Mike D and LEO's .. question..

[TexMax]

I read this as, any LEO can get your CHL revoked at their discretion, -..and as such.. I will do what , within reason, they request of me regarding it.
Asking that it be disclosed to them isn't that big a deal to me.

Nor to me. The way it was worded was confusing though. I would certainly consider having my chl revoked a punishment.

Thanks

[Liberty06]

Law has been updated on this. My opinion is the best policy is to give it to them anyway. When they run your DL it's going to come up anyway. I rather volunteer it, than them wondering why I didn't tell them.

I totally agree with you. I still find it weird that if I didn't have a CHL, I wouldn't have to tell them I have a gun in the car.

[Tommyh]

i dont see it as an illegal search because the probable cause was the original traffic stop. its the same thing as verifying legal residence.

[TexMax]

i dont see it as an illegal search because the probable cause was the original traffic stop. its the same thing as verifying legal residence.

Speeding means I have a gun?

[systemnt]

i dont see it as an illegal search because the probable cause was the original traffic stop. its the same thing as verifying legal residence.

I'm not following you on this?
the traffic stop wasnt because he saw a weapon..
he didn't see a weapon, it was concealed.
he was presented a CHL, and proceeded to disarm the driver - for his safety.

During this action , according to some of the LEO's (and Keegan..hehehe ) on here, the reason the running of the serial numbers is legal is in the course of disarming the CHL holder, the gun -and serial numbers, become part of the 'in plain view' rules of search/seizure (guessing at that last part..whatever its called),..

[Mike D]

If there is no penalty. How is there a requirement.

I can't answer that. Here is a copy of the old statute:

411.205 OLD.pdf

Here is the new statute as of Sept 1, 2009:

411.205 NEW.pdf

[TexMax]

They look about the same to me

[Tommyh]

I'm not following you on this?
the traffic stop wasnt because he saw a weapon..
he didn't see a weapon, it was concealed.
he was presented a CHL, and proceeded to disarm the driver - for his safety.

During this action , according to some of the LEO's (and Keegan..hehehe ) on here, the reason the running of the serial numbers is legal is in the course of disarming the CHL holder, the gun -and serial numbers, become part of the 'in plain view' rules of search/seizure (guessing at that last part..whatever its called),..

disarming happened because of the original stop. he has the authority to do so and make sure its clean because he was presented the CHL. the original stop allowed him the right to disarm, so my example of asking citizenship is based on the ability to do so from a probable cause stop. seems to work for drug searches too, right?

[CrookedArrow]

Of course he can't!! People with a CHL only carry legit, not stolen weapons!!

[TexMax]

Yes and no. Presenting him your chl gives him cause to believe you are armed. From there he has the right to disarm you. He may not search you car for drugs because you were going five over.

That's how it makes sense in my head at least

[DorothyNotKeegan]

Yes and no. Presenting him your chl gives him cause to believe you are armed. From there he has the right to disarm you. He may not search you car for drugs because you were going five over.

That's how it makes sense in my head at least

I have to strongly disagree here....I've searched cars and found dope for less....just sayin!

[rhester]

Can a LEO pulling over someone for a traffic violation, upon being properly notified of a CHL, then proceed to check to see if the weapons are stolen?

Simple answer.......YES!!!!

Long answer.........YES SIR!!!!

Sometimes I prefer to ask the person trying to figure out why an LEO should not be able to do something, "WHY NOT???" Instead of trying to convince someone about the legality of an issue, where they are not going to like the answer, and most of the time will not accept the answer, it's easier to leave them to answer their own question.

[TexMax]

I have to strongly disagree here....I've searched cars and found dope for less....just sayin!

Thanks Keegan. I never claim to be an expert on anything. .

On what grounds did you search the car.

[Tommyh]

something about reasonable suspicion or some such?

[DorothyNotKeegan]

Thanks Keegan. I never claim to be an expert on anything. .

On what grounds did you search the car.

Short and sweet......so we don't get off on a tangent here.

Traffic stop.....they were given all their things back and free to go....I asked the driver if they minded answering a few questions and got consent to search.

(Plus it was also nice being a dog handler too)

9 out of 10 times they gave consent.....