In Defense of the DPS..

[vscott]

Vic, just want to clarify that not all of the numbered discussion points are my opinions. They were meant to represent common argumentative points frequently found on this forum. I have changed the numbered points to be more explicit.

I appreciate that you read the whole post. I had initially suspected that 90% of the folks would just skip past my points, and go straight to telling me I was wrong. Yes, it's long, but I wanted to explain my rationale. Way too many people posts make comments like

"DPS is full of crooks"
"DPS is mismanaging the program"

without ANY backing. I knew that my post would go against the convention on this forum, so I had to make sure it at least showed my logic and reasoning, rather than just pure anger and frustration. I'm not a DPS fan-boy, but rather just understand how businesses/programs get into tough situations. In a way, this is a good problem to have. I really like that our system is flooded with more law abiding citizens choosing to exercise their right to carry a firearm, which for me, makes this easier to tolerate.

BBD

I didn't believe that they were your opinion but the opinion of the masses (hopefully I didn't shoot the messenger). I was very impressed with your post, it was well thought out and well written. When anger and frustration set in sometimes reason and logic fall to the way-side. I agree, exercising our rights is outstanding. As for telling you that you are wrong, I would never say that, it would be rude. I might say you are misinformed but not wrong

[mr.72]

Having a time limit with no accountability is totally meaningless, apart from establishing the expectation when budget planning and hiring comes around.

I think what angers people the most is that many of us, maybe most of us on this forum, feel that charging a fee, mandating a class be taken at the applicant's expense, and requiring a license to begin with is an infringement of their 2nd Amendment rights. So rightfully they consider it piling insult upon injury whenever not only do they openly and brazenly infringe our rights, but they (being the State gov't as a whole, including DPS) have the audacity to take up to 6 months to process the application and issue the license and then complain about the increased workload. If they were not infringing our rights to begin with, there would be no workload to be increased.

As a practical matter, the State legislature is not likely to do anything to alleviate this problem except the following:
1. increase the license and renewal fee
2. increase funding to the CHL division of the DPS
3. increase or remove the time limit from the law altogether.

That's because this is the way government always works. What they need to do is scrap the entire system and rework it for a better system that doesn't become overwhelmed so easily but you know, the gov't on any level, never scraps and rewrites anything. They just throw money at it. Taxpayer money is free. A smarter system is not.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I agree, that part of the solution will require legislative intervention. However, that fix may not be what everyone thinks it would be. Personally, if DPS wised up, I think it would be easier for them just to try and change the Government Code from 60 days to 120days in the next legislative session, and give them more time (under the law), than it would be to go and try and ask the goverment for more money each year. From their perspective, that would be a simple no cost solution. Therefore, as the saying goes "be carefull what you wish for, because you just might get it"

I'm been warning people of this since this issue heated up.

Chas.