• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Possibly moving to TX

rightwinglibertarian

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
827
Location
Seattle WA
You should know that if you carry in TX with any state permit, if you get asked for your ID you must produce your permit and either a DL or equivalent state issued ID card (that they issue in lieu of a DL). If you do not have a DL or that state DL equivalent ID, you cannot legally carry under any permit in TX. I'm not arguing their right or lack of right to stop you, but in the category of "you won't beat the ride" you would likely be arrested for unlawful carry of a firearm especially since before you carry in TX you were required to know that law. Just saying that your problem would be a whole lot bigger than arguing whether they have the right to demand that ID.

Added: Just so that this conversation here doesn't go badly, please note the forum rule about not advocating breaking the law (for example, by saying that you would carry without the required by law ID).

I have a WA state ID and I will have a WA permit, which i'm told is valid in TX. This should suffice won't it?
 

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
You should know that if you carry in TX with any state permit, if you get asked for your ID you must produce your permit and either a DL or equivalent state issued ID card (that they issue in lieu of a DL). If you do not have a DL or that state DL equivalent ID, you cannot legally carry under any permit in TX. I'm not arguing their right or lack of right to stop you, but in the category of "you won't beat the ride" you would likely be arrested for unlawful carry of a firearm especially since before you carry in TX you were required to know that law. Just saying that your problem would be a whole lot bigger than arguing whether they have the right to demand that ID.

Added: Just so that this conversation here doesn't go badly, please note the forum rule about not advocating breaking the law (for example, by saying that you would carry without the required by law ID).

What statute would a person violate by carrying a concealed (or unconcealed, after Jan 1st) handgun and a valid license to carry, but no driver license or other state issued ID?
 

qednick

Regular Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
499
Location
Bandera, TX
what all do you do? shirts? Cards? mugs? Signs? I guess I opened this up so i'd love to see a website, even if you have to PM it.

Sent from my HTC Desire 626s using Tapatalk

We do flyers, biz cards, brochures, booklets, etc. We don't do shirts, mugs, or signs, but we have partners that we work with to get these done very reasonably. I've produced some OC stuff for TX members here before back in 2011 (I believe) to put in gun shops/ranges, etc. when we were trying to get OC passed back then. I'll PM you the web site.
 

qednick

Regular Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
499
Location
Bandera, TX
What statute would a person violate by carrying a concealed (or unconcealed, after Jan 1st) handgun and a valid license to carry, but no driver license or other state issued ID?

News to me too. Isn't the CHL (or LTC as it's now called) issued by TX DPS and also classed as a valid government issued photo ID? I can only imagine having to also produce a driver's license if you're also operating a vehicle at the time.
 

Glockster

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2010
Messages
786
Location
Houston
What statute would a person violate by carrying a concealed (or unconcealed, after Jan 1st) handgun and a valid license to carry, but no driver license or other state issued ID?

The same one that requires them both today. Refer to the CHL Act (http://www.dps.texas.gov/InternetForms/Forms/CHL-16.pdf) which provides the requirement for carry both the CHL and either DL or DPS issued identification card (for those without a DL). And as crazy as it is, the DL is still required (or the DPS ID card) even though the CHL has your DL and has a picture. And nothing in the new OC law changes that.
 

Glockster

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2010
Messages
786
Location
Houston
News to me too. Isn't the CHL (or LTC as it's now called) issued by TX DPS and also classed as a valid government issued photo ID? I can only imagine having to also produce a driver's license if you're also operating a vehicle at the time.

Nope, that is incorrect. The law requiring a DL has not changed. You don't have to present anything if you're not carrying, and you don't have to have your DL with you if you aren't driving unless you are carrying in which case the law still and will on Jan. 1st require both.

To clarify - my nope was referring to your CHL as acceptable ID for carry purposes. The new law on required acceptance of CHL in lieu of DL is not changed by the wholly separate and additional requirements applicable to carry.
 
Last edited:

Glockster

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2010
Messages
786
Location
Houston
I have a WA state ID and I will have a WA permit, which i'm told is valid in TX. This should suffice won't it?

Yes, as far as I know your WA state ID would be sufficient. My response was based on your saying:
I have no drivers license so they will know nothing.

But if you have a state ID, then they clearly will know everything that they need to know.
 

nonameisgood

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
1,008
Location
Big D
The Texas rule (GC 411.205) is that you have to have your Texas DL or Texas ID card when carrying under authority of a Texas CHL. Texas requires CHL applicants to have and submit the number from the DL/ID on the application. Other states may not have this requirement so an out-of-state license holder may or may not have another ID.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

rightwinglibertarian

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
827
Location
Seattle WA
The Texas rule (GC 411.205) is that you have to have your Texas DL or Texas ID card when carrying under authority of a Texas CHL. Texas requires CHL applicants to have and submit the number from the DL/ID on the application. Other states may not have this requirement so an out-of-state license holder may or may not have another ID.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Are you saying I must have a TX ID or it is illegal to carry and that my valid WA ID is not valid for the purpose of carrying in TX?

Sent from my HTC Desire 626s using Tapatalk
 

Glockster

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2010
Messages
786
Location
Houston
The Texas rule (GC 411.205) is that you have to have your Texas DL or Texas ID card when carrying under authority of a Texas CHL. Texas requires CHL applicants to have and submit the number from the DL/ID on the application. Other states may not have this requirement so an out-of-state license holder may or may not have another ID.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Carrying on an out of state permit has as a part of the legal requirements that you must fully comply with the laws of the state you are in. If the state you are in requires a specific holster type, you better have it. If it forbids OC even though your permit is for OC, you better not do it. And if the state you are in prohibits carry in a particular manner, or time, or place, you must comply.

Sec. 411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY LICENSE. If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder's person when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder's driver's license or identification certificate issued by the department and the license holder's handgun license.

The law as quoted above doesn't include "Texas" anywhere in the language, and doesn't say unless your state doesn't issue one. And it also doesn't contain the "under authority of" language as in the next section on revocation. It does say that you must display both your carry permit and your DL or ID issued. I recognize that the "by the department" could imply TX DPS, but it doesn't say that it doesn't also mean any state's similar department. And imagine being stopped for ID, and all someone has is for example, a permit issued by a state that doesn't have a photo on it. Leaving you with no valid photo ID. I'm pretty certain Jin this day and age that every state issues non-DL photo ID and if you don't have a DL you certainly would need that for lots of things. I would see a ride in your future unless someone is able to their satisfaction determine that you are who you claim to be as authorized to have that carry permit.
 

Glockster

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2010
Messages
786
Location
Houston
Are you saying I must have a TX ID or it is illegal to carry and that my valid WA ID is not valid for the purpose of carrying in TX?

Sent from my HTC Desire 626s using Tapatalk

If you have a state issued photo ID, then you are good to go. If you don't have one, and the state you intend to carry in requires one, then you'd better get one.
 

qednick

Regular Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
499
Location
Bandera, TX
Nope, that is incorrect. The law requiring a DL has not changed. You don't have to present anything if you're not carrying, and you don't have to have your DL with you if you aren't driving unless you are carrying in which case the law still and will on Jan. 1st require both.

To clarify - my nope was referring to your CHL as acceptable ID for carry purposes. The new law on required acceptance of CHL in lieu of DL is not changed by the wholly separate and additional requirements applicable to carry.

Thanks for pointing it out! It seems kind of silly but if that's the law then that's the law. I suppose I'd never even thought about it before because, unlike my wife, I ALWAYS carry all my ID's/licenses on me at all times.
 

Glockster

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2010
Messages
786
Location
Houston
Thanks for pointing it out! It seems kind of silly but if that's the law then that's the law. I suppose I'd never even thought about it before because, unlike my wife, I ALWAYS carry all my ID's/licenses on me at all times.

I completely agree about the silly. I have a feeling that will become one of those "course corrections" that will be presented to the 2017 legislature as the law clearly hasn't kept pace with the other changes to the code.
 

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
The same one that requires them both today. Refer to the CHL Act (http://www.dps.texas.gov/InternetForms/Forms/CHL-16.pdf) which provides the requirement for carry both the CHL and either DL or DPS issued identification card (for those without a DL). And as crazy as it is, the DL is still required (or the DPS ID card) even though the CHL has your DL and has a picture. And nothing in the new OC law changes that.

I found nowhere in that document where it states that you must carry a driver license in order to carry a concealed handgun legally. Again, if I carry a concealed handgun and a LTC, but no DL, what statute am I in violation of? Edit to add: For one assuming no ID has been demanded by a peace officer (the case in which it has being the only scenario 411.205 addresses), but then additionally even if it has?

I can only assume you think I may be in violation of Government Code 411.205, but no, I am not in any way in violation of Government Code 411.205 by simply carrying a concealed handgun and my CHL while leaving my DL elsewhere.

You may be implying that 411.205 de facto creates a requirement to carry a DL, but I would adamantly argue that is not and cannot lawfully be the case, and that there would be no end to the number of de facto requirements that could be made using that sort of unreason. For instance, by that illogic, homelessness would be outlawed by the requirement to give your address upon being arrested, even if you haven't even been arrested!

In addition, 411.205 does not create an offense so you should generally not be prosecuted for non-compliance with 411.205.
 
Last edited:

notalawyer

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2012
Messages
1,061
Location
Florida
You should know that if you carry in TX with any state permit, if you get asked for your ID you must produce your permit and either a DL or equivalent state issued ID card (that they issue in lieu of a DL). If you do not have a DL or that state DL equivalent ID, you cannot legally carry under any permit in TX. I'm not arguing their right or lack of right to stop you, but in the category of "you won't beat the ride" you would likely be arrested for unlawful carry of a firearm especially since before you carry in TX you were required to know that law. Just saying that your problem would be a whole lot bigger than arguing whether they have the right to demand that ID.

Added: Just so that this conversation here doesn't go badly, please note the forum rule about not advocating breaking the law (for example, by saying that you would carry without the required by law ID).

The penalty for that particular violation was removed a few years ago, so can you really say something is illegal if there is no penalty?
 

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
411.205 doesn't require you to carry a DL, plain and simple.

A requirement to show something on demand is materially different than a requirement to have something in your possession at all times. Even if logically you understand that in the event an order is made to show something, you would need to have that something in your possession in order to meet the demand to show it, the former requirement still wouldn't even come into play for consideration until a point in a time in which the demand for ID was made. Even if you could be prosecuted for failing to produce the DL in the event ID was demanded (which you likely can't, and likely couldn't even if it was still an offense), you still couldn't be prosecuted for simply not having the DL on you sans LE demand for it, and so even still it is not unlawful to "carry without a DL" as it is being phrased.

If you're really concerned about it you should ask a lawyer who can try to find if there have been any cases involving this scenario.

IMO it looks like the legislature wanted to make sure that when DL was demanded, such as at a traffic stop, the license holder gave the CHL in addition to the DL, even if the CHL wasn't explicitly asked for. I don't think they ever intended for someone to be prosecuted for not having a DL on them, it probably never even crossed their minds.
 
Last edited:

qednick

Regular Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
499
Location
Bandera, TX
...
IMO it looks like the legislature wanted to make sure that when DL was demanded, such as at a traffic stop, the license holder gave the CHL in addition to the DL, even if the CHL wasn't explicitly asked for. I don't think they ever intended for someone to be prosecuted for not having a DL on them, it probably never even crossed their minds.

Good points from you both. The text reads:

GC §411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY LICENSE
. If a license holder is
carrying a handgun on or about the license holder’s person when a magistrate or
a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license
holder shall display both the license holder’s driver’s license or identification
certificate issued by the department and the license holder’s handgun license.
---
Last amended by Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 1146 (H.B. 2730), Sec. 12A.02, eff.
September 1, 2009


I really can't see anyone getting in hot water for not also carrying a DL/ID unless they're operating a vehicle, and, if they're not operating a vehicle and a LEO asks for ID/LTC then I can't imagine the LEO not being satisfied with just the LTC. Though the text of 411.205 does appear to say you should present both? Weird indeed!
 

nonameisgood

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
1,008
Location
Big D
Interesting twist, see below:

Texas Lege... said:
H.B. No. 2739

AN ACT
relating to the use of a concealed handgun license as valid proof of
personal identification.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Subtitle A, Title 11, Business & Commerce Code,
is amended by adding Chapter 506 to read as follows:
CHAPTER 506. CONCEALED HANDGUN LICENSES AS VALID FORMS OF
PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION
Sec. 506.001. CONCEALED HANDGUN LICENSE AS VALID PROOF OF
IDENTIFICATION. (a) A person may not deny the holder of a
concealed handgun license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411,
Government Code, access to goods, services, or facilities, except
as provided by Section 521.460, Transportation Code, or in regard
to the operation of a motor vehicle, because the holder has or
presents a concealed handgun license rather than a driver's license
or other acceptable form of personal identification.
(b) This section does not affect:
(1) the requirement under Section 411.205, Government
Code, that a person subject to that section present a driver's
license or identification certificate in addition to a concealed
handgun license; or
(2) the types of identification required under federal
law to access airport premises or pass through airport security.
SECTION 2. This Act takes effect September 1, 2015.
 
Last edited:

rightwinglibertarian

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
827
Location
Seattle WA
Good points from you both. The text reads:

GC §411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY LICENSE
. If a license holder is
carrying a handgun on or about the license holder’s person when a magistrate or
a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license
holder shall display both the license holder’s driver’s license or identification
certificate issued by the department and the license holder’s handgun license.
---
Last amended by Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 1146 (H.B. 2730), Sec. 12A.02, eff.
September 1, 2009


I really can't see anyone getting in hot water for not also carrying a DL/ID unless they're operating a vehicle, and, if they're not operating a vehicle and a LEO asks for ID/LTC then I can't imagine the LEO not being satisfied with just the LTC. Though the text of 411.205 does appear to say you should present both? Weird indeed!

this is vague in the extreme. What department? The police department? It could be the department for the equality of cuckoo birds for all the sense that makes
 

MAC702

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
6,331
Location
Nevada
The penalty for that particular violation was removed a few years ago, so can you really say something is illegal if there is no penalty?

Many states' preemption laws have no penalty, too. Does that mean we can't demand compliance by rogue local governments? This is a big problem in Nevada.
 
Top