New Law in Texas supports CAP

[BrannG]

Hey everyone, just wanted to share a bill that just passed.

83(R) SB 1536 (Texas) - ftp://ftp.legis.state.tx.us/bills/83R/billtext/html/senate_bills/SB01500_SB01599/SB01536I.htm

Here is some interesting tid-bits on here.

SECTION 3.04. Section 411.1881(a), Government Code, is
amended to read as follows:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, a person may not be required to complete the range instruction portion of a handgun proficiency course to obtain or renew a concealed handgun license issued under this subchapter if the person:
(1) is currently serving in or is honorably discharged from:
(A) the army, navy, air force, coast guard, or marine corps of the United States or an auxiliary service or reserve unit of one of those branches of the armed forces; or
(B) the state military forces, as defined by Section 437.001 [431.001]; and
(2) has, within the five years preceding the date of the person's application for an original or renewed license, as applicable, completed a course of training in handgun proficiency or familiarization as part of the person's service with the armed forces or state military forces.

- What this is saying is that CAP / Coast Guard Auxiliary members can now obtain concealed handguns and keep their license without extended proficiency training past the initial courses.

SECTION 3.05. Section 411.1951(a), Government Code, is
amended to read as follows:
(a) In this section, "veteran" means a person who:
(1) has served in:
(A) the army, navy, air force, coast guard, or
marine corps of the United States;
(B) the state military forces as defined by
Section 437.001 [431.001]; or
(C) an auxiliary service of one of those branches
of the armed forces; and
(2) has been honorably discharged from the branch of
the service in which the person served.

- Vet status in the State of Texas offers some great perks - and is now being extended to CAP and Coast Guard Auxiliary members. Details on what this means exactly haven't come to light, but I know that as of now, all Texas Military Forces retired service members, including the Texas State Guard, will now have honors and grave services. (if discharged under honorable terms)

The bill is also stating that all active, reserve and retired Texas Military Forces as well as CAP will have access to BX/PX within the State - I believe this just the Post Exchanges on STATE OWNED PROPERTY (such as the National Guard camps around the state)

By all means - lets talk it over. As I think this a great change for the Coast Guard Auxiliary (as they can be pulled into active duty to serve when needed) I don't see how this is at all appropriate for CAP. Only because of the Vet status really. Does CAP really need a vet status and thus, vet benefits under Texas Law? I understand and respect that this change was really aimed at the Texas State Guard, as they are considered an active military force here in Texas, and highly respected here as well, and due to the fact an officer in the TXSG is in fact a commissioned officer by the Governor of Texas and is saluted by federalized forces, CAP is not under this regard at all.

That is just my 2 cents. But on the plus side - it is nice to see such laws pass that support auxiliary forces.

[abdsp51]

Hey everyone, just wanted to share a bill that just passed.

83(R) SB 1536 (Texas) - ftp://ftp.legis.state.tx.us/bills/83R/billtext/html/senate_bills/SB01500_SB01599/SB01536I.htm

The bill is also stating that all active, reserve and retired Texas Military Forces as well as CAP will have access to BX/PX within the State - I believe this just the Post Exchanges on STATE OWNED PROPERTY (such as the National Guard camps around the state)

If it's a guard area who knows but on a federal yard this will not fly.  It's ultimately as least for the AF access is granted at the discretion of the Wing Commander.   And no amount of waving state law at him/her is going to fix that. 

[capmaj]

Plus I'm a little curious as to how/why ones CAP training/status qualifies that person to be excused from firearms training? I wonder if the Bill drafters truly understand what CAP is?

[Angus]

Plus I'm a little curious as to how/why ones CAP training/status qualifies that person to be excused from firearms training? I wonder if the Bill drafters truly understand what CAP is?

Perhaps they had the CG Aux more in mind while drafting this.

[jeders]

CAP has long shared benefits of the real military in regard to the conceal carry law (i.e. not having to pay the state fee for processing), and so this change is just staying in line with existing law. However, you still have to do some form of training, if you read a little further down.

(2) has, within the five years preceding the date of the person's application for an original or renewed license, as applicable, completed a course of training in handgun proficiency or familiarization as part of the person's service with the armed forces or state military forces.

CAP does not offer any firearms training to its senior members, and so CAP members living in Texas seeking to obtain or renew a conceal carry permit will still have to complete the range training portion.

As for the second part, that particular portion of the Texas Government Code is strictly dealing with reduction of fees for conceal carry permits, nothing more. It does not give CAP members PX access, it does not give them burial/grave rights, it does not give them any other benefits.

[RiverAux]

That is just nuts in regards to both CAP and CG Aux.  Both have regs against being armed.  Heck, the CG Aux once had a local program where Auxies with prior service helped maintain CG weapons (if I recall correctly) and even that got shut down a while back.

FYI, CG Auxies can't be put on active duty.  There is a provision in federal law for the creation of a "Temporary Reserve" at the discretion of the Commandant, but if it was used like it was in WWII it wouldn't just be open to Auxies. 

[Flying Pig]

The legislation reads as if the author assumed an "auxiliary service" meant "Firearms proficient and trained"

This reads interesting though... that word "and" seems to imply an auxilarist who was also honorably discharged from the service.  Do you need to have had prior military service to qualify as an auxilarist?

(C) an auxiliary service of one of those branches
of the armed forces; and
(2) has been honorably discharged from the branch of
the service in which the person served.

[lordmonar]

Plus I'm a little curious as to how/why ones CAP training/status qualifies that person to be excused from firearms training? I wonder if the Bill drafters truly understand what CAP is?

I'm curious as to how/why ones military training qualifies that person to be excused from firearms training?  I wonder if the Bill drafters truly understand what the military is.

[RiverAux]

The legislation reads as if the author assumed an "auxiliary service" meant "Firearms proficient and trained"

This reads interesting though... that word "and" seems to imply an auxilarist who was also honorably discharged from the service.  Do you need to have had prior military service to qualify as an auxilarist?

(C) an auxiliary service of one of those branches
of the armed forces; and
(2) has been honorably discharged from the branch of
the service in which the person served.

The way I read that is that they're assuming that "honorably discharged" is something that happens to Aux members just like it does to those in the real military services.  Keep in mind that this is in the context of the definition of a veteran.  I wonder what other parts of Texas law use that definition as their base that may now apply to CAP and CG Aux.  Preferences in hiring, for example. 

[Critical AOA]

Plus I'm a little curious as to how/why ones CAP training/status qualifies that person to be excused from firearms training? I wonder if the Bill drafters truly understand what CAP is?

It doesn't.  Read this part.

and
(2) has, within the five years preceding the date of the person's application for an original or renewed license, as applicable, completed a course of training in handgun proficiency or familiarization as part of the person's service with the armed forces or state military forces.

If you have never "completed a course of training in handgun proficiency or familiarization as part of the person's service with the armed forces or state military forces" within the past 5 years then this does not apply to you.

Looks like many just read the word "auxiliary" and got all excited. 

[RRLE]

I am wondering if too much is being read into "auxiliary service". It could be that CAP and the USCG Aux aren't meant at all. During WWII and after, some of the auxiliary services were the Women's Army Corps (WAC) and Women Airforce Service Pilots (WASP). So the Texas law may apply to the remaining members of those units.

[Garibaldi]

I am wondering if too much is being read into "auxiliary service". It could be that CAP and the USCG Aux aren't meant at all. During WWII and after, some of the auxiliary services were the Women's Army Corps (WAC) and Women Airforce Service Pilots (WASP). So the Texas law may apply to the remaining members of those units.

Police auxiliaries exist as well. Usually those aren't paid or armed as a matter of course.

[RiverAux]

I am wondering if too much is being read into "auxiliary service". It could be that CAP and the USCG Aux aren't meant at all. During WWII and after, some of the auxiliary services were the Women's Army Corps (WAC) and Women Airforce Service Pilots (WASP). So the Texas law may apply to the remaining members of those units.

I doubt even Texas would spend time modifying laws to allow easier gun carry by 90 year olds. 

[Woodsy]

I am wondering if too much is being read into "auxiliary service". It could be that CAP and the USCG Aux aren't meant at all. During WWII and after, some of the auxiliary services were the Women's Army Corps (WAC) and Women Airforce Service Pilots (WASP). So the Texas law may apply to the remaining members of those units.

Police auxiliaries exist as well. Usually those aren't paid or armed as a matter of course.

I've never heard of a police auxiliary that was not armed.  In this area, volunteer auxiliary law enforcement officers (local, state, etc.) are armed and sworn officers with powers of arrest while on duty and under the supervision of a career officer. 

Now,  the "sheriff's posse" type thing is a different story. 

I can see how this new law would make sense for Auxiliary LEO's as they have to be licensed officers that have completed police academy or a certain amount of training (the local department requirement is around 200 hours I think, one or 2 nights a week for about a year before they're sworn.)  But for CAP?  I think not. 

[Eclipse]

I am wondering if too much is being read into "auxiliary service". It could be that CAP and the USCG Aux aren't meant at all. During WWII and after, some of the auxiliary services were the Women's Army Corps (WAC) and Women Airforce Service Pilots (WASP). So the Texas law may apply to the remaining members of those units.

Police auxiliaries exist as well. Usually those aren't paid or armed as a matter of course.

I've never heard of a police auxiliary that was not armed.

Allow me to change that - the NYPD Aux is one of the largest in the country and they are all unarmed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_Police_Department_Auxiliary_Police
[/quote]

Quoth the wiki:
"Auxiliary Police officers are certified as "Part-Time Peace Officers without Firearms Training" by the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services-Municipal Police Training Council and are registered as peace officers in the NYS DCJS registry of peace officers."

At least in the urban areas in my state, you'd be hard-pressed to find armed auxiliary policy.
One local suburb does have armed part-timers, and a very large force at that, more part-timers
then full timers, however they all had to attend an abbreviated version of the police training academy,
and the unspoken word (from a friend who was an officer), was that if you ever actually drew your
weapon, that was the last day of your employment.  Their role was primarily visibility and traffic control at major
public activities (the burb has a large tourist and trade show center, as well as a major arena).

Around these parts, the PD aux's, volunteer corps, and similar, assist with community outreach,
traffic control, accident scene management, parking enforcement, and some administrivial duties.
Only in rare cases are they sworn officers, armed, or have any police powers.

[SARDOC]

Police auxiliaries exist as well. Usually those aren't paid or armed as a matter of course.

Wow...The Police and Sheriff Auxiliaries in my town....are just volunteers, they meet the same requirements as the full timers and carry fully qualified on duty and off.  They have the same arrest/authority as the Full Timers...the only difference is the Badge reads "auxiliary" for the sheriff's office the Police auxiliary badge is the Old Style badge the old County police used. 

I wouldn't do auxiliary police work without the equipment to do it.

[Woodsy]

Police auxiliaries exist as well. Usually those aren't paid or armed as a matter of course.

Wow...The Police and Sheriff Auxiliaries in my town....are just volunteers, they meet the same requirements as the full timers and carry fully qualified on duty and off.  They have the same arrest/authority as the Full Timers...the only difference is the Badge reads "auxiliary" for the sheriff's office the Police auxiliary badge is the Old Style badge the old County police used. 

I wouldn't do auxiliary police work without the equipment to do it.

Exactly the same here.  Personally, I think only a fool would wear a cop uniform without being armed... 

What good is an unarmed police officer that can't arrest anyone?  Sounds more like the "downtown ambassador" or "community service officer" program here.  DA's ride around on segways helping people find places, answering questions, etc.  CSO's have a patrol car identical to a LEO's except have yellow lights and it says "CSO" under the sheriff's office symbol.  They respond to traffic accidents, direct traffic, assist motorists, look for lost kids, etc.  The police auxiliary are actually police, not tour guides. 

[BrannG]

Great talking points, I'm sure CAP wasn't thought about when they added the firearms part. More to the point I wanted to make was the Vet status. Vet status in Texas is a big thing and offers many perks and benefits on the state level. I don't feel that CAP really deserves vet status, except maybe for the select few who actually retire from CAP..

But I also wanted to crush a theme I am seeing.

The bill states "(A) the army, navy, air force, coast guard, or marine corps of the United States or an auxiliary service or reserve unit of one of those branches of the armed forces" - this means the auxiliaries of the army (none exist), air force (that's CAP), coast guard (CAUX) or marine corp (none here either) - so don't start including police auxiliaries. lol

For what I understand however, STATE OWNED BASES - these called Camps and include all National Guard posts, not FEDERAL posts such as military bases, etc, would allow access to TMF personnel and auxiliary members of the Federal forces as well as all Armed Services. (Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines, Coast Guard) Don't lump up a place like Camp Mabrey with Lackland Air Force Base - not the same thing. Lackland is owned by the DoD, not the State. AAFES wouldn't be so kind to CAP on Lackland vs Camp Mabrey or Camp Bullis.

Hope that clears up some. Oh and I so agree on the firearms.. what the hell where they thinking including auxiliary in that list?

[Eclipse]

Exactly the same here.  Personally, I think only a fool would wear a cop uniform without being armed...

I pretty much agree, but bear in mind "ability to arrest" and "armed" are not necessarily linked.  The NYPD Aux are considered Peace Officers, and can arrest people.

[Luis R. Ramos]

To expand on what Eclipse posted.

A few years ago, about 10 years, the NYPD Auxiliary were not even issued bullet-proof vests. One night two NYPD Auxies decided to not only report but chase a suspect. Although they were very careful and maintained their distance, they even separated. The suspect saw them and fired a handgun at them killing one. A few months later the city issued vests to their Auxies.

It is not only NYPD Aux that does not carry. In my previous service as a CAP member I attended several parades. In at least one of them in a small town in what we call "upstate," I saw whom I took as a police officer directing traffic. His uniform, equipment, etc was the same as other police officers except he was not carrying. A Police Auxiliary for that New York town. It may very well be a In Eclipse's post, he mentioned a state law stating that Police Auxies will not carry.

[edited-I was wrong, both of them got killed. See http://www.nowpublic.com/world/more-then-1-year-after-2-auxiliary-officers-were-killed-line-duty-little-change-has-been-made-police-program]

Flyer

[jeders]

For what I understand however, STATE OWNED BASES - these called Camps and include all National Guard posts, not FEDERAL posts such as military bases, etc, would allow access to TMF personnel and auxiliary members of the Federal forces as well as all Armed Services. (Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines, Coast Guard) Don't lump up a place like Camp Mabrey with Lackland Air Force Base - not the same thing. Lackland is owned by the DoD, not the State. AAFES wouldn't be so kind to CAP on Lackland vs Camp Mabrey or Camp Bullis.

WRONG.

Section 411.1951 of the Texas Government Code does NOT confer veteran status on anyone for any purpose other than reduction or waiver of conceal carry fees. If you try to use this statute to claim veteran status you will be laughed out of the facility at best.

Second, the section referring to CAP is NOT new. This is a law that has been around for nearly 10 years and has included CAP for those 10 years. Many of the members in my former squadron have taken advantage of this law. The "new" part is to amend the reference of section 431.001 to section 437.001.

If you want to continue to debate the propriety of including CAP in this, great. But Brann, stop claiming that this confers benefits which it does not.

[bflynn]

(a) a person may not be required to complete the range instruction portion of a handgun proficiency course if the person:
(1) is currently serving in or is honorably discharged from:
(A) ... aux service (CAP)... or
(B) the state military forces and
(2) has completed a course of training in handgun proficiency or familiarization as part of the person's service with the armed forces or state military forces.

- What this is saying is that CAP / Coast Guard Auxiliary members can now obtain concealed handguns and keep their license without extended proficiency training past the initial courses.

I do not think it means what you think it means.  (Because I couldn't figure out how to write out an Inigo Montoya accent)

You must complete a handgun proficiency or familiarization as part of your service.  Since CAP does not use handguns or offer training in them as part of our service, we can't meet that requirement.

The requirement is 1 and 2.  1 can be satisfied by 1A or 1B.

I'm still happy to see that it's there, it is a reasonable way to relieve the burden on someone who already has been trained on handgun safety.

[BrannG]

I give up trying to talk on here. lol

I wasn't trying to say that CAP is a qualified vet-status giver.. matter of fact, I'm AGAINST CAP members getting vet rights in any form. CAP is NOT an armed force, it's a civilian volunteer force, which has become more and more cadet oriented, so I view it more as a club these days.

I posted the bill to share some news that could have an effect of CAP in Texas. Minor, but still. Then again, I come back and remembered why I left this site.. and why I don't wear an CAP uniform anymore. I proudly wear my ACUs with a actual commission.

[bflynn]

You posted two sections - I know I really read one and reacted to your statement that "- CAP / Coast Guard Auxiliary members can now obtain concealed handguns and keep their license without extended proficiency training past the initial courses. "  Your statement is not true.

The second part of your post doesn't apply to CAP either since we do not issue honorable discharges as others have noted.

So...I can understand the confusion, but neither change affects us in any way.

[Luis R. Ramos]

 

By all means - lets talk it over.

You asked people to comment.

By all means - lets talk it over.

:angel:

Does not mean all comments you receive are going to be similar to or like your way of thinking...

Flyer

[Eclipse]

it's a civilian volunteer force, which has become more and more cadet oriented, so I view it more as a club these days.

Seriously?

The first part of the statement has no basis in fact, and the second is a back-handed insult.  Why throw that out?

Then again, I come back and remembered why I left this site.. and why I don't wear an CAP uniform anymore. I proudly wear my ACUs with a actual commission.

Your sig says you left the USAF in 2006.  You're still wearing the uniform?

[RogueLeader]

And an Army uniform at that.

[a2capt]

Your sig says you left the USAF in 2006.  You're still wearing the uniform?

Or he's missing something else about Army in there.

Lackland Cadet Squadron - SWR-TX-007 2012-Current
Kelly Composite Squadron - 42178 (Deactivated) 1994-2000
Cadet from 1994-1998
Senior Member from 1998-2000, 2012-Current
United States Air Force 2000-2006, 0-3

[Eclipse]

Um, yeah, like "mentions it at all".

Whatever, no reason to believe otherwise, however other then a slam at CAP, it's not relevent to this conversation even a little.
I will go to my grave wondering why people voluntarily engage with others on the internet, and then get bent when people
disagree with them.