TexasCHLforum.com

Interesting. I taught in a small district a couple of years ago where we all took turns as crossing guard in the afternoons. There was no training at all. They provided an orange traffic vest and a stop sign on a stick. I asked if I was going to be issued a firearm or if I was to provide my own? Obviously it was just their standard answer, not that they had any knowledge of the law.

Enjoy!
Jeff

A-R wrote:(b) A school crossing guard trained under this section:
(1) is not a peace officer; and
(2) may not carry a weapon while directing traffic in a school crossing zone.

IANAL but I thought "may not" means it's not authorized while "shall not" means it's prohibited. That follows the standard that "may" means it's allowed but not required while "shall" means it's required.

Consider when a peace officer "may arrest" versus "shall arrest" someone. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/D ... /CR.14.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

hillfighter wrote:

A-R wrote:(b) A school crossing guard trained under this section:
(1) is not a peace officer; and
(2) may not carry a weapon while directing traffic in a school crossing zone.

IANAL but I thought "may not" means it's not authorized while "shall not" means it's prohibited. That follows the standard that "may" means it's allowed but not required while "shall" means it's required.

Consider when a peace officer "may arrest" versus "shall arrest" someone. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/D ... /CR.14.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think you are getting "should" mixed up with "may." When talking about regulations and such the difference is usually between "should" and "shall." I don't think "may" is the equivalent of "should" and in this case "may not" is more like "shall not." When I use the word "may" and give someone the choice I will say something like, "You may or may not do that."

As a general rule, the laws are written using the words may and shall. May is permissive and indicates some specific behavior is allowed but not mandated while shall says that the behavior is required. A great example of the difference, that we should all read, is Article 14.01 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. A citizen or police officer MAY arrest for a felony or breach of the peace committed in his presence or view. A police officer SHALL arrest for a violation of a protective order committed in his presence or view.

But the inverse is that may not means the action is not permitted. The law is written to assume that people will obey and so, may not -meaning you have no permission to do so - also means that it is forbidden.

It probably helps to think of shall as the equivalent of will, as in what will happen. More like a statement of fact - the arrest will happen. And since they assume people obey the law, shall not would be a statement that something will not happen, which we know is not true. Most laws use may not to forbid the behavior. I cannot think of a case with "shall not" as the operative clause (there probably are some but I cannot think of any offhand).

By the way, since it was brought up in this thread earlier... many districts have their own police officers and police department. The officers are peace officers, and like other police officers, generally have all the statutory police powers in their jurisdiction, plus certain powers (i.e. the power to arrest someone who commits a felony in their view) outside of their jurisdiction.

Other districts enter into contracts with local jurisdictions to have officers assigned to a school or schools, as "school resource officers". They also are peace officers, and often write tickets to offenders (both students and occasionally, staff members) and have powers of arrest just like every other peace officer in the state. Often, their salaries are split between the district and the jurisdiction. Some districts even contract for both police officers (of the city in which the school is located) and county sheriff's deputies (I know that our district has done that for quite a while, recently deciding to drop the contracts for the police officers at our high school and have only sheriff's deputies - made the matters of which court to file any offenses into a bit easier). The officers are armed with guns and tasers, and have had to use tasers in at least one instance that I'm familiar with.

What is the penalty if a crossing guard violates the " may not carry a weapon while directing traffic in a school crossing zone" law?

Is it like our duty to present our CHL when an officer demands ID? We are required to do so, but the penalty for not complying has been removed.

Sure they could lose their job, but is there any other penalty attached?

A-R wrote:

RPB wrote:I see Municipal Police cars on School Property in my city a lot, though IMHO the School District Police should be there instead.

I think many (most) school district police or "school resource officers" in smaller comunities are simply a long-term "assignment" given to a municipal peace officer - some police are detectives, some are traffic, some are patrol, some are school officers etc

This is the case at our agency and we have over 130 sworn.