met the requirements of chapter 9. If you do, and there is reasonable doubt on the issue, then the jury is instructed that they must acquit.



The prosecutor need not address any defense you may be alleging. All he has to do is prove the initial offense (1. Assault 2. Murder) beyond a reasonable doubt. In both those cases, it would probably be easy.



Once the prosecution rests, then you can put on your defense and state evidence that you met the defense. Basically you don't fight or argue the facts of your actions, you show you had a legal justification for those actions, one that absolves you of criminal responsibility.



It is like a person who is found not-guilty by reason of insanity. That does not mean the person did not commit the offense, but that he is free from criminal responsibility for that act.



None of that means the police are required to arrest you, or that a DA is required to attempt to convict you. In fact, if it is clear to the police from the evidence that you were justified under chapter 9, then it is likely you will not be arrested. It happens often in Texas.



However, at the least expect to have your case submitted to a Grand Jury if you caused the death of another. Again, when it is clear you were justified DAs often do not ask for a indictment, and GJs usually no-bill.


Also understand that even with CLEAR evidence that you met chapter 9, you can be arrested and charged.

Any help in finding this legislation on-line is greatly appreciated. This is my first posting. Great site! Thanks.

Google any of the Penal Code terms or sections I mentioned.

 

[Danton]

Thanks very much, txinvestigator. I greatly appreciate your help, particularly the amount of detail and posting/alluding to the TX penal code. It clearly took some time and effort, and I'm extremely grateful. That's how real Texans treat one another! I hope I can return the favor at some point, but I tend to think that there's not much I could tell you that you don't already know when it comes to the subjects discussed on this site.