Defensive Carry banner

Texas changes "intentionally displays" to "fails to conceal" effective 9/1/13

6K views 44 replies 20 participants last post by  stylus 
#1 ·
Texas changes "intentionally displays" to "fails to conceal" effective 9/1/13

Texas Legislature Online - 83(R) Text for SB 299

A license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder’s person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and intentionally displays xxx[fails to conceal]xxx the handgun
in plain view of another person in a public place.
I guess this eases up the potential of being busted for printing or having your cover ride up.

I wonder how many prosecutions they have had over this?
 
#2 ·
Backwards. They're changing the "fails to conceal" language to the more-lenient "intentionally displays" lingo.

Sounds like a good move. :yup:

From the bill text said:
SB299 text: A license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person ... and intentionally displays [fails to conceal ] the handgun in plain view of another person in a public place.
* "Fails to conceal" is struck-out in the text, replaced with the "intentionally displays" language.
 
#35 ·
Backwards. They're changing the "fails to conceal" language to the more-lenient "intentionally displays" lingo.

Sounds like a good move. :yup:

* "Fails to conceal" is struck-out in the text, replaced with the "intentionally displays" language.
Thank you ccw9mm. When I read the OP, I thought "this is bad", because the change in wording would have made it worse for us. Your explanation helped my heartbeat return to normal!
 
#3 ·
#5 ·
I would think this change would make the law more strict. "Intentionally displays" means non-accidental display. "Fails to conceal" doesn't seem to care accidental or not.
Disagree.

  • Out with the old wording: If I'm failing to conceal, that means that my shirt tails accidentally riding up could snag me with a criminal charge.

  • In with the new: But if it's required that I intentionally display (a la brandishing) or engage in utter lack of any attempt to conceal per the law, that means intent is demanded prior to any charges being leveled.

Seems clear to me that this is a much higher standard, more-protective of the concealed carrier who is seen by another to be carrying unbeknownst to him, unintentionally printing, accidentally getting a gust of wind, etc.
 
#7 ·
Yes, sounds like it. IIRC, TX is not an open-carry state. This is not an open-carry bill. It's merely relaxing the standard by refusing to criminalize "printing" like they're doing now.

Open-carry and intentional, deliberate, unjustified brandishing/menacing are still verboten.
 
#8 ·
This is a move in the right direction! I've always been worried about printing or getting made on my many trips to Houston.

I don't as a rule O.C., but I've always wondered why TX, of all states, does not have O.C.? Does this go back to 'cowboy days' laws'? Not trying to be funny there, actually want to know.
 
#9 ·
The answer is actually pretty simple on the 'how' OC is illegal: the state constitution grants a right to keep and bear arms but also dictates"...the legislature shall have the power to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime." Well, with the writing of the Unlawful Carrying of a Weapon (UCW) laws in the PC they have done precisely that.

On the "why" side, it is more complicated but overall my observation is that not a lot of people really care. Truth be told, if you polled random people in most states, even pro gun ones, many would likely believe that OC is illegal (even where it isn't). There have been clear cut OC legalization bills proposed in at least the past 3 legislative sessions (every other year) and all have quietly died in committee. Despite what you will read on forums like this one, that majority of Texans don't have any interest in changing the current laws and very few politicians want to touch it because the political risks vastly outweigh the potential returns.

It never ceases to amaze me how severely incorrect many people's understanding of TX gun laws are, most people from other states seem to think that everyone walks around packing on their hip every day. In actuality, we were one of the last states that is currently shall issue become such, and the CHL system has only been around since the mid 90s. We also have arguably the most laborious and expensive process of getting a CHL of any shall issue state: 10 hour minimum class, prints, range qual, $150 fees plus class fee (usually about the same amount), and right now it is taking well over 8 weeks to get a permit even with a spotless record.
 
#11 ·
Our State made it easy...... if the gun shows, tough... it's legal. They essentially made open carry legal for CC holders.... so if something even accidentally got totally exposed, it's not against the law and would not be illegal.
Makes life simplier for everyone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ccw9mm
#17 ·
This is definitely a step in the right direction but now they need to make the next move - allow open carry. That would do away with any possibility of being at the mercy of others to interpret how this new "intentionally displays" law will be enforced.
Yes.

All it'll take for some enterprising LE and DA to make someone's life a living hell is to claim intentional display. After all, if someone is carrying, ostensibly concealed, then it's hard to imagine display without doing so intentionally. :tired:

You're right. Carrying is not a commission of violence against others. By itself, it does not constitute a threat. And it shouldn't be taken to be so, in the statutes. It's a point of potential abuse through deliberate "misinterpretation," a point of confusion, and a needless statute that in the end merely criminalizes good people. Plus, it stands in the way of LE being able to help calm down the bare-fear callers by nipping the stupid reactions to MWAG sightings in the bud, before they're allowed to fester into outright cuff-and-stuff scenes for no real reason other than the bare-fear call itself. Can't do one without the other.

I like the few states that have stated it plainly, in the statutes, that mere carrying shall not constitute a crime or violation in any way, that an overt and actual other crime is required to justify stopping/detaining/stuffing. That is where it gets crystal clear.
 
#21 ·
IA was "may issue" until about two years ago. CCW permits were made of unabtanium unless you were a judge or a close personal friend of a sheriff, the liberal "Good Ol Boy" system.
A few sheriff would issue but most would not. This is the system IL now wants to adopt since they are being forced into a carry law.
The IA system was actually passed by the Democrats (go figure) trying to buy votes. The IA law is a "Permit to Carry Weapons" you can carry concealed or open. They highly encourage you not to carry open though, but it is legal. From what I am hearing IA has about the best system around barring "Constitutional Carry" which really should be the law of the land.
 
#24 ·
This is precisely why I am glad that TX does not have a county by county system. I'm basing this just on my own opinions, but you would see lots of corruption via this in TX counties if they had this power. If you don't know this, TX has 214 counties, most of which are just arbitrary squares. We have counties with as few as 3000 people and as large as several million. Sheriffs range from total good ol' boys who will probably issue to anyone to others who are clones of Lee Baca (LA County) and would only issue to very few. I live in Dallas County, Valdez is not exactly gun friendly, she will not sign off on any Class III paperwork so I doubt a CHL would be forthcoming either. Luckily, we are shall issue under the authority of the Texas DPS so this isn't a factor.

On constitutional carry, simply put: no, not a good idea and no, it is not an absolute right. The state constitution clearly states that the legislature has the power to regulate the wearing of arms and they have done precisely that. There are some people in the world who are not prohibited persons who I don't want touching a firearm, nonetheless being able to carry one (openly or concealed) whenever they want without having to go through a licensing process. I think TX has one of the best systems as far as licensing goes, I'd be ok with OC being legal (I wouldn't practice it, and I still think it's a bad idea to do) provided it required a CHL just like the current CC laws do. Some people aren't going to like this but, no it is not your right. When the state constitution is amended to say so, then it is.

You want to carry a gun? Get a CHL and follow the rules. If not, you are no better than the criminals with guns that we talk so much about defending ourselves against.
 
#22 ·
I like the wording as in the Florida law:

Chapter 790
WEAPONS AND FIREARMS

790.10 Improper exhibition of dangerous weapons or firearms.—If any person having or carrying any dirk, sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, or other weapon shall, in the presence of one or more persons, exhibit the same in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

The problem that many CWFL holders in my area have experienced is that many LEO's either don't know the law or have their own interpretation of the law and treat a unintentional display as a violation. In most cases the charges are dismissed but at a high cost to the CWFL holder.
 
#23 ·
This speaks to the point I was trying to make in a previous recent thread.

OCing is viewed by many, apparently including Texas, as tantamount to brandishing a weapon.

Although I don't necessarily agree tha OC is brandishing it is the perception that rules the day.

Personally I CC and would only in rare circumstances and appropriate situatiions wear a gun fully exposed on my hip (i.e. outdoor range, hunting, in my house, on my property etc.)

I want to avoid attention in most situations, not attract it.
 
#37 ·
...in Tx, the letter of the law rules the day, not perception...
...show me where the word brandishing even appears in TX law, please...

...a lot of out-of-state assumptions here...incorrectly applied to TX, who has quite enough to live down, thankyberrymuch!!!
 
#27 ·
I seem to remember that before TX's CCW law went into effect, OC was legal in most if not all of TX, and that gun owners had to swallow no-OC as a condition of shall issue?
 
#32 ·
83(R) SB 299 - Enrolled version - Bill Text

...this puts the state in the position of proving that we intentionally displayed...a hard thing to prove, without some sort of verbal backup or witnesses that we gestured or something...it's a BIG step towards fairness...
Texas Legislature Online - 83(R) Text for SB 299



I guess this eases up the potential of being busted for printing or having your cover ride up.

I wonder how many prosecutions they have had over this?
 
#45 ·
Texas Legislature Online - 83(R) Text for SB 299



I guess this eases up the potential of being busted for printing or having your cover ride up.

I wonder how many prosecutions they have had over this?
IMO you should be legally allowed o fully open-carry if you want. Not always wise or appropriate but it certainly shouldn't be a criminal offence. At least this loosening of the law i a step in the right direction.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top