TexasCHLforum.com

In my short duration on this forum, I've read overwhelmingly the negative attitudes for the DPS, with criticism after criticism. So I thought that I would do something contrary, and post in defense of the DPS. While I am not admitting that the DPS blame free, I do feel that there is enough cause that warrants the delays and current situation. Here are some discussion points about common arguments found in this forum.

1. The argument of "DPS is required to process my application in 60 days"
Using "Texas Gun Owner's Guide" by Alan Korwin, Chapter 2, page 60 (ironically), he says

"Within 60 days of your local officials' receipt of your application (which would be within 60-90 days of when DPS got your application) DPS must either
1-Issue your license;
2-Notify you in writing that you've been denied (for reasons described under Application Denials below); or
3-Notify you that your application is delayed, stating why and how long the delay is likely to last. They have a total of 180 days from when they first received your materials in which to complete any lingering investigations."

There are a couple of additional points I would like to make, is his comment "Within 60 days of your local officials' receipt of your application". This does not mean when you mailed it from you house. Additionally, this may not mean when it was received in Austin. As far as I know there are typically shared mailrooms where all mail goes to and then is distributed to the specific departments. The actual DPS office may not receive your application until several days after it is marked as received from USPS, UPS, FedEx etc. When I completed my online application, I called in and asked for some questions. I was told, that after DPS prints up my forms to mail, they are sent to the mailroom and it could take up to a full week before the mail room is able to get them sent out. This was clear to me that DPS-CHL officees doesn't doesn't directly receive our applications, but rather some mailroom receives it and it ultimately makes it way to the CHL offices.

Second, I believe that DPS is currently doing #3. When people call into DPS, they are notified that their applications is delayed (due to backlog), and are given estimates on how long the delay will last (between 90-120 days). Contrary to most peoples understanding, Austin is only doing a portion of your application processing. DPS is only charged with doing the initial background check, and must forward you fingerprints to the FBI to have them checked, as well as forward you application to your local authorities for them to do their checks. As far as I know, DPS has no authority to force the FBI and your local authorities to speed up you application. People should start calling and complaining to the FBI and their local county authorities to get them to get their act together as well. But the DPS makes for a convienent, single point of blame.

2. The argument of "The DPS CHL office is mismanaging the process"
The government, along with pretty much any large corporate, does not run itself on a month to month basis. These entities are required to forecast and budget for the upcoming year, to cover their operating expenses and incoming revenue, etc. The key here, is that this activity is done in advance of the fiscal year. This means that sometime in 2007, DPS had to project how many CHL license applications they thought they would receive in 2008. Here are the numbers of licenses per year from DPS web site

2002 Active Licenses = 224,172
2003 Active Licenses = 239,863
2004 Active Licenses = 239,940
2005 Active Licenses = 248,874
2006 Active Licenses = 258,162
2007 Active Licenses = 288,909

Seeing those numbers, DPS could estimate the year over year growth in the licenses

2002-2003 Increase = 6.99%
2003-2004 Increase = 0.032%
2004-2005 Increase = 3.72%
2005-2006 Increase = 3.73%
2006-2007 Increase = 11.90%

I'm quite sure that DPS projected and budgeted for an appropriate amount of people to accomodate an application load that was in line with historical data. However, NO ONE anticipated that the increase in application would have occurred like they have. At this point in time, DPS was reported to have process 52K applications as of start of July (http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/d ... 1afcb.html). They only processed 30,747 for the WHOLE of 2007. So based on basic estimates, DPS had processed approximately 15K in middle of 2007, where as they are now processing 52K. That would represent over a 300% increase in load, where as statistics would suggest the increase should be between 3% - 12%.

3. The argument of "TX Government should give DPS-CHL more money"
Yes, this would definately help lower the time spent INSIDE the Austin based portion of the CHL process. However, those temp workers aren't going to make your local county authorities or the FBI do their jobs any faster. Second, the Texas government has no shortage of agencies asking for more funding. The Texas CHL program is miniscule in the overall scheme of things, and we as CHL holders/applicants represent a neglible amount of voting power when compared to other groups. Just as we are complaing for more money, so are other groups. Let me ask you this, do YOU feel the CHL programs needs more money over other groups such as

* School districts asking for pay raises for teachers
* Law enforcement agencies asking for more money for pay raises, and to cover increasing overtime pay
* Non-Profit agencies looking for money to expand their after school programs to keep kids out of gangs and drugs
* Non-Profit agencies looking to buy window AC units for poor, elderly people who have no AC during the summer months
* Mass Transit systems fighting with increasing operating expenses as cost of gas causes more people to stop driving and start taking trains and buses
* County Hospitals providing free health care to individuals who cannot pay for it

I can guarantee you that groups, similar to the above, are in Austin daily asking for more funding. While the CHL office could use more money (who couldn't), I certainly think that there are MORE groups that need that money than we do. I mean, the ONLY impact to us is that it is taking longer to get our cards. For other groups, it may mean that they won't be able to do things PERIOD.

4. The argument of "The government is corrupt and not looking after the people"
Contrary to many on this forum, I do NOT think DPS is out to get me, nor deny my right to protect myself. I firmly believe that DPS is aware of the current state of frustration, and I know that they are trying to do what ever they can to resolve it. I find it absurd that people post that DPS is doing nothing to help out the problem. Ultimately, there are paid people that are working down there in Austin, and NO ONE wants to lose their job. Who wants to tell the data entry person that is working long days, trying to enter 30-100 applications per day that they aren't doing their job. Who wants to tell the people that answer the phone, and listen to complaint after complaint after complaint that their group isn't doing their job. What about the senior management. I can assure you that the guys running the program are feeling the heat, and looking for every opportunity that they can to make it better. After all, their jobs are on the line, and I doubt that they would be willing to do nothing, and risk their job.

Second, I find it hypocrytical how many people will accuse the goverment of being corrupt, dysfunctional, not working for the people, and then reach out to their State Representative, Senator, Congressman to get their application pushed to the front of the line. What has been demonstrated to me is that the attitude is really that "the government is corrupt, not serving the people, unless they can get my application pushed to the top, and then they are okay".

5.What is the TRUE impact to you
I've read many posts that say "DPS is endangering my life by delaying my application", "DPS is violating my civil liberties", etc. Let's take all of the emotion and frustration and put that aside, and let's talk about the REAL impact. The ONLY difference between today and when you get your CHL is that you wil be able to carry your gun on you. You already have the right to carry you gun in your home, your place of business (if you own it), and your vehicle. We already have the ability to arm ourselves for the majority of each day, without the CHL. We are not talking about a night and day difference of being unarmed 0% of the time to armed 100% the time. We are talking about a difference of being armed 75% of the time versus 100% of the time. Even with a CHL, most likely you will not be able to be armed 100% of the time, given how business can post 30.06 and your company can prohibit employees from bringing guns into the workplace.

Realistically, we are talking about people getting upset for having to wait 30-40 days longer than usual. What is the real cost of those 30-40 days to you? You've managed to live for XX years (insert your age) thus far, does 30-40 days represent a significant risk to you?

The reality of it is if DPS originally said it would take up to 120 days to process your application, instead of the 60 days, nobody would have been complaining. Right now it appears to many that their life will get significantly more threatened after the 60 day mark, where as if DPS originally said 120 days, then you wouldn't even be thinking twice about your application right now, and life would be same as usual, no more dangerous.

6. Do you hold yourself to the same standard you are holding DPS to
Many people are getting hung up on the "DPS says they should process in 60 days, regardless" argument. There is no significant argument WHY that is a problem, other than just because DPS said they be done by then and they didn't. I've yet for someone to give me a compelling reason why going past 60 days is worse than going past 30 days or 90 days for that matter. It's becoming a "Just because" type of argument. Now let me turn the table back on you. You are generally required to pay your bills, credit card statements, mortage withing 30 days. How many on this forum have never went past the due date on their bills? Our creditors tell us that we have 30 days to pay. What if we miss? Do you expect your creditor for having no tolerance for you missing payment, that we do of the DPS? Most of us despise bill collectors who come after us after we get behind on payments. We often justify the non payment as we aren't in the wrong, that we just encountered hard times and the bill collectors need to be more lenient to us. We call them unfair. But we are doing the exact same thing to DPS right now. We are giving them NO tolerances what so ever to accomodate ANY spikes in behavior. We are sending in the bill collectors (state representatives) to collect for us, even though we personally would despise the same think happening to us.

7. The argument of "DPS is completely to blame for the long processing times"
The current majority of the discussions put the blame completely on DPS. But if you keep reading you will see many cases where WE, CHL applications actually complicated the scenarios. We misspelled something on the applications, we didn't send in all of the supporting documentation for that arrest some time ago, or we flat out didn't understand the process. All of these examples caused delays, but we were so quickly to dismiss errors on our part and continue to blame DPS. For example, there is one recent story of a CHL application that did not understand the process, submitted two different applications, without the full paperwork and payment in either application and yet he was ready to call his state representative to report DPS taking so long. Granted that these instance are in a smaller majority, but they do happen. Should DPS still be held to their time commitments if error on your part introduces delays in the process?

8. Not happy with the wait, you have alternatives! You DON'T have to wait as long
At this point in time, if you have done anything related to CHL, you know about the delays before you even attend your class or submit your application. There have been so many news reports and articles written that you would have to be disconnected from any news media to not know. But even if you didn't know, I'm pretty sure that when you stepped into your CHL class, one of the first topics the instructor talked about was the huge delays in the application, so you were warned then. So at the point you are ready to submit your application you already know about the delay, and yet we still complain. Let's assume I go to work, and I hear of a wreck on the radio on my route to work, but choose to ignor the warning. Then while driving I see one of those DPS electrnic signs that says there is a wreck, and to expect delays, but yet I choose to ignore it. Then I finally hit the jam, and I start complaining and choose to blame the police for not doing their job faster and clearing the wreck. I know that police probably have guidelines to get the wreck cleared as fast as possible, but in this case this was a bigger than expected wreck, and they were taking longer to clear it. Plus they are having to wait for the Fire Department which was behind fighting fires, and the Crime Scene investigation unit. They are stuck waiting. I was fully aware that there was a wreck, with significant delays, but yet I chose to continue on my path, but yet I gripe at the police for not doing their job.

So let me ask you this. If you knew there was an alternative route to get you to work (in our example) in less time, at less cost, would you take it? Well, you have that route. It's called an out of state CHL license. You have the opportunity to get a Utah CFP or Florida CHL and will most likely get it before you get a Texas CHL. If the delays are a concern, why wouldn't you go an alternate path for a faster, and cheaper license (Utah is only $65 versus $140 for texas).



In Conclusion....
<insert lawyer voice>So people of the court, we are gathered today to bear witness to the DPS behavior for the last six month. Based on the facts, I ....... well enough of that. I don't do lawyer speak very well, and I bet Charles could shred my closing statement in a heart beat.

So despite seeing the daily posts condemning DPS, I thought I would try and post something in defense of DPS. I will state that I DO NOT WORK FOR DPS. I simply understand how unpredicatable the world is, and that everyone works under constraints. Personally, while I don't like it, it doesn't bother me too much to have to wait about a month longer than I normally would have. I don't think having to wait 30-40 days longer (on average) is unreasonable. If the wait time was 1 year, then this would be a different story.


Okay, grenade has been thrown out there. I'm going to duck for cover.......

I have defended DPS in the past, particularly based the fact of their fixed, two-year budget cycle.

I do have some quibbles:

True, DPS has no control over FBI background checks. But DPS is taking more than 60 days to start processing applications in the Austin office. DPS management has admitted that their staff did not match the workload.

The cost of the CHL, which AFAICT is the highest in the country, was supposed to pay for processing applications. It does not work that way. All the money goes to the general fund, and the DPS budget is set according to estimated costs every other year.

The state does the latter with a lot of fees. The sales tax on sporting goods is supposed to go to Texas Parks and Wildlife. Some state parks are closed because TPWS cannot afford to pay people to collect entry fees. That is nuts, and it has to stop.

BTW, at risk of getting off-topic, Texas has hundreds of these special fees and funds. I suspect many or most of them are not doing what they were intended to do. Educate yourself about it.

- Jim

Where as i see your point on most of what you said. My problem is that why are they not held to the same accountability that we the citizens, that they are supposed to serve are held to?

For example if there is a fine or fee of some sort that almost any regular person may have to pay by a certain time for some reason to the state or dps. If we are late even by a couple days much less, multiple weeks or months as in this case. They do not hesitate to fine us more or even arrest us. I can guarantee you that if we did the same they are doing now and you advise them, "well we had some extra expenses that caused us to not be able to pay by this time", or " we were extra busy this month" they will not sit back and say "oh it is ok, we understand" and give you more time. They will advise you that the laws and regulations are set where they are for a reason and they can't be changed, and they couldn't care less.

I understand the situation i just hate the double standard that we are held accountable for so much, but when the government that is supposed to serve us, breaks their own laws or regulations it is ok to make excuses and we are supposed to sit back and understand.

I don't know what could or should be done about it right now, but even if i did i wouldn't be able to enact it anyways as i have no power. I just think that there should be some accountability and, or consequences of some sort when the they don't hold up their end of the deal.

By the way i can't type it exactly as it is written as my packet is sitting in a big pile in Austin, but i seem to remember a page in my packet saying something along the lines; that if we falsify any info on our apps we could be prosecuted. But they can't be prosecuted for falsifying their half of the application.

People who move are busy. It's a hectic time.

If DPS can take 120 or 180 days to process an application, why shouldn't TAXPAYERS get the same grace period before they have to submit a change of address?

But, When you mail in your package with your check...your check is cashed with in 10 days..They open it for that.

Sorry for the long post, but it's just my .02

BigBlueDodge wrote: "Within 60 days of your local officials' receipt of your application (which would be within 60-90 days of when DPS got your application) DPS must either
1-Issue your license;
2-Notify you in writing that you've been denied (for reasons described under Application Denials below); or
3-Notify you that your application is delayed, stating why and how long the delay is likely to last. They have a total of 180 days from when they first received your materials in which to complete any lingering investigations."

OK, if the above is true -- then where did we get the impression DPS has 60 days? (for new license)

Bold type added by me.

The answer is here:

GC §411.177. ISSUANCE OR DENIAL OF LICENSE.

(a) The department shall issue a license to carry a concealed handgun to an applicant if the applicant meets all the eligibility requirements and submits all the application materials. The department may issue a license to carry handguns only of the categories indicated on the applicant's certificate of proficiency issued under Section 411.189. The department shall administer the licensing procedures in good faith so that any applicant who meets all the eligibility requirements and submits all the application materials shall receive a license. The department may not deny an application on the basis of a capricious or arbitrary decision by the department.

(b) The department shall, not later than the 60th day after the date of the receipt by the director's designee of the completed application materials:

(1) issue the license;

(2) notify the applicant in writing that the application was denied:

(A) on the grounds that the applicant failed to qualify under the criteria listed in Section 411.172;

(B) based on the affidavit of the director's designee submitted to the department under Section 411.176(b); or

(C) based on the affidavit of the qualified handgun instructor submitted to the department under Section 411.189(c); or

(3) notify the applicant in writing that the department is unable to make a determination regarding the issuance or denial of a license to the applicant within the 60-day period prescribed by this subsection and include in that notification an explanation of the reason for the inability and an estimation of the amount of time the department will need to make the determination.

(c) Failure of the department to issue or deny a license for a period of more than 30 days after the department is required to act under Subsection (b) constitutes denial.

(d) A license issued under this subchapter is effective from the date of issuance.


I agree we need to be patient and cut the state some slack for being swamped. Having said that, lets be honest and acknowledge the state (local, state, federal) would not cut us the same slack. It's not fair, but it's the way it is. As an old boss of mine used to say, "it is what it is". They are not holding up their end of the bargain. As citizens we (through our reps) either change the statute, or give the DPS the resources to fix the problem. I think they should be given the flexibility to hire more when demand is high, but like any business, when (if) demand slacks off, they can, and should cut staff accordingly.

BigBlueDodge:

I agree with much of what you said. I have long been critical of DPS for slow handling of CHL applications, and I do think the increasing length of the delays is getting more and more people understandably upset. But I don't think DPS deserves as much condemnation as it is receiving. The problem does require a legislative fix that includes more money, but there are other changes that can and will help dramatically.

DPS's contention that delays only recently started and that they are the result of unexpected increases in the number of applications is untrue. Yes, applications are up, but DPS has been slow on applications for several years. The only thing that has happened in recent months is that the delays have gotten worse, due to increased applications.

The 60 to 90 days timetable begins the day DPS gets the application in it's Austin office. Alan Korwin's summary is misleading to some extent. The DPS has to send the file to it's "local designee" not to just any local authority. Plus, the Gov't Code requires that local designee complete the application not later than the 60th day after the DPS receives the application. Finally, although the DPS can, under very limited circumstances, take up to 180 days to process an application, the reason cannot be a backlog. There has to be some doubt as to the accuracy of the information on the application.

The controlling language from the Gov't Code is below.

Chas.

Tex. Gov't Code §411.176 wrote:§ 411.176. REVIEW OF APPLICATION MATERIALS. (a) On
receipt of the application materials by the department at its
Austin headquarters, the department shall conduct the appropriate
criminal history record check of the applicant through its
computerized criminal history system. Not later than the 30th day
after the date the department receives the application materials,
the department shall forward the materials to the director's
designee in the geographical area of the applicant's residence so
that the designee may conduct the investigation described by
Subsection (b).

• (b) The director's designee as needed shall conduct an
  additional criminal history record check of the applicant and an
  investigation of the applicant's local official records to verify
  the accuracy of the application materials. The scope of the record
  check and the investigation are at the sole discretion of the
  department, except that the director's designee shall complete the
  record check and investigation not later than the 60th day after the
  date the department receives the application materials. The
  department shall send a fingerprint card to the Federal Bureau of
  Investigation for a national criminal history check of the
  applicant. On completion of the investigation, the director's
  designee shall return all materials and the result of the
  investigation to the appropriate division of the department at its
  Austin headquarters. The director's designee may submit to the
  appropriate division of the department, at the department's Austin
  headquarters, along with the application materials a written
  recommendation for disapproval of the application, accompanied by
  an affidavit stating personal knowledge or naming persons with
  personal knowledge of a ground for denial under Section 411.172.
  The director's designee in the appropriate geographical area may
  also submit the application and the recommendation that the license
  be issued. On receipt at the department's Austin headquarters of
  the application materials and the result of the investigation by
  the director's designee, the department shall conduct any further
  record check or investigation the department determines is
  necessary if a question exists with respect to the accuracy of the
  application materials or the eligibility of the applicant, except
  that the department shall complete the record check and
  investigation not later than the 180th day after the date the
  department receives the application materials from the applicant.

Okay, in no apparent order

baseballguy2001 wrote:OK, if the above is true -- then where did we get the impression DPS has 60 days? (for new license)

Bold type added by me.

The answer is here:

GC §411.177. ISSUANCE OR DENIAL OF LICENSE
..

(b) The department shall, not later than the 60th day after the date of the receipt by the director's designee of the completed application materials:

The designee is a local authority to you, and not you. The CHL department has up to 30 days to send it to them, and they must issue the license up to 60 days after the designee's receive i. This is my understanding from a post Charles made earlier (will have to dig is up). I could be wrong on that. I'm going by Alan Korwin's book.

billfromtx wrote:But, When you mail in your package with your check...your check is cashed with in 10 days..They open it for that.

As I would expect them to. They will want to verify the funds before they do their work. Remember, part of your money is going to pay the FBI for the fingerprints, and I bet the FBI wants their money before they do any work. As I read in another post, the FBI does 7000 fingerprint checks a day, so I guarantee they have no time to do checks that they aren't getting paid for. Way back when, when I applied for college, I had to pay an application fee before they would even look at my application for admittance. When I had LASIK done on my eyes, I had to pay for the service before I ever had it done.

boomerang wrote:People who move are busy. It's a hectic time.

Well, quite honestly I don't know what you are trying to say... Not sure how to reply either....how bout "monkey grass foo foo nuggets"...

boomerang wrote:If DPS can take 120 or 180 days to process an application, why shouldn't TAXPAYERS get the same grace period before they have to submit a change of address?

bigdave238 wrote:Where as i see your point on most of what you said. My problem is that why are they not held to the same accountability that we the citizens, that they are supposed to serve are held to?

I don't disagree. I'm not absolving DPS of that apparent double standard. I do believe that a lesson learned is that DPS should way away with a different attitude on how they enforce their rules to us.

seamusTX wrote:True, DPS has no control over FBI background checks. But DPS is taking more than 60 days to start processing applications in the Austin office.

Fully agree with you. I didn't say it was right that it's taking them so long, I merely pointed out why I think they have sufficient justification why.

Okay, headed back for cover...<jumps back into fox hole....>

Charles L. Cotton wrote:BigBlueDodge:

I agree with much of what you said. I have long been critical of DPS for slow handling of CHL applications, and I do think the increasing length of the delays is getting more and more people understandably upset. But I don't think DPS deserves as much condemnation as it is receiving. The problem does require a legislative fix that includes more money, but there are other changes that can and will help dramatically.

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"

BigBlueDodge wrote:I agree, that part of the solution will require legislative intervention. Personally, I think it would be easier for DPS just to push 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. From their perspective, that would be a simple no cost solution.

If they do that, I will encourage people who ask me about concealed carry to get a Utah or Florida or other license instead.

boomerang wrote:

BigBlueDodge wrote:I agree, that part of the solution will require legislative intervention. Personally, I think it would be easier for DPS just to push 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. From their perspective, that would be a simple no cost solution.

If they do that, I will encourage people who ask me about concealed carry to get a Utah or Florida or other license instead.

Aaah, but you assume that DPS WANTS to run a CHL department. I can't comment on what their real opinion is, but look at it their way, they don't make an "profit" on the program. The money recieved pays for their operating expense, and the extra is put into the general fund of the TX government. If anything, this program could be argued to be a nuisance for them. Would you want to run a business where you knew you weren't going to make any profit, and had to put up with constant complaints and criticism? It would not surprise me at this point that DPS wouldn't appreciate you do explore alternate routes, so as to ease the backlog on them.

Every bureaucracy wants to expand its size and budget and increase its scope. It is like a law of nature. DPS is not going to disown the CHL division.

- Jim

BigBlue you make some very compelling arguments and while when read fast they sound good but I can never pass an opportunity to add my two cents, so here goes...

1. DPS is required to process my application in 60 days

I don’t believe that he DPS mailroom holds on to the applications for “several days� after it is received, one or two maybe but not several. In my opinion, citing their use of #3 implies (at least to me) that they make contact with you, not notify you when you call in with a question. So by that example if I never call them and it takes 180 days for them to enter my application in the system they are “covered� because I didn’t call them so they could notify me? Doesn’t hold water to me. BTW, I contacted them today and was told, quite politely, that the statute had changed and they now have 90 days. I asked when that happened and Lauren didn’t know when but they were issued a memo. Has anybody heard of that change?

I do believe that the X number of days to process the application includes the “out of office� process as well. Heck, I’ve gotten security clearances in the military quicker than that. Again, no water.

As a side note. This whole getting a CHL for me started with my wife. She belongs to a Moms Meet-up Forum here in Pearland. She related a story to me from the group. It seems that a lady had a “friend of a friend� story where a woman was in our area at a local mall putting her kids in the car. A man approached her, stated he had a gun and wanted the keys to her car. She turned and threw the keys over the car as far as she could. He ran away, she called the police. Happy ending. It was then and there we decided she would get a CHL. We checked around, found the PSC Range in Friendswood and decided to join. The day of the orientation she was unable to attend, so I did. I inquired about CHL classes and was directed to Charles Cotton. The email notice he sent came with such short notice that we both could not attend (we have 2 small children and couldn’t find a babysitter). Again, we decided that I would go first and her later. Charles told us about the backlog and 40% increase in applications and to expect delays. But as of this email, my application has been sitting in Austin for 87 days. I called today and spoke to a very nice lady, Lauren. I told her that I have not received a PIN and was told that my application has not been entered into the system and that it was going through a “process� to be entered. She described the process as making sure everything was there, signed and legible. She assured me that this “process� would prevent rejections and that they were just now entering early April applications into the system, so mine should be entered within the next few weeks and I would receive my PIN. If I give them the benefit of doubt and say two weeks, my application would have been sitting in their office for 101 days before the 60 day process clock starts. She states it takes 30 days, or so, for the background checks and then the final process takes some time. To me, regardless of how they have staffed themselves that is unacceptable. Now here is the kicker; On 6/29, my wife applied on-line for her CHL. We paid the $140 and went to bed. Yesterday, she received her packet and a PIN. Lets see that’s only 7 business days to get a PIN, and I’m at 87, it just doesn’t seem logical.


2. The DPS CHL office is mismanaging the process

I wholeheartedly agree with you. there is no way they could have predicted the increase of applications this year. To believe that they could have or should have is ludicrous. Government budgets are based on statistics and trends, sometimes there is a shortage and sometimes there is a surplus.

3. TX Government should give DPS-CHL more money

I agree with you on this as well. There are far more agencies that could use the money more, but as stated above, the process includes both in and outside the DPS office.



4. The government is corrupt and not looking after the people

I truly believe that by and large they are not corrupt do look after us but they establish the processes and make the rules. If they see that they cannot work to those processes then change them. I know they sense the frustration but I do have to give it to the ones I have spoken to, they are polite. I don’t believe that anyone’s job is on the line and no one will get fired but there are a lot of smart people in Austin and I just wonder if things could be handled better. If it were a company that was failing to provide a service as advertised, they would lose business, believe me I know, I work for Boeing and you’d have to be under a rock to not see what failures to deliver plane orders can do to a business.

I have written my representative, twice, regarding this matter. And like the DPS, I am still waiting for an answer.

5. What is the TRUE impact to you

Only a heightened sense of frustration. I don’t feel any more endangered today than I felt in April and don’t feel my civil liberties are being violated. At least we CAN get a CHL where several states you can’t.

IF DPS stated the process would take 120 days to process, I wouldn’t complain, but they didn’t.

6. Do you hold yourself to the same standard you are holding DPS to

Yes I do. If I am late in paying a bill, I have to pay a late fee. If I am very late in paying a bill, my credit report goes out the window. While it may not be entirely their fault, the DPS is not being held accountable for delays many people are feeling.


7. DPS is completely to blame for the long processing times

That’s a loaded statement. If the delay in my application is due to an error on my part, that’s my bad. If the delay in starting or misunderstanding the application process is my fault, who can I blame but me. But when my application is sitting there as long as it has been who else is to blame. I know that they know it is there based on my call today so one would think that if Lauren saw that my application was received and going through the initial process, they would be able to contact those individuals when they sit around for 2 or 3 weeks and inform them that there would be a delay in their process (ties into your item # 1 above for option 3).

8. You have alternatives. You DON'T have to wait as long

As stated above, I was informed about the delays at the CHL class and probably wouldn’t be writing this if I at least had a PIN. Then I would know that my application is being processed, background checks and whatever else they do with it.

As for getting an out of state permit, I have never really thought about it.

What if the wait time was 6 months, would that bother you?

Respectfully

Vic

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. This sends a notice to the anti-gun crowd that, contrary to their believes, the public does want to arm themself.

vscott wrote:What if the wait time was 6 months, would that bother you?

Yes, I do believe that 6 months would be borderline to me. But as I stated earlier, had I known that it would be 6 months I would not put myself in that position and pursued a out of state license first (which I have, see my signature)

Charles L. Cotton wrote:BigBlueDodge:

I agree with much of what you said. I have long been critical of DPS for slow handling of CHL applications, and I do think the increasing length of the delays is getting more and more people understandably upset. But I don't think DPS deserves as much condemnation as it is receiving. The problem does require a legislative fix that includes more money, but there are other changes that can and will help dramatically.

It would not surprise me at all if the legislative fix turns out to be giving DPS 180 days or more to process applications. They will say that experience has shown that is how much time they need and the statutes could very well be changed to allow for this.