TexasCHLforum.com

Myself and all of my Pastor friends will be glad to do whatever it takes.

Please provide the bill number/s so I can track the progress. Are they the same #'s as last session?

My church has no "security", and on any given Sunday service there are at least 3 to 4 CHLrs packing out of about 80 members. At leadership meetings there are 3 of us carrying. It's something we CHLrs know. It sometimes helps because it carries over to security of the facility, locked doors, maintenance, visitors coming in - general situational awareness, you see. Truly shepherding the flock. Only with a 1911 instead of a sling and a stone.

HB1561 filed 2/18/15 by Schaefer. It is clean and simple.

gugisman wrote:HB1561 filed 2/18/15 by Schaefer. It is clean and simple.

Dat's my boy Matt!

TX PC section 46.15 (a) "Sections 46.02 and 46.03 do not apply to:
(1-4)...
(5) Honorably retired state, local peace officer and federal criminal investigators...

These nonapplicability sections exempt any of the persons listed from the criminal statutes for carrying a weapon. By direct association, the persons are thus exempted from Gov. Code section 1702 related to security officers.

HR1561 Referred to committee today! See below:

FYI

We will be requesting a hearing immediately, so I will keep you posted.

Judd Quarles
Chief of Staff
Office of Rep. Matt Schaefer- House District 6
Capitol Office: E2.510
512-463-0584

District Office
202 E. Ferguson St., #506
Tyler, TX 75702
903-592-0900

From: Applications Administrator
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 3:45 PM
To: Judd Quarles
Subject: TLIS - Bill Movement Alert

Texas Legislative Information System
Bill Alert

84(R) HB 1561
Schaefer
Relating to the exemption from certain security licensure of certain persons who provide security services on a volunteer basis at a private primary or secondary school, a church or religious organization, or the meeting of certain nonprofit organizations.
3/9/2015 H Referred to Homeland Security & Public Safety: Mar 9 2015 3:35PM
View all actions

TLIS website: http://tlis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
To change alert criteria, go to: Alert Criteria

gugisman wrote:These nonapplicability sections exempt any of the persons listed from the criminal statutes for carrying a weapon. By direct association, the persons are thus exempted from Gov. Code section 1702 related to security officers.

What's your background in this area that qualifies you to give that legal advice?

Wolverine wrote:

gugisman wrote:These nonapplicability sections exempt any of the persons listed from the criminal statutes for carrying a weapon. By direct association, the persons are thus exempted from Gov. Code section 1702 related to security officers.

What's your background in this area that qualifies you to give that legal advice?

What makes you think he's giving legal advice?? I can see where he offers an opinion, but not any legal advice. IANAL.

He's quoting the law(legal statutes) from Texas Penal Code 46.15 (a) Please go back and re-read his post.

Nothing of which I am aware in Chp. 46 exempts LEO's from Chp. 1702 of the Occupations Code. However, §1702.322 expressly exempts certain LEOs from Chp. 1702.

Chas.

Tex. Occup. Code §1702.322 wrote:Sec. 1702.322. LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL. This chapter does not apply to:

(1) a person who has full-time employment as a peace officer and who receives compensation for private employment on an individual or an independent contractor basis as a patrolman, guard, extra job coordinator, or watchman if the officer:

• (A) is employed in an employee-employer relationship or employed on an individual contractual basis:
  
  • (i) directly by the recipient of the services; or
    
    (ii) by a company licensed under this chapter;
  (B) is not in the employ of another peace officer;
  
  (C) is not a reserve peace officer; and
  
  (D) works as a peace officer on the average of at least 32 hours a week, is compensated by the state or a political subdivision of the state at least at the minimum wage, and is entitled to all employee benefits offered to a peace officer by the state or political subdivision;

(2) a reserve peace officer while the reserve officer is performing guard, patrolman, or watchman duties for a county and is being compensated solely by that county;

(3) a peace officer acting in an official capacity in responding to a burglar alarm or detection device; or

(4) a person engaged in the business of electronic monitoring of an individual as a condition of that individual's community supervision, parole, mandatory supervision, or release on bail, if the person does not perform any other service that requires a license under this chapter.

joe817 wrote:He's quoting the law(legal statutes) from Texas Penal Code 46.15 (a) Please go back and re-read his post.

I went back and re-read the post as requested. I can't find where 46.15 nonapplicability means "the persons are thus exempted from Gov. Code section 1702" as he claimed. I also searched this and this with no luck for that exemption.

Please be more specific.

I know there's are specific exceptions for full-time peace officers in GC 1702. That doesn't mean that exemption also applies to reserve peace officers, special investigators, retired LEO, and other groups simple because they share the 46.02/46.03 nonapplicability of f/t Peace Officers. That's why I questioned his legal advice.

Great commentary, thank you for paying attention. Until laws or regulations are challenged, they can be interpreted by me or anyone else... I interpret my authority under 46.15 to mean 1702 would not apply, since 1702 is subservient to chapter 46. I could tell you my background but that does not matter. Your opinion is no less valid than mine. Now let's work together and fix this by supporting Matt Schaefers bill.

gugisman wrote:Great commentary, thank you for paying attention. Until laws or regulations are challenged, they can be interpreted by me or anyone else... I interpret my authority under 46.15 to mean 1702 would not apply, since 1702 is subservient to chapter 46. I could tell you my background but that does not matter. Your opinion is no less valid than mine. Now let's work together and fix this by supporting Matt Schaefers bill.

The Occupations Code is not "subservient to chapter 46" of the Penal Code. The provisions of §46.15 and Chp. 1702 are not conflicting, so we don't get into issues such as the specific controlling over the general, presumptive appeal, or any of the other conflict resolution methods we use when there is an irreconcilable conflict between code provisions.

Also, no authority is granted in §46.15. That subsection serves only to make §§46.02 and 46.03 "not applicable" to people set out in §46.15.

Chas.

Thanks for all you do Chas. I'll work hard to get this bill passed...

Public Hearing has been scheduled for Tuesday April 21. I plan to attend to testify.

See: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/BillLookup ... ill=HB1561" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;