Applications spike for Texas concealed handgun permits

[MBGuy]

How soon can the process for renewing begin? Mine's about to expire in about 10 months, and now after reading all this, I'm beginning to think that there's no such thing as renewing too soon.

[israel67]

What would happen if a person who knew himself to be qualified, starting carrying concealed after the 90 day limit was up?

Or what would happen if someone applied for a CHL, didn't get it within the statuatory period, and was subsequently attacked and killed by a BG against whom he'd have been able to defend himself, if he'd been carrying? Could his relatives sue the state?

[Keith B]

What would happen if a person who knew himself to be qualified, starting carrying concealed after the 90 day limit was up?

IANAL, but I would think you would still be violating the law and arrested for UCW if found.

Or what would happen if someone applied for a CHL, didn't get it within the statuatory period, and was subsequently attacked and killed by a BG against whom he'd have been able to defend himself, if he'd been carrying? Could his relatives sue the state?

Anyone can sue for about anything, but proving his capability to defend himself would have actually saved his life would be hard to prove.

[mr.72]

The DPS should not hold ME accountable and ticket me for not following "speed guidelines" - how does that sound?

Actually that is quite legal. You will have to go to court in order to get such a ruling, and it will likely cost you far more than the speeding fine to defend your case.

The speed limit by law is whatever is "reasonable and prudent". The posted speed limit on the sign is considered the "reasonable and prudent" speed limit only in the absence of any other indicator of what speed should be "reasonable and prudent". The question then becomes what is a "reasonable and prudent" speed? Perhaps more, perhaps less, than what is on the sign.

I drive a sports car with excellent tires and brakes. I do not talk on the phone or eat or engage in other distractions while driving. I am very attentive and I have not had a ticket of any kind in over 10 years. Is the "reasonable and prudent" speed for me to drive on a given road at a given time the same as it is for a working mom driving a mini-van with worn-out tires, putting on her makeup and yelling at kids in the back seat while commuting to work? Or is my "reasonable and prudent" speed the same as that of a teenager with one week's worth of driving experience in a $800 car with an inspection sticker that's two years out of date? No way you can make the argument that one speed is reasonable and prudent for everyone.

You just have to be able to present evidence that supports your choice of a "reasonable and prudent" speed, which would convince a jury that the speed posted on the sign was not valid, given that there is other evidence that carries more weight.

of course as everyone says, "I am not a lawyer".

[snscott]

The DPS should not hold ME accountable and ticket me for not following "speed guidelines" - how does that sound?

Actually that is quite legal. You will have to go to court in order to get such a ruling, and it will likely cost you far more than the speeding fine to defend your case.

The speed limit by law is whatever is "reasonable and prudent". The posted speed limit on the sign is considered the "reasonable and prudent" speed limit only in the absence of any other indicator of what speed should be "reasonable and prudent". The question then becomes what is a "reasonable and prudent" speed? Perhaps more, perhaps less, than what is on the sign.

I drive a sports car with excellent tires and brakes. I do not talk on the phone or eat or engage in other distractions while driving. I am very attentive and I have not had a ticket of any kind in over 10 years. Is the "reasonable and prudent" speed for me to drive on a given road at a given time the same as it is for a working mom driving a mini-van with worn-out tires, putting on her makeup and yelling at kids in the back seat while commuting to work? Or is my "reasonable and prudent" speed the same as that of a teenager with one week's worth of driving experience in a $800 car with an inspection sticker that's two years out of date? No way you can make the argument that one speed is reasonable and prudent for everyone.

You just have to be able to present evidence that supports your choice of a "reasonable and prudent" speed, which would convince a jury that the speed posted on the sign was not valid, given that there is other evidence that carries more weight.

of course as everyone says, "I am not a lawyer".

Do you have a reference for those statements about POSTED speed limits being merely suggestions that can be "broken" and then fought in court?

[mr.72]

somewhere... I'll have to dig it up.

they are not "suggestions", they are the "reasonable and prudent" speeds, in the absence of other evidence of reasonable and prudent speeds.

maybe look in here http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/do ... 545.352.00

you probably will have little success in fighting it. however there is no real legal "speed limit".

[snscott]

somewhere... I'll have to dig it up.

they are not "suggestions", they are the "reasonable and prudent" speeds, in the absence of other evidence of reasonable and prudent speeds.

maybe look in here http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/do ... 545.352.00

you probably will have little success in fighting it. however there is no real legal "speed limit".

You need to review sections starting at SUBCHAPTER H. SPEED[0] RESTRICTIONS, § 545.351. MAXIMUM SPEED[0] REQUIREMENT
…
(b) Unless a special hazard exists that requires a slower
speed for compliance with Section 545.351(b), the following speeds
are lawful:
(1) 30 miles per hour in an urban district on a street
other than an alley and 15 miles per hour in an alley;
(2) 70 miles per hour in daytime and 65 miles per hour
in nighttime if the vehicle is a passenger car, motorcycle,
passenger car or light truck towing a trailer bearing a vessel, as
defined by Section 31.003, Parks and Wildlife Code, that is less
than 26 feet in length, passenger car or light truck towing a
trailer or semitrailer used primarily to transport a motorcycle, or
passenger car or light truck towing a trailer or semitrailer
designed and used primarily to transport dogs or livestock, on a
highway numbered by this state or the United States outside an urban
district, including a farm-to-market or ranch-to-market road;
(3) 60 miles per hour in daytime and 55 miles per hour
in nighttime if the vehicle is a passenger car or motorcycle on a
highway that is outside an urban district and not a highway numbered
by this state or the United States;
(4) 60 miles per hour outside an urban district if a
speed limit for the vehicle is not otherwise specified by this
section; or
(5) outside an urban district:
(A) 60 miles per hour if the vehicle is a school
bus that has passed a commercial motor vehicle inspection under
Section 548.201 and is on a highway numbered by the United States or
this state, including a farm-to-market road;
(B) 50 miles per hour if the vehicle is a school
bus that:
(i) has not passed a commercial motor
vehicle inspection under Section 548.201; or
(ii) is traveling on a highway not numbered
by the United States or this state; or
(C) 60 miles per hour in daytime and 55 miles per
hour in nighttime if the vehicle is a truck, other than a light
truck, or if the vehicle is a truck tractor, trailer, or
semitrailer, or a vehicle towing a trailer other than a trailer
described by Subdivision (2), semitrailer, another motor vehicle or
towable recreational vehicle.

Text of subsec. (b) as amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 663,
§ 2 and Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 1346, § 1
(b) Unless a special hazard exists that requires a slower
speed for compliance with Section 545.351(b), the following speeds
are lawful: (1) 30 miles per hour in an urban district on a street
other than an alley and 15 miles per hour in an alley;
(2) 70 miles per hour in daytime and 65 miles per hour
in nighttime if the vehicle is on a highway numbered by this state
or the United States outside an urban district, including a
farm-to-market or ranch-to-market road, except as provided by
Subdivision (4);
(3) 60 miles per hour in daytime and 55 miles per hour
in nighttime if the vehicle is on a highway that is outside an urban
district and not a highway numbered by this state or the United
States;
(4) outside an urban district:
(A) 60 miles per hour if the vehicle is a school
bus that has passed a commercial motor vehicle inspection under
Section 548.201 and is on a highway numbered by the United States or
this state, including a farm-to-market road;
(B) 50 miles per hour if the vehicle is a school
bus that:
(i) has not passed a commercial motor
vehicle inspection under Section 548.201; or
(ii) is traveling on a highway not numbered
by the United States or this state; or
(C) 60 miles per hour in daytime and 55 miles per
hour in nighttime if:
(i) the vehicle is a truck, other than a
light truck, or if the vehicle is a truck tractor, trailer, or
semitrailer; and
(ii) the vehicle is on a farm-to-market or
ranch-to-market road;
(5) on a beach, 15 miles per hour; or
(6) on a county road adjacent to a public beach, 15
miles per hour, if declared by the commissioners court of the
county.
(c) The speed limits for a bus or other vehicle engaged in
the business of transporting passengers for compensation or hire,
for a commercial vehicle used as a highway post office vehicle for
highway post office service in the transportation of United States
mail, for a light truck, and for a school activity bus are the same
as required for a passenger car at the same time and location.
(d) In this section:
(1) "Interstate highway" means a segment of the
national system of interstate and defense highways that is:
(A) located in this state;
(B) officially designated by the Texas
Transportation Commission; and
(C) approved under Title 23, United States Code.
(2) "Light truck" means a truck with a manufacturer's
rated carrying capacity of not more than 2,000 pounds, including a
pick-up truck, panel delivery truck, and carry-all truck.
(3) "Urban district" means the territory adjacent to
and including a highway, if the territory is improved with
structures that are used for business, industry, or dwelling houses
and are located at intervals of less than 100 feet for a distance of
at least one-quarter mile on either side of the highway.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995. Amended
by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 165, § 30.110(a), eff. Sept. 1,
1997; Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 1020, § 2, eff. Sept. 1, 1997;
Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 663, § 2, eff. June 18, 1999; Acts
1999, 76th Leg., ch. 739, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1999; Acts 1999,
76th Leg., ch. 1346, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1999.


§ 545.353. AUTHORITY OF TEXAS TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TO ALTER SPEED LIMITS. (a) If the Texas Transportation Commission
determines from the results of an engineering and traffic
investigation that a prima facie speed limit in this subchapter is
unreasonable or unsafe on a part of the highway system, the
commission, by order recorded in its minutes, and except as
provided in Subsection (d), may determine and declare:
(1) a reasonable and safe prima facie speed limit; and
(2) another reasonable and safe speed because of wet
or inclement weather.
(b) In determining whether a prima facie speed limit on a
part of the highway system is reasonable and safe, the commission
shall consider the width and condition of the pavement, the usual
traffic at the affected area, and other circumstances.
(c) A prima facie speed limit that is declared by the
commission under this section is effective when the commission
erects signs giving notice of the new limit. A new limit that is
enacted for a highway under this section is effective at all times
or at other times as determined.
(d) Except as provided by Subsection (h), the commission may
not:
(1) modify the rules established by Section
545.351(b);
(2) establish a speed limit of more than 70 miles per
hour; or
(3) increase the speed limit for a vehicle described
by Section 545.352(b)(5).
(e) The commission, in conducting the engineering and
traffic investigation specified by Subsection (a), shall follow the
"Procedure for Establishing Speed Zones" as adopted by the
commission. The commission may revise the procedure to accommodate
technological advancement in traffic operation, the design and
construction of highways and motor vehicles, and the safety of the
motoring public.
(f) The commission's authority to alter speed limits
applies:
(1) to any part of a highway officially designated or
marked by the commission as part of the state highway system; and
(2) both inside and outside the limits of a
municipality, including a home-rule municipality, for a
limited-access or controlled-access highway.
(g) For purposes of this section, "wet or inclement weather"
means a condition of the roadway that makes driving on the roadway
unsafe and hazardous and that is caused by precipitation, including
water, ice, and snow.
(h) Notwithstanding Section 454.352(b), the commission may
establish a speed limit of 75 miles per hour in daytime on a part of
the highway system if:
(1) the commission determines that 75 miles per hour
in daytime is a reasonable and safe speed for that part of the
highway system; and
(2) that part of the highway is located in a county
with a population density of less than 15 persons per square mile.
(h-1) Notwithstanding Section 545.352(b), the commission
may establish a speed limit of 80 miles per hour in daytime on a part
of Interstate Highway 10 or Interstate Highway 20 in Crockett,
Culberson, Hudspeth, Jeff Davis, Kerr, Kimble, Pecos, Reeves,
Sutton, or Ward County if the commission determines that 80 miles
per hour in daytime is a reasonable and safe speed for that part of
the highway.
(i) The speed limits authorized by Subsections (h) and (h-1)
do not apply to:
(1) trucks, other than light trucks and light trucks
pulling a trailer; and
(2) truck tractors, trailers, and semitrailers.
(j) The commission may not determine or declare, or agree to
determine or declare, a prima facie speed limit for environmental
purposes on a part of the highway system.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995. Amended
by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 165, § 30.111, eff. Sept. 1, 1997;
Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1518, § 1, eff. June 15, 2001; Acts
2003, 78th Leg., ch. 1331, § 25, eff. June 20, 2003.

Amended by:
Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 730, § 1, eff. June 17, 2005.

The statutes state clearly that there are "lawful" and therefore "unlawful" speeds and that such lawful speed limits will be posted. I did not see anywhere in there where it says someone can contest a "speeding" ticket on the grounds that they were traveling at a prudent speed for their skill level and vehicle type.

[snscott]

So, the point remains that there are indeed "legal speed limits" for which you can be considering in violation of the law if you exceed. And, you would be fined if caught doing so. On the other hand, Government agencies are apparently exempt from following the laws established specifically FOR THEM TO FOLLOW.

[neal6325]

Looking at this objectively first; What is DPS to do?

Options could be:

1) Fire, punish, repremand or other punitive consequences to individuals not performing at maxmimum levels or managment for not anticipating the growth.

2) Push a permit through as the deadline approaches regardless of the status of background or other processes that were not complete.

Option 1 would only slow the process even more as you would either have disgruntled employees or poorly trained employees as you replaced the terminated staff......not a viable option.

Option 2 could put a permit in the hands of someone who could jeopardize the program for all......not a logical proposition.

So, rather than engergize everyone with anger towards DPS, how about a viable suggestion that would improve the process. Not likely you can come up with one in the short run and you can bet DPS is working on a long term one. The staff working to process the permits are empathetic to the situation and they want you carrying as well. I have not met a DPS employee woring on the CHL staff (training, processing or any other capacity) yet that was not excited to see the increase as they believe in the value of the program. The problem is that the "Government" was not set up to react quickly to sudden changes such as an increase in applicants.

Does it stink for those waiting....yes....should you be as empathetic to DPS as they are for you....I am.

[lws380]

I was told recently by the processing center (for CHL) that the complaints have helped them get additional help.

[rm9792]

So, the point remains that there are indeed "legal speed limits" for which you can be considering in violation of the law if you exceed. And, you would be fined if caught doing so. On the other hand, Government agencies are apparently exempt from following the laws established specifically FOR THEM TO FOLLOW.

I was told by DPS they are allowed by law to exceed posted limits during their normal driving duties. I was told in a DD class that they were limited to 10mph over though unless responding or in a pursuit. Maybe Rothstein can weigh in. I personally have beaten speeding tickets (less than 10mph over/open road) by stating the conditions I was in and usually I was the only car on the road within sight. Law is not what matters in reality it is the person in the robe at the bench. Convince him and you go home.

[HerbM]

Looking at this objectively first; What is DPS to do?
...
2) Push a permit through as the deadline approaches regardless of the status of background or other processes that were not complete.
...
Option 2 could put a permit in the hands of someone who could jeopardize the program for all......not a logical proposition.

The more I thought about this objectively the more I realized this needed emphasis:

OPTION 2 is precisely what DPS should be REQUIRED to do -- practically no one who gets this far; who owns a firearm; takes the class; submits the prints; and submits the license is going to fail the background check for any substantial reason and so at day 60 they should be required to:

Seal it in plastic and ship it.

If it turns out to be wrong at 85 days, then revoke it and arrest the offender.

No ones rights should be infringed due to the bad behavior of others, nor due to the inability of the bureaucracy to complete the processing on time.

And it is ships after day 59 it should be overnighted -- we overpay for our RIGHTS anyway.

[BigBlueDodge]

I really don't understand the criticism for the delay in the DPS processing times. Yes, none of us likes the time it takes to get our application processed. I think we all agree on that. However, the current budget and staff were based on previous years where there was MUCH less traffic. Can you fault them for why they can't handle the current load, that NOBODY expected to happen?

At budget time, if DPS used historical evidence that showed on average they get 80K applications per year and it takes about 4-6 weeks to process an application, so they go ask the Legislature for funding to process 100K applications per year, and state that it will take 60 days to process the application (they added contingency in both the budget and processing time to be safe). Their budget and processing time was based on proven, historical data. Then the next year (because budgeting is done WELL in advance), they find that their expected volume has jumped to approximately 150K application per year. However they are setup to process to only 100K applications per year, but now are expected to process 150K applications in the same time, with the same budget and same amount of people. Is it their fault?

Do you people honestly think that they like the delay? Do you think that they haven't gone and asked for more money? I'm sure the Texas government has no shortage of departments that are coming to them asking for more money. The department that processes handgun licenses is miniscule, in terms of budgets in the overall scheme of things. If I had to guess, they are at the bottom of the totem pole and is probably lucky to get the funding they get. You have to remember that the DPS concealed handgun processing group is fighting with numerous other agencies asking for money as well, including

1. State police agencies asking for more money for raises for police and firefighters
2. School districts asking for more money for teacher salaries increases
3. Hospitals asking for more money to treat poor people who cannot pay for healthcare costs
4. Outreach programs asking for more money to buy air conditioning units for poor, elderly individuals who go without air conditioning during the summer
5. Community programs that create after school programs to keep kids involved, and way from drugs and crimes
6. Battered womens shelters that provide a safe haven for women abused by their husbands.

I think, we as CHL applicants, loose sight of the fact that there are other agencies that need the money more than DPS does. I don't like it, but I don't mind waiting a month longer and completely understand the constraints the DPS is working under.

I wish everyone would shift their frustration from the DPS to Milt Sparks or Tucker gun leather, or other popular custom holster makers, to reduce their delays and backlogs for their holsters. It kills me to think it is going to take 4 months to get a Milt Sparks VMII :)

[srothstein]

So, the point remains that there are indeed "legal speed limits" for which you can be considering in violation of the law if you exceed. And, you would be fined if caught doing so. On the other hand, Government agencies are apparently exempt from following the laws established specifically FOR THEM TO FOLLOW.

I was told by DPS they are allowed by law to exceed posted limits during their normal driving duties. I was told in a DD class that they were limited to 10mph over though unless responding or in a pursuit. Maybe Rothstein can weigh in. I personally have beaten speeding tickets (less than 10mph over/open road) by stating the conditions I was in and usually I was the only car on the road within sight. Law is not what matters in reality it is the person in the robe at the bench. Convince him and you go home.

Well, while not on topic, DPS or any other peace officer can exceed any posted speed limit by as much as they want at any time and not be breaking the law. Transportation Code Section 546.001 tells us which traffic laws do not apply to the police.

So, the laws actually do apply to the police UNLESS there is a specific law saying otherwise. Such as 46.15 saying 46.02 does not apply to police. Which gets us back on topic to the issuing of CHLs. The law is very specific and says that the license will be issued in a set time period. DPS must follow this law.

What do they do if there is not a full return done on the background check in that time? I believe Neal's option 2 is exactly what should be done. If they cannot deny a license in the time period, it should be issued. This is the spirit of a shall issue law. It also follows the precedent set by the federal government with the NICS check (if there is no answer in the 5 day limit, the buyer gets the gun). TABC follows this logic with our licenses. If we do not get the work done in time, we issue the license. If we do find later that there is a problem with the license, we revoke it.

DPS can do the same thing with a CHL. Issue the license when the time limit is up while they continue the background check. If it turns up something bad, revoke the license. Which leads me to question how often they have found something in the background check after the time limit has expired. In the TABC cases I know of, we were aware of the problem and investigating it when we issued the license. I would wonder if DPS gets surprised more often than we do.

[Mike1951]

I couldn't have said it better. As a matter of fact, I've been trying. I've got a response that I've been working that is guaranteed to make everyone mad that is waiting for their license. Probably never post it.

But it comes down to there ain't nothing you can do about it so quit whining!

The problem is budgeting and it can't be fixed until 2009.

I only take issue with one small point.

CHL licensing is supposed to be revenue neutral. So we shouldn't have to stand in line with schools, police, hospitals, or anyone else for funds.

There has to be a way to link funding to applications processed on a more timely basis.