Is a .45 GI holster "concealed" or OC?

imported post

Here's an image of a 1911 GI holster. it looks like it would conceal from view, the pistol inside. Would carry of a pistol in this holster be legal in Texas?

imported post

When a 1911 is actually holstered in a military flap holster, it's still quite visible.

imported post

No part of the holster (that identifies it as a holster) or pistol can be visible in Texas.

imported post

jsimmons wrote:

No part of the holster (that identifies it as a holster) or pistol can be visible in Texas.

Click to expand...

Okay, time to break out the actual cites:

Texas Government Code, 411.171:

SUBCHAPTER H. LICENSE TO CARRY A CONCEALED HANDGUN

Sec.411.171.DEFINITIONS.In this subchapter:

(3)"Concealed handgun" means a handgun, the presence of which is not openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable person.

Texas Penal Code, 46.035:

Sec.46.035.UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER.

a)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 fails to conceal the handgun.

So, what you have is a two pronged test: 1) Did the person intentionally fail to conceal his handgun; so that, 2) it was openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable person.

There is nothing there about holsters, or printing, or accidentally flashing.

imported post

I know the specific laws, and I know they don't say anything about holsters (or printing), but concealed is concealed, and if someone sees what they think might be a weapon or holster, and they panic/call the cops, you risk losing your CHL.

imported post

Maybe a crazy idea, but what about non-license holders?

imported post

cbackous wrote:

Maybe a crazy idea, but what about non-license holders?

Click to expand...

Unlicensed people that are carrying concealed will probably be cited (or worse, arrested) and most likely have their weapon confiscated. I'm not sure, but I think it will also eliminate your eligibility for even getting a CHL.

imported post

cbackous wrote:

Maybe a crazy idea, but what about non-license holders?

Click to expand...

Since the 'non-privileged' aren't 'allowed' to carry, the style/type of holster becomes a moot point.....

As for CHL holders... Looks like a holster to me, and probably to most anyone else and certainly to an officer! So, I would say it is likely to fall under 'intentional failure to conceal'... If you were wearing it under an dun-tucked shirt and just the bottom was hanging out.... MAYBE! but not sure that I'd test that one... (unless your shirt 'normally' covers it entirely....)

imported post

(3)"Concealed handgun" means a handgun, the presence of which is not openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable person.

Seems it would very easy to discern you have a gun with this method. I think I'm reasonable thinking that. IfI were on a jury about this I'd think you were a bit loose in the head and question your ability to be trusted with life/death decisions.

Anyone that doesn't knowa gun is supposed to be in itwith one of these - is either asleep or brain dead. It advertises "I've got a gun here!" whether or not one is in it. Not clear to me how one could even argue it is concealed even if the gun itself is not directly visible. Even if printing is not specifically mentioned inre to CCthis leads one to assume you have a gun. It is the purpose it exists - no other purpose comes to mind. No leap-of-logic required to go there.

That said... Testthe waterswith an empty holster if you're feeling froggy!Then test it with an empty holster, that doesn't even have a flap, and a loaded mag on your belt. Without actually having a gunon you at the time!I would love to see THAT encounter videorecorded as an officer responds to a MWAG call. Would be a lesson in practicality for everyone.

Bonusquestion: Let's say you have aflawless method of concealment with no printing or any kind of bulge showing. Would wearing a shirt that says you are armed or has a picture of a gun stuck in your waistband put you in violation? My guess would be that the written word of claiming to be armed may fit inside some form of "creating a disturbance" "Designed to agitate the public" whatever the language may be for that kind of stuff.


Of course we are here because if we had Open Carry this thread would be about showing off your new holster and it's practicality without questionsabout risking some conviction that takes you rights away!

imported post

It would be neat if that was okay; you could carry one of those WWII German holsters that completely cover the gun and it would be considered legal.

One state, I believe it was Missouri, allowed open carry but prohibited concealed carry. A judge ruled that carrying a gun in a holster was concealment.

imported post

44Brent wrote:

Here's an image of a 1911 GI holster. it looks like it would conceal from view, the pistol inside. Would carry of a pistol in this holster be legal in Texas?

Click to expand...

Prob'ly a moot point... but the holsters designationis 'M1912', just in case anybody wants to go find one. 'Not legal to OC with in Texas.

imported post

The law says: "(3)"Concealed handgun" means a handgun, the presence of which is not openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable person."

This clearly says that the presence of the handgun should not be obvious nor apparent to the casual observer.

If you are wearing a holster which is not clearly empty, you are probably in violation.

We understand you don't like the current requirement to conceal. But the current law requires concealment, and, by definition, you cannot open carry when required to conceal. You want to scare away the bad guy, but Texas says you are not allowed to do so by continuously displaying a handgun.