Texas knife law question.

[saylorbrand]

I know I can buy a BM Infidel 3300, but can I carry it? I know they changed many of the laws for the better here, but not sure about a double edged auto.

 

[kniferbro]

Autos are legal to carry how ever a double edged blade is not.

HB 1935 a recently introduced bill in the Texas Legislature aims to repeal the ban on 'illegal' knives and would make your Infidel 100% legal to carry!

Call your local Rep. and let them know you support HB 1935

 

[Slauterhause]

Doug Ritter's group Knife Rights has a nice mobile app out called 'LegalBlade'. Amongst other things, it has the knife laws of all the states.



Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

 

[Petunia D. Feeble]

Autos are legal to carry how ever a double edged blade is not.

HB 1935 a recently introduced bill in the Texas Legislature aims to repeal the ban on 'illegal' knives and would make your Infidel 100% legal to carry!

Call your local Rep. and let them know you support HB 1935

This. I really need this passed. I've wanted to carry a Protech Dark Angel for years!

I've all but harassed my rep.

 

[amflud]

Aren't we talking about 2017 Texas HB 790?

 

[amflud]

After doing some more reading I see that HB 790 only applies to the definition of an illegal knife. 1935 has to do with carrying knives.

Nothing to see here. Carry on.

 

[zzyzzogeton]

There are 2 bills dealing with knives in the current legislative session, HB 790 and HB 1935.

HB 790 deals with the definitions of an illegal knife in Texas.

HB 1935 removes the term "illegal knife" from 3 sections of the Texas Penal Code and adds language dealing with the use of various knives by juveniles on school properties or while attending school related or school-sponsored activity.

HB 790 has been assigned to the "Criminal Jurisprudence" committee.

The members of the committee are::
Rep. Joe Moody, Chair
Rep. Todd Hunter, Vice-Chair
Rep. Terry Canales
Rep. Barbara Gervin-Hawkins
Rep. Cole Hefner
Rep. Mike Lang
Rep. Terry Wilson

Contact information for members of the House of Representatives may be obtained here::

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/Members/Members.aspx?Chamber=H

The ONLY thing that HB-790 does is eliminate the specification that "daggers, stilettos, dirk and poniards" are illegal. If the bill passes, double edged knives with a blade length of 5-1/2" or less will be legal for public carry.

The bill does NOT change the maximum length of a legal knife. As written the bill will leave 5-1/2" as the maximum legal blade length.

The bill does NOT eliminate the "bowie knife" from the list of "illegal weapons".

Even if this bill passes, a "bowie knife", will remain undefined so no one will know what the legal system deems to be a "bowie knife" until you are charged with illegally possessing on in public. This lack of definition of what constitutes a specific "illegal knife" will still allow someone with an otherwise "legal to carry in public" knife to be charged with carrying a "bowie knife" if the arresting LEO and DA decided to file charges. And the carrier will have to prove in court that the knife he/she was carrying is NOT a "bowie knife", and do so without a definition to base a defense on.

That's it - the only thing HB 790 does is make it legal to carry double edged knives with a blade length of 5-1/2" or less.

HB 1935 has been filed, but not yet been assigned to a specific committee.

Based on the language of the bill, I expect it to be assigned to the "Juvenile Justice & Family Issues" since part of the bill affects portions of the Education Code and the Family Code.

The changes in the bill ::

- adds a list of knives and knife-like objects to Section 37 of the Education Code that the use, possession or exhibition of can result in expulsion
- removes specific instances of the term "illegal knife" from the Family Code Sections 52.031 and 53.01,
- removes the term "illegal knife" from Penal Code Sections 46.02 (a) and 46.03 (a) and 46.06 (a).

What's really weird about this combination of bills is that Penal Code 46.01.(6) will still be defining what an "illegal knife" is, but the 3 sections of the TPC 46 that currently specify prohibitions on "illegal knives" will have the term "illegal knife" removed from them. Section 46.15, which lists exceptions to the prohibitions in 46.02 and 46.03, will still exempt bowie knives and swords for use in historical demonstrations and ceremonies.

It looks like if both bills pass, double edge knives will become legal, as long as they meet the other requirements for being considered a "legal knife", i.e., a blade length of 5-1/2" or less.

But at the same time, the term "illegal knife" will only be present in the Texas Penal Code as a definition of "illegal knife" and in the list of exemption for specific illegal knives, to wit, "bowie knives" and swords, for ceremonies and demonstrations.

So 5-1/2"+ knives will still be illegal BUT they won't be illegal for anything??? An improvement but????

 

[knifelobbyist]

There are 2 bills dealing with knives in the current legislative session, HB 790 and HB 1935.

HB 790 deals with the definitions of an illegal knife in Texas.

HB 1935 removes the term "illegal knife" from 3 sections of the Texas Penal Code and adds language dealing with the use of various knives by juveniles on school properties or while attending school related or school-sponsored activity.

HB 790 has been assigned to the "Criminal Jurisprudence" committee.

The members of the committee are::
Rep. Joe Moody, Chair
Rep. Todd Hunter, Vice-Chair
Rep. Terry Canales
Rep. Barbara Gervin-Hawkins
Rep. Cole Hefner
Rep. Mike Lang
Rep. Terry Wilson

Contact information for members of the House of Representatives may be obtained here::

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/Members/Members.aspx?Chamber=H

The ONLY thing that HB-790 does is eliminate the specification that "daggers, stilettos, dirk and poniards" are illegal. If the bill passes, double edged knives with a blade length of 5-1/2" or less will be legal for public carry.

The bill does NOT change the maximum length of a legal knife. As written the bill will leave 5-1/2" as the maximum legal blade length.

The bill does NOT eliminate the "bowie knife" from the list of "illegal weapons".

Even if this bill passes, a "bowie knife", will remain undefined so no one will know what the legal system deems to be a "bowie knife" until you are charged with illegally possessing on in public. This lack of definition of what constitutes a specific "illegal knife" will still allow someone with an otherwise "legal to carry in public" knife to be charged with carrying a "bowie knife" if the arresting LEO and DA decided to file charges. And the carrier will have to prove in court that the knife he/she was carrying is NOT a "bowie knife", and do so without a definition to base a defense on.

That's it - the only thing HB 790 does is make it legal to carry double edged knives with a blade length of 5-1/2" or less.

HB 1935 has been filed, but not yet been assigned to a specific committee.

Based on the language of the bill, I expect it to be assigned to the "Juvenile Justice & Family Issues" since part of the bill affects portions of the Education Code and the Family Code.

The changes in the bill ::

- adds a list of knives and knife-like objects to Section 37 of the Education Code that the use, possession or exhibition of can result in expulsion
- removes specific instances of the term "illegal knife" from the Family Code Sections 52.031 and 53.01,
- removes the term "illegal knife" from Penal Code Sections 46.02 (a) and 46.03 (a) and 46.06 (a).

What's really weird about this combination of bills is that Penal Code 46.01.(6) will still be defining what an "illegal knife" is, but the 3 sections of the TPC 46 that currently specify prohibitions on "illegal knives" will have the term "illegal knife" removed from them. Section 46.15, which lists exceptions to the prohibitions in 46.02 and 46.03, will still exempt bowie knives and swords for use in historical demonstrations and ceremonies.

It looks like if both bills pass, double edge knives will become legal, as long as they meet the other requirements for being considered a "legal knife", i.e., a blade length of 5-1/2" or less.

But at the same time, the term "illegal knife" will only be present in the Texas Penal Code as a definition of "illegal knife" and in the list of exemption for specific illegal knives, to wit, "bowie knives" and swords, for ceremonies and demonstrations.

So 5-1/2"+ knives will still be illegal BUT they won't be illegal for anything??? An improvement but????

I only disagree with one aspect of your analysis, HB1935 repeals ALL of 46.01 (6) which includes: (A) knife with a blade over five and one-half inches See page 7 line 4 of the bill.

So HB1935 repeals the entire code reffering to "illegal knives" including those over 5 1/2".

Unless you found something I missed, there is no other reference to blades over 5 1/2" in the TPC.

So if HB1935 is passed and signed all knives will be legal in TX

Todd Rathner
Knife Rights Lobbyist

 

[zzyzzogeton]

I missed the part where 46.01 (6) is removed. My bad there. When I went to read 1935, I didn't see any paragraph numbering changes in the bill for 46.01(7) becoming 46.01(6), 46.01(8) becoming 46.01(7), etc....

I'm used to seeing the affected section struck through AND subsequent paragraph numbers struck through and replaced with a series of "1 digit lower" paragraph numbers. Since that verbage is not included in the page I read at

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/Search/DocViewer.aspx?ID=85RHB019351B&QueryText="790"&DocType=B

I obviously overlooked the line from Section 7 saying 46.01(6) and 46.15(e) are repealed.

I guess I was also being confused by the verbage being ADDED under Section 1 of 1935, which is essentially a cut and paste of 46.01 (6)

The following is copied from that page. The ,,,,, represents stuff I eliminated from the heading down to the part I was referring to. The line you bolded above is shown as being ADDED to Section 37 of the EDUCATION CODE, not the Penal Code.




A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT
relating to the carrying of certain knives.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Section 37.007(a), Education Code, is amended to
read as follows:
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

(3) engages in conduct specified by Section
37.006(a)(2)(C) or (D), if the conduct is punishable as a felony; or
(4) uses, exhibits, or possesses:
(A) a knife with a blade over five and one-half
inches;
(B) a hand instrument designed to cut or stab
another by being thrown;
(C) a dagger, including a dirk, stiletto, and
poniard;
(D) a bowie knife;
(E) a sword; or
(F) a spear.

........ snip......

HB 1935 has been filed, but not yet been assigned to a specific committee.

Based on the language of the bill, I expect it to be assigned to the "Juvenile Justice & Family Issues" since part of the bill affects portions of the Education Code and the Family Code.

The changes in the bill ::

- adds a list of knives and knife-like objects to Section 37 of the Education Code that the use, possession or exhibition of can result in expulsion
- removes specific instances of the term "illegal knife" from the Family Code Sections 52.031 and 53.01,
- removes the term "illegal knife" from Penal Code Sections 46.02 (a) and 46.03 (a) and 46.06 (a).

....snip.....

I only disagree with one aspect of your analysis, HB1935 repeals ALL of 46.01 (6) which includes: (A) knife with a blade over five and one-half inches See page 7 line 4 of the bill.

So HB1935 repeals the entire code reffering to "illegal knives" including those over 5 1/2".

Unless you found something I missed, there is no other reference to blades over 5 1/2" in the TPC.

So if HB1935 is passed and signed all knives will be legal in TX

Todd Rathner
Knife Rights Lobbyist

So ALL sharp and pointy things will be legal to publicly carry if it passes. Great work. Except NOT if you are a student at a school or school function.

 

[knifelobbyist]

I missed the part where 46.01 (6) is removed. My bad there. When I went to read 1935, I didn't see any paragraph numbering changes in the bill for 46.01(7) becoming 46.01(6), 46.01(8) becoming 46.01(7), etc....

I'm used to seeing the affected section struck through AND subsequent paragraph numbers struck through and replaced with a series of "1 digit lower" paragraph numbers. Since that verbage is not included in the page I read at

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/Search/DocViewer.aspx?ID=85RHB019351B&QueryText="790"&DocType=B

I obviously overlooked the line from Section 7 saying 46.01(6) and 46.15(e) are repealed.

I guess I was also being confused by the verbage being ADDED under Section 1 of 1935, which is essentially a cut and paste of 46.01 (6)

The following is copied from that page. The ,,,,, represents stuff I eliminated from the heading down to the part I was referring to. The line you bolded above is shown as being ADDED to Section 37 of the EDUCATION CODE, not the Penal Code.




A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT
relating to the carrying of certain knives.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Section 37.007(a), Education Code, is amended to
read as follows:
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

(3) engages in conduct specified by Section
37.006(a)(2)(C) or (D), if the conduct is punishable as a felony; or
(4) uses, exhibits, or possesses:
(A) a knife with a blade over five and one-half
inches;
(B) a hand instrument designed to cut or stab
another by being thrown;
(C) a dagger, including a dirk, stiletto, and
poniard;
(D) a bowie knife;
(E) a sword; or
(F) a spear.






So ALL sharp and pointy things will be legal to publicly carry if it passes. Great work. Except NOT if you are a student at a school or school function.

Yes all sharp and pointy things will be legal in Texas. The reference to schools is there because it was there under current law but when we repeal 46.01 (6) we remove the list of knives that are "illegal" AND we remove the knives not allowed in schools. The bill will not pass if we do not maintain the school provision.

Oh and don't feel bad because when I looked at HB1935 for the first time, comparing it to the 2015 version, I missed the repealer on page 7 also! And I practically WROTE the damn thing!!!

 

[knifelobbyist]

Also, HB790 will likely be held as a backup as Mr Lozano has indicated he wants to co-author HB1935. The legislature generally won't move two bills on the same subject. There are exceptions but they are rare. I am headed back to the capitol today to keep working on HB1935.

 

[zzyzzogeton]

Legislative bills are notorious for being difficult to read. I think that was one of the reasons "they" started producing versions that had underlines and strike-throughs, so any changes could be easily identified. I guess I got complacent on this one, just homing in on the visible changes, not ALL the verbage.

Keep up the good work. I have a couple of Brazilian Mauser bayonet sword canes planned.

 

[amflud]

Thanks for the updates on this, guys. I appreciate your hard work.

 

[yipchoy]

TPC 46.15 exempts CHL folks from 46.02 restrictions.

 

[zzyzzogeton]

TPC 46.15 exempts CHL folks from 46.02 restrictions.

Yes, IF you read the law in a very straight-forward, logical manner. HOWEVER, the law is legal, not logical. Every CHL instructor I have spoken with has said essentially, "Don't Bet The Farm On It."

DAs say that was not the intention of the law, but no test case has gone through the court system. There almost was one a couple of years ago, but the DA dropped the charges after the individual got a lawyer and started fighting back. The DA chose NOT to push for a conviction on the chance a legal precedent would be set (liberal Travis County DA).

MOST CHL holders are relatively law-abiding and don't get stopped by LEOs doing something wrong. LEOs are going to not care what you say about that section of the law. If you are doing something that catches their eye, they will find whatever you are carrying that violates 46.02 and then simply arrest you and let the lawyers fight it out.

If one wants to "push the envelope" and pack a 7", 8", 9", etc, blade knife or a sword around, they are welcome to be the test case. If they win, good. A precedent will have been set in a court of law and they will be out a big chunk of money defending themselves. If they loose, well, the end result will be similar - legal precedent set and out a bunch of money. Oh, yeah, AND they will get some jail time AND they will have a felony conviction that will prohibit them from legally owning/using a firearm ever again AND prevent them from ever getting a multitude of state licenses.

 

[yipchoy]

Not trying to be contentious here, but how else are you to read the law, if not in a straight forward and logical way. I'm not smart enough to be a lawyer, but it would seem to me that "the intent of the law" has a lot of wiggle room and yardage for interpretation that would vary with every judge depending on the way they lean. Would it not have been better to have clearly defined the "intent" of the law rather than leaving it open to misinterpretation?

This "intent" thing seems to be the same argument that is used by Gun Control Proponents regarding 2A as to whether the amendment "intended" only certain people to be allowed to carry arms.

And you are correct I do not want to be the beta tester for that little "discussion" in a court of law especially if the judge tends to lean toward the liberal side.

 

[zzyzzogeton]

I don't disagree with you. By simple logic, the law says

IF THIS
AND
THAT
THEN
46.02 does not apply. Period

So I don't believe the legislators were trying to be ambiguous. They were very straight forward in their verbage.

The problem is that DAs and judges ARE lawyers and if the law disagrees with their own prejudices and preconceptions they tend to try to weasel out and buffalo people.

The problem with that is that it has the potential to be very expensive and very costly, in time, money, freedom and the potential loss of rights. So CHL instructors have erred on the side of protecting their own collective butts by telling students "This is what the law says, but you probably don't want to test that theory."

The best solution is HB 1935 which will flat do away with laws regulating types of knives. It will just be "What did the individual DO with said knife."

 

[TattooBlade]

Until this passes, does anyone know where it says in the current TX statutes that blades over 5.5 inches are allowed for hunting, camping, etc? Thanks!

 

[zzyzzogeton]

You can use >5.5" blades on your own property, on any property you have a legal right to be on (invite, lease, etc) while hunting/camping/etc. Problematic as to what you can carry on one of the few national parks in the state since I never go to them.

 

[TattooBlade]

You can use >5.5" blades on your own property, on any property you have a legal right to be on (invite, lease, etc) while hunting/camping/etc. Problematic as to what you can carry on one of the few national parks in the state since I never go to them.

Do you have a link or know that statutes that says that? I've read it too. But now I can't find it.