Texas Govenor Indicted & His CCL & Firearms

Status
Not open for further replies.
The "CCL" is the least of what should be our worries. Being indicted for threatening
a veto -- his absolute constitutional prerogative -- should of greater concern
for those who espouse rule of law.
 
There is no question the indictments are pure politics. And if he is found guilty of a felony then I am sure the appropriate laws would apply to his CCL and firearms possession. But while under indictment will he have to surrender his CCL and any firearms he possesses?
 
The funny part of all this is the reason for the veto in the first place; defunding a recalcitrant head of an Integrity Unit who was busted on a DUI, for not resigning. The Texas governor has limited powers of persuasion in the government (stemming from lessons learned the last time a sitting governor was indictied, IIRC, over 100 years ago), and the veto is one of them. Now, if Rick had had something to do with the drunk driving arrest of this gal in the first place, I could see them calling it an abuse of authority. But demanding an ethics officer to resign after such a breach of faith, and taking whatever options are available to effect that should they refuse, seems entirely reasonable.

I move we close this one, since it is only tangentially related to guns, if that ;)

TCB

EDIT: Oh, my sweet lord. From Breitbart;
"During her arrest, Lehmberg, whose blood alcohol content was nearly three times the legal limit, was caught on video screaming at police officers to the point where she had to be restrained." :D :D :D :D :D
Explain to me again, why in the world anybody is falling on their swords for this fool?
 
Last edited:
Nobody has responded to the OP's original, non-political question. Under Texas law, is the governor's CCL suspended because of the pending indictment? Politics need not enter into the issue.
 
Ok, I am certainly not a lawyer or expert but they made us learn this in the CHL class.

If you google CHL-16 you get to the .pdf of the relevant laws.

This is copied directly from that document:

GC §411.187. SUSPENSION OF LICENSE
. (a) The department shall suspend a
license under this section if the license holder:
(1) is charged with the commission of a Class A or Class B misdemeanor
or equivalent offense, or of an offense under Section 42.01, Penal Code, or
equivalent offense, or of a felony under an information or indictment;
(2) fails to notify the department of a change of address, name, or status as
required by Section 411.181;
(3) commits an act of family violence and is the subject of an active protective
order rendered under Title 4, Family Code; or
(4) is arrested for an offense involving family violence or an offense under
Section 42.072, Penal Code, and is the subject of an order for emergency
protection issued under Article 17.292, Code of Criminal Procedure.


There is a ton more but it seems to be that being indicted for a felony uner 1) above means they suspend his CHL.

Please note, I am not an authority and my cynical nature suggests that, as a powerful politician, he may get exceptional treatment.

But to answer the original question, it seems from the law he looses his CHL. I do not think he looses his firearms unless he is convicted of a felony, but I think that is under Federal law, not the state CHL law.
 
That seems to be an answer to the OP. Please confine comments to that law. The motives and legitimacy of the charge and the correlation with partisan politics is not our business.

The coyotes sleep peacefully tonight.
 
So the answer so far is he will have to give up his CHL but will be able to keep the firearms he already possesses. Question b on the 4473 form probably means he cannot purchase a firearm while under indictment.

Is it the CHL's responsibility to inform whoever nulifies or issues CHL's or is there a process where they are notified as part of the indictment and ask him to return it?
 
The state police know they issued it, failing to inform them will not keep them in the dark - and failing to display the license if asked for identification is contrary to the law (although they removed the penalty).

As far as 4473, if he gets convicted he becomes a felon and therefore a prohibited person and will not be eligible to keep whatever guns he already has. Again, this is my layman's understanding of the matter, not a truly informed opinion.

The coyotes may sleep peacefully, but the bobcats are restless.
 
dogtown tom said:
A person under indictment for a felony is also a prohibited person.
Click to expand...

A person under indictment for a felony can't buy a gun or receive a gun from anyone. See 18 USC 922(d):
(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person—

(1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;

(2) is a fugitive...;

(3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to ...;

(4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed ...;

(5) who, being an alien—...

(6) who [2] has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;

(7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship;

(8) is subject to a court order that restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner ...

(9) has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.​
Click to expand...

But compare 18 USC 922(g) relating to possession:
(g) It shall be unlawful for any person—

(1) who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;

(2) who is a fugitive...;

(3) who is an unlawful user of or addicted to ...;

(4) who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed ...;

(5) who, being an alien—...

(6) who has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;

(7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship;

(8) who is subject to a court order that...

(9) who has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence,​

to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.
Click to expand...
 
I don't understand what the felony charge is. Is not vetoing bills one of the functions of his office? How is that a crime?
 
I hear you but surely there must have at least been some kind of law of the Texas Code or whatnot that he is accused of breaking?
 
I hear you but surely there must have at least been some kind of law of the Texas Code or whatnot that he is accused of breaking?
Click to expand...
Not with the "Public Integrity" unit. Any Republican is fair game. Literally.
 
Since the original question has been answered, and we can't seem to avoid partisan politics despite warnings, I'm closing this one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top