Relevant Text of the Bill for this discussion:
30.06/07 amended with the following:
(f) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that
the license holder is volunteer emergency services personnel, as
defined by Section 46.01.
and the following is added to chapter 46:
SECTION 10. Section 46.01, Penal Code, is amended by adding
Subdivision (18) to read as follows:
(18) "Volunteer emergency services personnel"
includes a volunteer firefighter, an emergency medical services
volunteer as defined by Section 773.003, Health and Safety Code,
and any individual who, as a volunteer, provides services for the
benefit of the general public during emergency situations. The
term does not include a peace officer or reserve law enforcement
officer, as those terms are defined by Section 1701.001,
Occupations Code, who is performing law enforcement duties.
and 773.003 reads:
(13) "Emergency medical services volunteer" means emergency medical services personnel who provide emergency prehospital care without remuneration, except reimbursement for expenses.
So right out the box, volunteer firefighters have a defense to prosecution from 06/07, and so do EMTs who work at volunteer fire departments (emergency medical services volunteer, right?), but who else could be that "any individual"?
Texas State Guard members (I think this is a definite "yes")
Possible militia/oath keepers/3%er members (but this could probably be argued)
Certified EMTs and other individuals with first aid training who are not employed for those services?
Does the "as a volunteer" mean they are a card carrying member of a group, or you have your red cross CPR certification for bad situations and don't need it for your employer?
What other certifications do you think would qualify for this defense?