TexasCHLforum.com

Question: can a Texas school district adopt a policy allowing specific school personal with CHL to carry on school property and then hire a CHL holder, and call them a safety officer without the individual being either a commissioned LEO or licensed security officer?

doncom wrote:Question: can a Texas school district adopt a policy allowing specific school personal with CHL to carry on school property and then hire a CHL holder, and call them a safety officer without the individual being either a commissioned LEO or licensed security officer?

thankfully no

Unfortunately, liberal El Paso Democrat Chairman Pickett didn't allow a vote on Rep. Shaefer's HB2535 that would have allowed schools and churches to do this, except that they would have to have been volunteers rather than paid personnel.

Chas.

EEllis wrote:

doncom wrote:Question: can a Texas school district adopt a policy allowing specific school personal with CHL to carry on school property and then hire a CHL holder, and call them a safety officer without the individual being either a commissioned LEO or licensed security officer?

thankfully no

I would gladly have volunteered with no pay to serve at our granddaughter's school and for my church as well. That Texas does allow such things is well beyond a shame. And the shame belongs to Speaker Strauss for allowing Rep. Pickett to chair the committee in the first place. It amazes me that a Legislature with such a lopsided Republican majority can end up with flaming Lib Democrats heading key committees which stifle votes on beneficial bills. I fear an replay in 2015.

doncom wrote:Question: can a Texas school district adopt a policy allowing specific school personal with CHL to carry on school property ...

They can do this first part, though, right?

C-dub wrote:

doncom wrote:Question: can a Texas school district adopt a policy allowing specific school personal with CHL to carry on school property ...

They can do this first part, though, right?

A CHL can carry in a school with written authorization from the proper school administrator.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Unfortunately, liberal El Paso Democrat Chairman Pickett didn't allow a vote on Rep. Shaefer's HB2535 that would have allowed schools and churches to do this, except that they would have to have been volunteers rather than paid personnel.

Chas.

Yep! And, I'm all about that. But, this is a paid position, created just for this individual. Expecting him to use his CHL for security but calling his job something else so it stays below the radar.

I've been wondering about all of this. Harrell ISD signs off on some of their teachers and staff to carry, provides additional training (not disclosed what type), a stipend, and now has a "security" force. Harrell ISD is certainly not the only school that did this, just the only public one up until the last few months. Now there are several local schools that are doing the same to some degree and not necessarily under the new Security Marshall law as I understand. How does this not make them "Security"? I am fairly certain they have not jumped through all the PSB hoops. Seems like a precedent in being set here.

It also aggravates me to no end that the State, or more specifically the PSB, gets into my congregation's business. I can protect my earthly family but I can protect my heavenly family as a volunteer. Short of immoral or unsafe acts the State needs to stay out of our congregations. The CHL law should trump the PSB law. I can understand the PSB law pre-chl (whether I agreed with it or not) but now it doesn't make sense. This law has to be changed next session. My representatives are going to be hearing about it for the next two years.

jmra wrote:

C-dub wrote:

doncom wrote:Question: can a Texas school district adopt a policy allowing specific school personal with CHL to carry on school property ...

They can do this first part, though, right?

A CHL can carry in a school with written authorization from the proper school administrator.

Correct; this takes are of the Penal Code issue. If the CHL is serving as security, they must be a LEO or a licensed security guard.

Chas.

troglodyte wrote:I've been wondering about all of this. Harrell ISD signs off on some of their teachers and staff to carry, provides additional training (not disclosed what type), a stipend, and now has a "security" force. Harrell ISD is certainly not the only school that did this, just the only public one up until the last few months. Now there are several local schools that are doing the same to some degree and not necessarily under the new Security Marshall law as I understand. How does this not make them "Security"? I am fairly certain they have not jumped through all the PSB hoops. Seems like a precedent in being set here.

School personnel (teachers, maintenance, etc.) are not serving in a security capacity. They are just armed.

troglodyte wrote:It also aggravates me to no end that the State, or more specifically the PSB, gets into my congregation's business. I can protect my earthly family but I can protect my heavenly family as a volunteer. Short of immoral or unsafe acts the State needs to stay out of our congregations. . . .

I agree wholeheartedly! And the out right lies told by the industry representative testifying against the bill were infuriating. For example, he claimed that churches could already "do this" so the Bill need not pass. Of course, then DPS Asst. Director RenEarl Bowie who heads that division testified that CHLs cannot be armed if they are serving as part of a security team. Everyone in the room, including the committee members, then knew the truth.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

jmra wrote:

C-dub wrote:

doncom wrote:Question: can a Texas school district adopt a policy allowing specific school personal with CHL to carry on school property ...

They can do this first part, though, right?

A CHL can carry in a school with written authorization from the proper school administrator.

Correct; this takes are of the Penal Code issue. If the CHL is serving as security, they must be a LEO or a licensed security guard.

Chas.

There is one new addition to this list, but it is sort of a cross. A person with a CHL may be employed by a school and appointed as a school marshal if he completes an 80 hour training program just for this. This is the new law that was passed to allow CHLs to protect campuses. The school marshal has most of the powers of a peace officer (no ticket writing) while on duty.


EDIT: Incidentally, Doncom, this is how I would suggest the school board do this instead of trying to circumvent the law on security licensing.

srothstein wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

jmra wrote:

C-dub wrote:

doncom wrote:Question: can a Texas school district adopt a policy allowing specific school personal with CHL to carry on school property ...

They can do this first part, though, right?

A CHL can carry in a school with written authorization from the proper school administrator.

Correct; this takes are of the Penal Code issue. If the CHL is serving as security, they must be a LEO or a licensed security guard.

Chas.

There is one new addition to this list, but it is sort of a cross. A person with a CHL may be employed by a school and appointed as a school marshal if he completes an 80 hour training program just for this. This is the new law that was passed to allow CHLs to protect campuses. The school marshal has most of the powers of a peace officer (no ticket writing) while on duty.


EDIT: Incidentally, Doncom, this is how I would suggest the school board do this instead of trying to circumvent the law on security licensing.

As far as I'm concerned that one has a CHL means little to nothing about one's ability to serve as security for a school, they should have no need for a chl at all. Not to mention as soon as the school starts paying for someone then they end up costing the school more than hiring a contract guard would anyway. So what is the point?

EEllis wrote:

srothstein wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

jmra wrote:

C-dub wrote:

doncom wrote:Question: can a Texas school district adopt a policy allowing specific school personal with CHL to carry on school property ...

They can do this first part, though, right?

A CHL can carry in a school with written authorization from the proper school administrator.

Correct; this takes are of the Penal Code issue. If the CHL is serving as security, they must be a LEO or a licensed security guard.

Chas.

There is one new addition to this list, but it is sort of a cross. A person with a CHL may be employed by a school and appointed as a school marshal if he completes an 80 hour training program just for this. This is the new law that was passed to allow CHLs to protect campuses. The school marshal has most of the powers of a peace officer (no ticket writing) while on duty.


EDIT: Incidentally, Doncom, this is how I would suggest the school board do this instead of trying to circumvent the law on security licensing.

As far as I'm concerned that one has a CHL means little to nothing about one's ability to serve as security for a school, they should have no need for a chl at all. Not to mention as soon as the school starts paying for someone then they end up costing the school more than hiring a contract guard would anyway. So what is the point?

Just to add thought fodder... a teacher is normally expected to administer his/her class and to stay with them until relieved of that duty by the end of the period, by an administrator, etc. If I were able to carry during my school day, my main reason for doing so would be to protect my class... I doubt very seriously that anyone would think abandoning my class to fend for themselves would be an acceptable action for any teacher (if I decided to wander off in search of an active shooter or other intruder into the school). That's the best argument I know for not considering school teachers as "security" or "school marshals".

troglodyte wrote:I've been wondering about all of this. Harrell ISD signs off on some of their teachers and staff to carry, provides additional training (not disclosed what type), a stipend, and now has a "security" force. Harrell ISD is certainly not the only school that did this, just the only public one up until the last few months. Now there are several local schools that are doing the same to some degree and not necessarily under the new Security Marshall law as I understand. How does this not make them "Security"? I am fairly certain they have not jumped through all the PSB hoops. Seems like a precedent in being set here.

It also aggravates me to no end that the State, or more specifically the PSB, gets into my congregation's business. I can protect my earthly family but I can protect my heavenly family as a volunteer. Short of immoral or unsafe acts the State needs to stay out of our congregations. The CHL law should trump the PSB law. I can understand the PSB law pre-chl (whether I agreed with it or not) but now it doesn't make sense. This law has to be changed next session. My representatives are going to be hearing about it for the next two years.

The district is Harrold, in north Texas. At this time, there are some 20 ISD's that have authorized certain of their staff and or teachers to carry. I am working with 4 in our area, providing training. Most are built off the Harrold policy, which began in 2007. http://xicanopwr.com/wordpress/wp-conte ... irearm.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

srothstein wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

jmra wrote:

C-dub wrote:

doncom wrote:Question: can a Texas school district adopt a policy allowing specific school personal with CHL to carry on school property ...

They can do this first part, though, right?

A CHL can carry in a school with written authorization from the proper school administrator.

Correct; this takes are of the Penal Code issue. If the CHL is serving as security, they must be a LEO or a licensed security guard.

Chas.

There is one new addition to this list, but it is sort of a cross. A person with a CHL may be employed by a school and appointed as a school marshal if he completes an 80 hour training program just for this. This is the new law that was passed to allow CHLs to protect campuses. The school marshal has most of the powers of a peace officer (no ticket writing) while on duty.


EDIT: Incidentally, Doncom, this is how I would suggest the school board do this instead of trying to circumvent the law on security licensing.

Incidentally the press release I saw on this was by TCLOE and they called the program "a licensing program for the
new type of law enforcement designated as School Marshals" so as a school marshal you would be a LEO. In reality it's little different how if some Govt body commissions an armed guard they are considered "peace officers" while they work giving them some additional powers. Many school districts do this already but the guards would have to follow all the restrictions the board places on private security. School marshals wouldn't be under the security board but Tcloe. This would however mandate that the school district have some sort of police dept because without one I wonder how they could take part. Many districts have such even if they have no officers preferring to contract out to a local dept for officers.