TexasCHLforum.com

Generally what Liberty wrote above are minimum requirements, obviously no felonies+criminal history needs to be squeaky clean.

Those who never served in the fire service will be "yellow helmets" until they meet SFFMA requirements for certification/complete the rookie school.

Training is non-negotiable and mendatory, with 30hrs of CE requirement annually, at least with our Dept.

I tend to agree with Trey above. For me, this is more of a symbolic passage, another inch of 2A restored if you will.

I see in the future some amendments to signs perhaps, which will make them bigger as more text will presumably need to be added, more expensive thusly, and hopefully within few years they'll be just plain to big to post up front

Right. I was wondering about some of the more sensible options...

As I was walking into HEB this morning....reluctantly....I thought about something. Presume this bill becomes a law, which it looks like it will, after Sep. 1, I could walk into HEB while carrying open and if a manager or an employee advised me of no open carry then what? Inform them that I'm covered under the new law? Show my Fire/EMS ID? CERT ID? Just continue to CC there only (likely what I will do)?

How is this new information going to be disseminated amongst business posted as 06 or 07 or both? Will they even know (my suspicion is not)?

Amend the 06&07 signs to include "unless dot dot dot personnel..."?

Do I now get a special badge?

I didn't see Pelosi's house mentioned on that list. Oh well.

TexasJohnBoy wrote:

RossA wrote:So if we start a "volunteer militia" and the charter documents say that we exist to provide services for the benefit of the general public during emergencies, members would fall under this law?
I like it, but I wonder what the AG and the courts would say about that?

I don't think a militia will fall under the "Emergency Services" umbrella, however thats one of the reasons for the Texas State Guard, so I could be wrong. The definition is somewhat vague.

Looks like this fixes section 552.002 Health and Safety code as well. No carry allowed in the listed hospitals in 552.002(2). Civil fines only for violation if I read that part correctly....

One could say that would be pushing it somewhat.

As for fines, I think first offense is $100, each subsequent violation is $500. No criminal charges that I can see.

Again, hat tip to everyone who worked on this (and many other) pro 2A bills, putting up with some of us who are little...passionate...

As a first responder, I can tell you that this bill means a great deal to me and my family.

TexasJohnBoy wrote:

(18)
AA
"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.

This would include CERT or Red Cross Volunteers then, no?

As written/highlighted in bold above, yes.

My guess is that the House members know that the wrath of the electorate will be upon them if more pro 2A bills are not pushed through in this session. There are no excuses.

I know that personally, I've put pressure on as much as I could, and I know that the staff know darn well that we are watching this unfold carefully.

My supposition is that had we been silent, this bill would have been dead awhile back.

Many thanks to all members and staff who are listening to the will of the people. Do the right thing.

RPBrown wrote:Will this bill also include Volunteer search and rescue organizations such as TEXSAR?

I believe so, unless the text below changes.

"(18)AA"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."

RoyGBiv wrote:

parabelum wrote:I am still a bit confused if this bill creates an exemption for first responders during the execution of their duties solely. In other words, an off duty first responder will not receive defense to prosecution for 06/07?

But, we the volunteer FF'ers & EMT's, are never really off duty unless the definition of on duty is regarded as actual response to a call.

In either case, what documentation would I need in addition to LTC and DL obviously...NREMT, SFFMA, IAFF, CERT card?

Defense to prosecution on 30.06 and 07 ALWAYS
Defense to prosecution on most Chapter 46 situations only when responding to an emergency.

Caveat: Unless amended between today and enactment.

Thank you sir.

I am still a bit confused if this bill creates an exemption for first responders during the execution of their duties solely. In other words, an off duty first responder will not receive defense to prosecution for 06/07?

But, we the volunteer FF'ers & EMT's, are never really off duty unless the definition of "on duty" is regarded as actual response to a call or I put myself in a "off duty" status in IAR.

In either case, what documentation would I need in addition to LTC and DL obviously...NREMT, SFFMA, IAFF, CERT card?

My brain is a V8 currently firing on 3 cylinders...

We are a rural dept. running around 600 calls annually.

Our dispatch does a decent job where 9 out of 10 calls I'd say we are given heads up to stage for SO.

Having said that, every couple of months there is that one time where you find yourself in the middle of nowhere, shady characters involved, it's 2am and you're basically on your own.