TexasCHLforum.com

R_Comstock wrote:As for what I would like to see changed, I would like to see an exception to a portion of the class for ALL LEOs, including us military guys. Perhaps allow the refresher course in lieu of the full certification course. Since a large portion of the class is spent on firearms safety and use of force, I don't see why we can't have a shorter class that just covers the state laws and requirements for those of us who have had safety and UOF stuffed down our throats for years.

I think some of the discussions about 30.06 prove beyond a doubt that some police need instruction on the law more than anyone.

As far as the military, there's a big difference between military gun handling and civilian concealed carry, even for Infantry. And if we're talking about Armor, Signal Corps, Quartermaster Corps, or Public Affairs, the average Texan with a hunting license probably has at least as good small arms knowledge and skills and safe handling experience. When it comes to the Texas laws on weapons (Ch 46) and force (Ch 9) and other civilian laws, there's no reason to think military experience is any benefit. In fact, the military and civilian rules of engagement are so different, maybe additional training should be required for military.

Or drop the classroom requirement and have a randomized written test and a standardized practical test for everyone. If you pass you get your license after the background check. If you fail you have to take the class and wait 30 days before you're allowed to retake the exam.

Or drop all of it and go to 2A carry laws.

R_Comstock wrote:OK, the upsides of having an online course would be standardized training, and more flexibility for those of us who have crazy work schedules that make it very difficult to attend a 2-day course. The downside of course would be less retained knowledge.

As for what I would like to see changed, I would like to see an exception to a portion of the class for ALL LEOs, including us military guys. Perhaps allow the refresher course in lieu of the full certification course. Since a large portion of the class is spent on firearms safety and use of force, I don't see why we can't have a shorter class that just covers the state laws and requirements for those of us who have had safety and UOF stuffed down our throats for years.

I would have to disagree with the Military aspect. There are large segments of the Military in various MOS's (Occupations) that demonstrate little to no knowledge of firearms. I think it would be difficult for a DPS clerk or an Instructor to determine just which Military member had an institutional knowledge of firearms to qualify as sufficient training.

Don't get me wrong, there are lots that do...but how does one tell which ones without putting them through an evaluation?

I have to come to the defense of another Coastie, if I properly construe his avatar. Ross's post explicitly concerned "military LEOs," as I read it, not all military members in general. This would cover MPs, or their counterparts in other services, but Coast Guard men and women are the only military members who have law enforcement authority vis-a-vis civilians, and the CG is the only military service specifically excluded from the Posse Comitatus Act by the Congress.

Having said that, I recognize that although a Coastie may be an authorized LEO on paper, there are those who do not "practice that particular trade," so the element of someone having to make a difficult, if not impossible, distinction could well apply to Coasties as well. I, for example, served for more than 20 years, a congressionally-authorized LEO the whole time, but in only 6 of those years did I serve in a dedicated law enforcement position.

Welcome aboard, Ross. Nice to see another racing stripe here.

Jim

57Coastie wrote:I have to come to the defense of another Coastie, if I properly construe his avatar. Ross's post explicitly concerned "military LEOs," as I read it, not all military members in general. This would cover MPs, or their counterparts in other services, but Coast Guard men and women are the only military members who have law enforcement authority vis-a-vis civilians, and the CG is the only military service specifically excluded from the Posse Comitatus Act by the Congress.

Having said that, I recognize that although a Coastie may be an authorized LEO on paper, there are those who do not "practice that particular trade," so the element of someone having to make a difficult, if not impossible, distinction could well apply to Coasties as well. I, for example, served for more than 20 years, a congressionally-authorized LEO the whole time, but in only 6 of those years did I serve in a dedicated law enforcement position.

Welcome aboard, Ross. Nice to see another racing stripe here.

Jim

If that is what the shallow-water-sailor meant, than I agree with him...I took it as Military in general (or Admiral).

Thanks to Jim for helping out a young BM who still has trouble getting his point across (as was demonstrated in my Deck Watch Officer review board today). That IS exactly what I meant and noting the disadvantage of being able to distinguish the difference, I believe a CO's letter should suffice in the same way as the waiver for the fee. I did a short time on the dark side (Navy) and while there, I was an aircraft electronics technician but I also had LE/Firearms responsibility when on duty.

The reason I brought that to the table is because of past experience with North Carolina. Granted, their process is much more complex and a huge pain in the exhaust but they had no exemption for LEOs and as the Sheriff I spoke with explained: "Even a Secret Service Agent would need to complete the course to carry off duty in our state, which is stupid because y'all have much more stringent requirements to handle weapons than a CCL class does." As has been stated before on other threads, it is obvious that some folks who go to these classes have little or no firearms experience and it's on that observation that I suggested the exemption.

Purplehood wrote:If that is what the shallow-water-sailor meant, than I agree with him...I took it as Military in general (or Admiral).

Only because of your service in the Corps, Purplehood, before you downgraded to the Army, do you get away with using the expression "shallow-water-sailor." As I am sure you know, that expression has resulted in many a waterfront brawl, but we Coasties have always been close to the Corps, with their only problem being that they are in the Department of the Navy. We know the Corps always got the hand-me-downs from the big-three, but the CG got the Corps' hand-me-downs.

Reminds me of a sea story. While well-retired from the service I was sitting in a barber shop one day wearing a T-shirt with "USCG" prominently displayed, having a pleasant chat with a retired Gunnery Sergeant. A fellow next to us chimed in to say that when he was in the Navy during WWII his ship carried Marines all over the Pacific. The Gunny nicely responded, "You guys hauled me 3,000 miles to Tarawa, and these guys (pointing at me) hauled me only one mile, but that was the toughest mile of them all!" If I had had buttons on that T-shirt they would have popped off.

Jim

I worked with a guy in the late seventies who had been in the CG. He told us about how he had cleverly avoided being drafted and sent to VN by joining the CG instead. He also showed us the scars from where he had been shot while manning the deckgun of his patrol boat on a river in VN. :)

A video similar to this made me rethink my opinion of the CG - http://exposureroom.com/members/fotoman ... 18eacdbfb/

I can't find the original, but in that one, the boat flipped completely over and came back upright in similar conditions to those in this video.

-davidtx

3dfxMM wrote:I worked with a guy in the late seventies who had been in the CG. He told us about how he had cleverly avoided being drafted and sent to VN by joining the CG instead. He also showed us the scars from where he had been shot while manning the deckgun of his patrol boat on a river in VN. :)

Among the many things not known about the CG by the general public, 3dfxMM, is the fact that for a while during the VN situation, we had the highest percentage of our active forces in country of all 5 military services. While we of course had the smallest service, as we have always been, this is an indication of how our service was depleted here at home, where the CG has many duties not shared by the other services.

Jim

Well this thread went off sideways...

To get semi-on topic.... I would like to see something done about employers forbidding weapons in cars while parked on company property. I would also like to see law abiding college students allowed their constitutional right of self defense while attending classes on campus. Some kind of educational coarse for officers so we can all quit worrying about some Barney Fife cop arresting one of us for carrying past a sign that does not apply to us. Maybe a law to PUNISH the cop for his incredible ignorance of how to do his job. Then they would think twice before going off on a tangent because somebody picked on them too much in High School.

Get rid of the card and have a TDL restriction code similar to M or C? Most people who see your license wouldnt notice it anyways.

rm9792 wrote:Get rid of the card and have a TDL restriction code similar to M or C? Most people who see your license wouldnt notice it anyways.

But -- Many people whom you wouldn't want to know it -- would recognize it. I don't think I want to -- even possibly -- reveal my status to just ANYBODY who want to see my ID.

Whom do you show it to day to day? Clerks when you use a CC or at the bank is all that ever asks to see mine. They are not posted and you are leaving anyway so who is to care? I might show my license once every 2 or 3 weeks as most stores do not ask for, though they should. If your job requires going to secure areas that is a whole of different issue.

1. Same tests for everyone to get new license.
2. Same fees for everyone to get new license.
3. Renewals online or at local DPS office like driving licenses, and renewal fees the same as driving license renewals.
4. More places where it's legal to carry, especially schools. Allow private schools to post like any other private business but prohibit public schools from posting because ISD is a government organization.
5. No requirement to carry the plastic.
6. Start expiring unilateral acceptance if another state won't allow reciprocity.