1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Knife (weapons charge) case pending in Texas.

Discussion in 'Non-Firearm Weapons' started by Acera, Mar 27, 2013.

  1. Acera

    Acera Well-Known Member

  2. hso

    hso Moderator Staff Member

    Lawyers are expensive, but I'd be interested to see how this turns out. Does he have a legal fund?
  3. Acera

    Acera Well-Known Member

    He is getting one set up.

    I will post it here when he does.
  4. Acera

    Acera Well-Known Member

    Ok, legal fund has been set up and is being overseen by a Texas specific gun board where all the updates will be posted.

    If you get a chance take a look.

    From my understanding for this to become a precedent stetting case, where the law gets clearly defined by the courts, he must first be found guilty and then have the conviction overturned by an appeals court. Long way, and expensive, way to go to get our rights known.

    He seems to be up for the task.

    Please check it out.

  5. ChaoSS

    ChaoSS Well-Known Member

    Interesting case. Seems like the police, may have been correct in their interpretation, if it was meant to cover knives, would that mean that you could only carry the long knife if you had your gun on you at the time?

    Texas has some horrible knife laws, I once got stopped while driving through Texas, they searched the car, for no reason other than that they claimed I fit the profile of a drug runner, they went so far as to stick a scope into the gas tank and look around, anyway, they found a knife in the back, apparently I was breaking some sort of law about concealed carry, or carry at all, I don't remember, but it was a hunting knife in the back seat of the car, and apparently that's a felony.

    They let me go, though, and I learned a lesson about assuming different states have similar laws about weapons.

    I don't think the police are correct. I think the interpretation that the police are using was probably the intent of the author of the law. That being said, it wasn't written as it was intended.
  6. Beaux Nehr

    Beaux Nehr Well-Known Member

    Donation sent.

    Godspeed to him. I asked my lawyer about this back in November, and he researched it a bit. He also agreed with the interpretation that the law *does* allow for the carry of illegal knives WITH a CHL and gun.
  7. Acera

    Acera Well-Known Member

    Case over, dropped before it got to trial. Now it's his turn to take the fight to them.........

  8. OleReb

    OleReb Well-Known Member

    Glad they dropped the charges,i read the law and unless i'm dumb it clearly states that he was not in violation. I also had my father and brother read it to get thier opinion and they both agreed that it was pretty clear he wasnt in violation,my father is a state judge and my brother is a lawyer just incase anyone was wondering why i asked them.
  9. JohnKSa

    JohnKSa Well-Known Member

    IMO, they dropped the charges because to do otherwise could result in a precedent that would completely change the generally held interpretation of 46.02. The interpetation which is also generally held to be the one consistent with the intent of the law and the legislators who penned and passed it.

    There are three lessons there:

    1. The next guy who tests the law will likely get the same treatment. He probably won't actually be found guilty, but he'll take the ride and pay for the lawyer just like this guy. If he doesn't get a lawyer, or doesn't get a good one, he may actually be found guilty.

    2. The "system" isn't going to let this get pushed up high enough to set a precedent that might change the current interpretation of the law.

    3. The current interpretation of the law remains unchanged and that interpretation is that a CHL invalidates 46.02 as far as handguns go but not in terms of other "illegal weapons".
    Last edited: May 16, 2013
  10. Beaux Nehr

    Beaux Nehr Well-Known Member

    That's great!

Share This Page