Why don't they follow the law?

[Anvilfire]

Why is it we have to jump through hoops to get a CHL and the state does as it pleases? I'm at the 30 day mark but what I been hearing I might as well find the biggest noval and start reading.

[AEA]

Because they are SWAMPED with applications........

The SEARCH button is your Friend!

[boomerang]

Because there's no penalty. Imagine if there was no penalty for not paying income tax.

[03Lightningrocks]

I am going with, "Because they are not doing their jobs properly ".

[bdickens]

I'm going with "swamped."
http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archi ... 08_4563752

ONE STEP FORWARD, TWO STEPS BACK

During the week that ended Friday, DPS said it processed 1,043 original and renewal applications but received 1,871 requests.

[mr.72]

"swamped" doesn't cut it.

There is a purpose to the 60 day legal requirement. The purpose is so that the State cannot unduly delay these applications, with whatever excuse "swamped" or otherwise.

The reason they do not follow the 60 day law is that there is no penalty. There is in fact no validity to the law because there is nothing to hold them accountable. The law would be meaningful if it said something like "You are permitted to carry a concealed handgun upon receipt of your license, or 60 days from the date of application submittal, whichever comes first".

[mondo2000]

No penalties? You may sue them in civil court.

[lunchbox]

No penalties? You may sue them in civil court.

thats true but as chas told me when i asked him about it you will get your plastic before your case is heard

[mr.72]

Maybe a class-action suit could be used to hold the state accountable.

Damages would be at least the fee for the application, and probably some blanket "mental anguish" that one must endure by not being permitted to protect themselves during the time while they were unlawfully denied their CHL after the 60-day time limit.

[lunchbox]

Maybe a class-action suit could be used to hold the state accountable.

Damages would be at least the fee for the application, and probably some blanket "mental anguish" that one must endure by not being permitted to protect themselves during the time while they were unlawfully denied their CHL after the 60-day time limit.

i asked about that too that wont fly

[lunchbox]

i wish there was some way to fix the problem but it seems there is not one

[dukesean]

I personally think there are more effective ways of enacting change than trying a civil suit against a bureaucracy, but as I waited for my CHL I pondered the following:

What if you were waiting over 60 days for your CHL application and were robbed and/or injured by a criminal because you were unable to defend yourself? Could DPS be held partially responsible since they are supposed to issue the license within 60 days but failed to do so?

Again, I don't recommend suing DPS as I think that would be a waste of time and money, but just food for thought.

[lunchbox]

I personally think there are more effective ways of enacting change than trying a civil suit against a bureaucracy, but as I waited for my CHL I pondered the following:

What if you were waiting over 60 days for your CHL application and were robbed and/or injured by a criminal because you were unable to defend yourself? Could DPS be held partially responsible since they are supposed to issue the license within 60 days but failed to do so?

Again, I don't recommend suing DPS as I think that would be a waste of time and money, but just food for thought.

i thought the same thing
even still what about suing because we got robbed or injured due to not having a gun when the constitution grants us that right when we have to jump through all these hoops to do so it just a pile of junk these laws the system is broken and beyond mending

[Charles L. Cotton]

"swamped" doesn't cut it.

There is a purpose to the 60 day legal requirement. The purpose is so that the State cannot unduly delay these applications, with whatever excuse "swamped" or otherwise.

The reason they do not follow the 60 day law is that there is no penalty. There is in fact no validity to the law because there is nothing to hold them accountable. The law would be meaningful if it said something like "You are permitted to carry a concealed handgun upon receipt of your license, or 60 days from the date of application submittal, whichever comes first".

Both the reasons for the delays and the necessary legislative fixes have been covered in another thread. But let me ask this question; would you want the DPS to issue a CHL before the the complete background check is finished?

Chas.

[lunchbox]

but yes there is a but
thats not a valid excuse
there is no accountability there
i know what you mean though