TexasCHLforum.com

I just had one of my students receive his license this week, it still has the gun category on it. You would think that if they did not have the form revised the category could have been left blank. I know they are busy but I would think they could share bits and pieces as it becomes available.

Jerry

6 Point Star wrote:I just had one of my students receive his license this week, it still has the gun category on it. You would think that if they did not have the form revised the category could have been left blank. I know they are busy but I would think they could share bits and pieces as it becomes available.

Jerry

It would not surprise me if they intend to use up all of the pre-printed license blanks they have on hand to keep from throwing them out or destroying them. Since with the law change the indicator on the license will legally hold no value. They many be looking at this as a "use to depletion" issue....then when they reorder it will change. On the other hand they may be looking at a Sept.1 roll-out.

Sherrie will be at the meeting next month. Maybe she'll enlighten us.

kg5ie wrote:

It would not surprise me if they intend to use up all of the pre-printed license blanks they have on hand to keep from throwing them out or destroying them. Since with the law change the indicator on the license will legally hold no value. They many be looking at this as a "use to depletion" issue....then when they reorder it will change. On the other hand they may be looking at a Sept.1 roll-out.

Sherrie will be at the meeting next month. Maybe she'll enlighten us.

I understand them wanting to use up the blanks but is not the category printed when the personal information is printed on the blank. Why could it not be left blank or better yet have N/A be used instead of the SA or NSA. I am concerned that many of the patrol officers have not heard this yet and may try to hold a license holder to the category on the license. I guess I must be a bit unique because I have had a LOT more NSA students than some of the instructors have indicated.

Jerry

I 'know' it went into effect immediately because to the veto proof vote in both houses. However, I suspect DPS may not agree. They probably will switch over everything 9/1.

If you had a student get a NSA license, (s)he probably do not have a SA. I doubt there is much chance of them being caught w/a SA in a month and a half. If caught, if charged, the DA should drop it.

I know, may cost some $. :(

switch wrote:I 'know' it went into effect immediately because to the veto proof vote in both houses. However, I suspect DPS may not agree. They probably will switch over everything 9/1.

If you had a student get a NSA license, (s)he probably do not have a SA. I doubt there is much chance of them being caught w/a SA in a month and a half. If caught, if charged, the DA should drop it.

I know, may cost some $. :(

Most of the time the problem is not whether they have a SA it is the spouse that has a SA and leaves it in the car. In this case my understanding is that their NSA license does not cover. I have always tried to warn them about this situation in my class. I told them that since it would be issued after the date it went into effect they should not have any problems, apparently I was wrong again.

Jerry

6 Point Star wrote:Most of the time the problem is not whether they have a SA it is the spouse that has a SA and leaves it in the car.

What about MPA?

Well according to an article by the Dallas Morning News from TSRA the Category does not go away until Sept. 1. So much for trying to understand what is going on.


"interchangeable guns: Allows people to carry a weapon that may be of a different category than they demonstrated handgun proficiency with prior to being issued a CHL. f you qualified with a revolver, you were limited to carrying a revolver. Earlier law stated that if someone qualified with a semiautomatic weapon, they could carry either a revolver or a semiautomatic. If only qualified with a revolver, then that’s the only gun that can be carried. This lifts that restriction. used in qualification. Effective Sept. 1, 2013. "

Jerry

It will probably require a software change in the system, which as any sysop knows, takes time, money and beta testing.

superchief wrote:there are apparently a lot of leos that don't know anything with regard to CHL laws. I know there's a lot to know, and they can change every other year. I think that is the main reason WE need to know them.

Knowing the law and being right isn't going to help you if you run into a LEO who doesn't know and is wrong. I don't want to even have that conversation. It tends to cost lots of money.
Honestly, can we make these laws more complicated? I can't imagine all the stuff that LEOs have to keep track of. We can barely keep track of one very narrow and focused section of the law... And even then, lots of it is up to some form of interpretation until we have valid case law around it...

oohrah wrote: which as any sysop knows, takes time, money and beta testing.

"Sysop" - that's a term I haven't seen in decades!