Search found 5 matches

by locke_n_load
Wed Jun 07, 2017 10:11 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: HB435 Emergency Services Personnel
Replies: 65
Views: 5562

Re: HB435 Emergency Services Personnel

Alf wrote:
locke_n_load wrote:Looks like I need to join the Texas State Guard soon.
It's worthwhile work but I don't see the TSG in the HB435 text. Did it get added later? With the stipend for training and while activated, TSG wouldn't qualify as unpaid volunteers.
I don't know if "stipend" would be the same as getting paid, as they only get that if "deployed" and seems more like a reimbursement to me. They pay for their own uniforms to my understanding, don't know who wouldn't consider them volunteers.

HB435 text:
(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
.
I can't think of a group that meets the latter definition to a T.
by locke_n_load
Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: HB435 Emergency Services Personnel
Replies: 65
Views: 5562

Re: HB435 Emergency Services Personnel

Looks like I need to join the Texas State Guard soon.
by locke_n_load
Tue May 30, 2017 12:15 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: HB435 Emergency Services Personnel
Replies: 65
Views: 5562

Re: HB435 Emergency Services Personnel

parabelum wrote:Many of folks on my dept. are paid guys who volunteer. Exception is that some (Fort Worth FD comes to mind) paid depts. frown on volunteering...

Surely a fully certified ff/emt would easily fall under that broad "any" definition, no? If I'm a paid guy, there could always be a situation where my skills warrant for me to stop and render aid (mva, sick person in that restaurant that has 06/07 sign, or a movie theater posted...someone could have a tia there etc.).

Read 773.003 closely. Note how broad it actually is. So, if I am a paid guy, it is not unreasonable then for me to expect to have to volunteer my service to save or assist someone at some point, right? As a professional firefighter, I am always on the lookout for someone who might need my help. De facto volunteer. Always.

Also, while paid ff/ems workers are not included explicitly, note that they are also not excluded.
That's what I would think, just strange that they specifically called out "volunteers". I think a ton of people could fall under that very broad definition of "any...".
by locke_n_load
Tue May 30, 2017 11:44 am
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: HB435 Emergency Services Personnel
Replies: 65
Views: 5562

Re: HB435 Emergency Services Personnel

parabelum wrote:
nightmare69 wrote:I don't understand why only volunteers are are allowed to carry and not address the massive majority of full-time firefighters and EMTs who should be allowed to carry anywhere a LEO can while on-duty.
I suspect it's due to paid dept. policy/sop.

I'm not 100% sure, but all major fire/ems depts. around here (north Texas) that are paid, that I know of, have strict no guns allowed while on duty policy.

It's a political spiel you know...

Off-duty however I'd expect them to be covered under this bill as they are all ff/ems certified.
But they are not volunteers.?
by locke_n_load
Tue May 30, 2017 9:29 am
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: HB435 Emergency Services Personnel
Replies: 65
Views: 5562

HB435 Emergency Services Personnel

So HB435 just needs to be signed by the governor to become law according to the legislature website. I wanted to see people's thoughts about who would have a defense to 30.06/07 under this bill.

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"?

I'm thinking:
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?

Return to “HB435 Emergency Services Personnel”