Page 1 of 2

Tweaking of Draft on TX CHL law changes

Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 3:33 pm
by Greybeard
I have been working on this since this morning and am to the point of requesting comments or corrections before I "sleep on it all" another night.

--------------------------
Right or wrong, an unusually large number of new Concealed Handgun License (CHL) laws go into effect soon as result of the recent session of the Texas Legislature. The Department of Public Safety (DPS) is scrambling to get around 3,000 instructors updated before September 1, when most of these laws go into effect. This article is to summarize what is believed to be how 8 of the primary new laws will be interpreted – with more known after I attend another DPS Instructor renewal school (as soon possible after the folks in Austin get us a schedule), as well as an Instructors Conference in Houston on August 9.

Senate Bill 864 is a huge change. Without eliminating any of the 4 required topics, it reduces the specified class time for an “original” (4+ year) license from 10 to 15 hours, including the shooting, to a minimum of 4 and maximum of 6 “classroom” hours, plus a separate range/shooting segment with no time limitation.

House Bill 48 is another big one. Effective September 1, it eliminates the current 4 to 6 hour (including shooting) renewal class requirement. License holders will need only to do minimal online work on DPS’ web site and pay the applicable renewal fee for a 5-year license (typically, even now, with no new photograph or fingerprinting requirement). However, it appears the current “one year grace period” after expiration will go away on September 1. If interpreted as suspected, people who let their CHL lapse may very well have to start completely over – including another class, new fingerprints and paying the full “original license” fee to DPS (rather than simply paying a ½ price renewal fee if the online application is completed before expiration on their birthday).

House Bill 3142 eliminates the requirement to qualify with a semi-automatic pistol in order to carry one. So long as it is 32 caliber or greater, students will be able to qualify with either a revolver or a semi-automatic and be licensed to carry any type of legal handgun they chose.

Senate Bill 299 adds a more clear meaning for “intentional failure to conceal” and protects against charges of unlawful carry for the inadvertent or accidental display of a handgun.

House Bill 333 requires hotels and motels to provide advance notice if they prohibit firearms.

Senate Bill 1907 is of particular interest to college students. While certainly not the much better bills we hoped for, it allows students with a CHL to have firearms in personal locked vehicle on private or public university parking lots without the universities having rule-making authority to expel them for doing so.

House Bill 1009 regarding a “School Marshal” program became effective immediately for local school districts that choose the option. It creates a new category of law enforcement officer, with specific training requirements, rights and restrictions.

Senate Bill 1857 is another “School Safety Certification” option for local school districts or open-enrollment charter schools. It requires DPS to develop the curriculum for training of some CHL instructors to become additionally certified to conduct specialized training for staff members who already have the Texas CHL.

Although not an actual change by the legislature, DPS is very likely to be enforcing an old (unenforced/reinterpreted) provision that all new and existing CHL instructors will also be required to have National Rifle Association or TCLOSE (law enforcement) or equivalent Pistol Instructor certifications before they can conduct CHL classes after December 31, 2013.
--------------------

This, plus probably a little more, is for "KISS Method" article for little local newspaper. Feel free to post here or hit me via PM if anything really jumps out at you. Or especially if I brain farted on any of 'em. Thanks.

---------------------------
Edited to add (if space allows):

House Bill 485 is “relating to the amount of fees paid by certain peace officers, correctional officers, members of the state military forces and veteran of the armed forces for a license to carry a concealed handgun.” Likely the largest group to benefit are U.S. military vets who have been honorably discharged for more than 1 year, paying a fee to DPS of just $25 for an original or renewal license.

Senate Bill 987 will allow the Texas Attorney General to obtain an injunction against a municipality or county that adopts prohibited regulations regarding firearms, ammunition or firearms supplies. One purpose is to put even more teeth into the “Range Protection Act” passed in 2011.

Re: Tweaking of Draft on TX CHL law changes

Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 4:03 pm
by gringo pistolero
Unless you're responding directly to an editorial in opposition to expanded civil rights for gun owners, I would leave off the "Right or wrong" comment. I certainly wouldn't start with it unless your goal is to provoke an emotional response. If your goal is to inform, stick to the facts.

I also think many of the changes (class length, SA/NSA categories, instructor certification) are not important to the average person who doesn't have a CHL, but maybe things are different in your neck of the woods.

Re: Tweaking of Draft on TX CHL law changes

Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 4:31 pm
by Crossfire
Looks like an excellent summary to me!

Re: Tweaking of Draft on TX CHL law changes

Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 4:34 pm
by n5wd
Good job so far! But, One of the CHL bills that passed the first session reduced the fees for various classes of folks, including veterans, down to a very manageable fee didn't it? Might include some details of that one, as well, since it will benefit a whole lot of folks.

Re: Tweaking of Draft on TX CHL law changes

Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 5:05 pm
by Mel
n5wd wrote:Good job so far! But, One of the CHL bills that passed the first session reduced the fees for various classes of folks, including veterans, down to a very manageable fee didn't it? Might include some details of that one, as well, since it will benefit a whole lot of folks.
Yep! Veterans and seniors currently pay $35 for renewal. After September 1, Veterans will pay only $25.
At least that's what I remember. Discounting my having "sometimers" disease.

Re: Tweaking of Draft on TX CHL law changes

Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 7:46 pm
by Greybeard
OK ... Thanks all for the feedback thus far. Possible additions:

House Bill 485 is “relating to the amount of fees paid by certain peace officers, correctional officers, members of the state military forces and veteran of the armed forces for a license to carry a concealed handgun.” Likely the largest group to benefit are U.S. military vets who have been honorably discharged for more than 1 year, paying a fee to DPS of just $25 for an original or renewal license.

Senate Bill 987 will allow the Texas Attorney General to obtain an injunction against a municipality or county that adopts prohibited regulations regarding firearms, ammunition or firearms supplies. One purpose is to put even more teeth into the “Range Protection Act” passed in 2011.

Re: Tweaking of Draft on TX CHL law changes

Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 8:31 pm
by sjfcontrol
I think it very unlikely that they will be requiring instructors to attend renewal classes in Austin ever again. Especially if they are going to wait to September to start. There are just too many instructors to accommodate in four months. But that's just my opinion.

Re: Tweaking of Draft on TX CHL law changes

Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 9:24 pm
by OldGrumpy
Thanks Greybeard for putting together this summary
:patriot: :txflag:

Re: Tweaking of Draft on TX CHL law changes

Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 9:30 pm
by Greybeard
Comprendo. However, in 2007 when there were also some major law changes, I clearly recall attending the 2nd scheduled renewal class on August 7 (when Ms. Shaw "refused to discuss" Senate Bill 378/ The Castle Doctrine). They were doing 60 instructors at a time, every Tuesday and Thursday at the Georgetown La Quinta. I believe if they did get their act together and did such again, they could do at least 2,400 instructors before Christmas. And 2,400 may be a realistic number once all the part-timers decide to deal - or not - with any NRA or TCLOSE certification requirement.

Re: Tweaking of Draft on TX CHL law changes

Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 9:42 pm
by sjfcontrol
Greybeard wrote:Comprendo. However, in 2007 when there were also some major law changes, I clearly recall attending the 2nd scheduled renewal class on August 7 (when Ms. Shaw "refused to discuss" Senate Bill 378/ The Castle Doctrine). They were doing 60 instructors at a time, every Tuesday and Thursday at the Georgetown La Quinta. I believe if they did get their act together and did such again, they could do at least 2,400 instructors before Christmas. And 2,400 may be a realistic number once all the part-timers decide to deal - or not - with any NRA or TCLOSE certification requirement.
As I said, it's my opinion. You're entitled to your own. We shall see... :tiphat:

Re: Tweaking of Draft on TX CHL law changes

Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:40 pm
by Greybeard
Comment from another forum by a normally pretty sharp grump. ;-) "The Texas Administrative code is where the 1 year grace period for renewals is located, and that does not change." It's about my bedtime. I will be ready for more comments/research/tweakin manana. tks for participatin.

Re: Tweaking of Draft on TX CHL law changes

Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2013 11:21 pm
by srothstein
The administrative code is the compilation of the rules adopted by various agencies to implement the law. It will change if the laws do. I think the rule giving the one year grace will change because of the wording of the new bill. It specifically states that a license must be renewed on or before the date it expires.

Re: Tweaking of Draft on TX CHL law changes

Posted: Mon Jul 22, 2013 7:47 am
by SC1903A3
It might be a good idea to add this with regard to senate bill 299.
h) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a) that
the actor, at the time of the commission of the offense, displayed
the handgun under circumstances in which the actor would have been
justified in the use of force or deadly force under Chapter 9.

Re: Tweaking of Draft on TX CHL law changes

Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2013 12:08 pm
by Greybeard
Below is the draft that I am getting close to letting fly. If anyone does think I might consider more tweaking, please post it here or PM me before 10:00 Wednesday. Thanks for all the feedback.

2013 Texas Legislature Passes Numerous Firearms Laws Effective September 1
By Lonnie Ward

An unusually large number of new firearms related laws go into effect soon as result of the recent session of the Texas Legislature. The Department of Public Safety (DPS) is scrambling to get around 3,000 Concealed Handgun License (CHL) instructors updated before September 1, when most of these laws go into effect. This article is to summarize what is believed to be how some “top ten” new laws will be interpreted, with more known after I attend an Instructors Conference in Houston on August 9 - and hopefully another “in person” DPS Instructor renewal school ASAP.

Some of the bills below are the result of the legislature’s recognition of the astounding reputation of what is now close to 600,000 Texas CHL holders. When Senate Bill 60 was passed in the summer of 1995, it created a CHL program that contained some of the most stringent eligibility and training requirements of any state in the nation. On an annual basis since, DPS has published data setting out the conviction rates for the general public as well as CHLs. The latest statistics indicate that Texas license holders are over 15 times less likely to commit a crime than is the general public and 7 times less likely to commit a crime as are Texas peace officers. I am quite proud of having assisted thousands of Denton County residents contribute to those statistics - and encourage others to consider the more streamlined process effective September 1.

Senate Bill 864 is a huge change. Without eliminating any of the 4 required topics, it reduces the specified class time for an “original” (4+ year) license from 10 to 15 hours, including the shooting, to a minimum of 4 and maximum of 6 “classroom” hours, plus a separate range/shooting segment with no time limitation.

House Bill 48 is another big one. Effective September 1, it eliminates the current 4 to 6 hour (including shooting) renewal class requirement. License holders will need only to do minimal online work on DPS’ web site and pay the applicable renewal fee for a 5-year license (typically, even now, with no new photograph or fingerprinting requirement). However, subject to interpretation of the laws and probable revision of “administrative code rules”, it appears the current “one year grace period” after expiration will go away. People who let their CHL lapse may very well have to start completely over – including another class, new fingerprints and paying the full “original license” fee to DPS (rather than simply paying a ½ price renewal fee if the online application is completed before expiration on their birthday).

House Bill 3142 eliminates the requirement to qualify with a semi-automatic pistol in order to carry one. So long as it is 32 caliber or greater, students will be able to qualify with either a revolver or a semi-automatic and be licensed to carry any type of legal handgun they chose. Until clarified by DPS, it is unclear if current “NSA” (non semi-automatic) license holders will be bound to just that category.

Senate Bill 299 adds a more clear meaning for “intentional failure to conceal” and protects against charges of unlawful carry for the inadvertent or accidental display of a handgun.

House Bill 333 requires hotels and motels to provide advance notice if they prohibit firearms.

Senate Bill 1907 is of particular interest to college students. While certainly not the much better bills we hoped for, it allows students with a CHL to have firearms in personal locked vehicle on private or public university parking lots without the universities having rule-making authority to expel them for doing so.

House Bill 1009 regarding a “School Marshal” program became effective immediately for local school districts that choose the option. It creates a new category of law enforcement officer, with specific training requirements, rights and restrictions.

Senate Bill 1857 is another “School Safety Certification” option for local school districts or open-enrollment charter schools. It requires DPS to develop the curriculum for training of some CHL instructors to become additionally certified to conduct specialized 15 to 20 hour training for staff members who already have the Texas CHL.

House Bill 485 is “relating to the amount of fees paid by certain peace officers, correctional officers, members of the state military forces and veteran of the armed forces for a license to carry a concealed handgun.” Likely the largest group to benefit are military vets who have been honorably discharged for more than 1 year, paying a fee to DPS of just $25 for an original or renewal license.

Senate Bill 987 will allow the Texas Attorney General to obtain an injunction against a municipality or county that adopts prohibited regulations regarding firearms, ammunition or firearms supplies. One purpose is to put even more teeth into the “Range Protection Act” passed in 2011.

Although not an actual change by the legislature, DPS is very likely to be enforcing an old (unenforced/reinterpreted) provision that all new and existing CHL instructors will also be required to have National Rifle Association or TCLOSE (law enforcement) or equivalent Pistol Instructor certifications before they can conduct any CHL classes after December 31, 2013.

In light of what some are predicting as a “September Stampede”, I have added several “special” handgun classes to the schedule at Denton County Sports Association (DCSA). While we are typically slammed primarily with hunter education students from August through December, this year the market may dictate more-than-normal “Handguns 101” and CHL classes. For the first time ever, the law change will facilitate CHL class completions (by experienced people) in just 5 or so hours on weekday evenings.

Before the mandated “reduced hour” classes begin on September 1, one “last of the breed” combined CHL class is scheduled for Saturday, August 24 starting at 8:00 a.m. The first 5 to 6 hours will be structured for both “original license” people and “renewal desperados”: those with a CHL expiring in August - or many who may already be into their 1-year grace period. The next 6 hours will be structured for “original license” people who want not only the “should know” and “must know“ info about safety, legalities, non-violent dispute resolution and child protective measures, but also some “nice to know” info that, on September 1, will have to be greatly abbreviated, eliminated or put into another type of “defensive handguns” class.

Local people interested in training, testing or independent practice possibilities are encouraged to check out details at http://www.dentoncountysports.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, “Like” or follow our Facebook page and/or drop by 409 Copper Canyon Road for a visit during one of our scheduled “Open House” periods, also shown on our web site.
------------------------------------
Lonnie Ward is President of Denton County Sports Association, Inc., a private indoor range at 409 Copper Canyon Road. He holds NRA Instructor Certifications in multiple disciplines, including Personal Protection and Range Safety Officer. Mr. Ward has conducted thousands of scheduled and private firearms courses as both a profession and a passion since the inception of the Texas CHL program in 1995 and received Texas Parks and Wildlife’s Hunter Education “Hall of Fame” award in 2002.

Re: Tweaking of Draft on TX CHL law changes

Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2013 1:52 pm
by AcesFull
SC1903A3 wrote:It might be a good idea to add this with regard to senate bill 299.
h) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a) that
the actor, at the time of the commission of the offense, displayed
the handgun under circumstances in which the actor would have been
justified in the use of force or deadly force under Chapter 9.
Agreed...being able to display a handgun when justified in the use of force instead of just deadly force is a major change.