TexasCHLforum.com

texanjoker wrote:
The federal courts do not allow anybody to carry. We have to turn in our guns while in a LEO uniform..... pretty lame wanting a uniformed Leo to disarm.

In courtrooms surrounded by marshals and perps, etc I can see it, but in their offices? In the parking lots? In the cafeteria? It seems grotesque to me, another facet of the pitiful pale shadow of America this country has sunk to.

Our courthouse here wouldn't allow anyone to carry a tape recorder, dictating device, radio, or anything last time I was there. I've not been in many years now, since cell phones on everyone's hip and purse became ubiquitous. Cellphones with camera must really give them fits.

I take it the exemption quoted above relating to peace officers and special investigators must not apply to elected officials like the DA.

E.Marquez wrote:

JALLEN wrote:

ninjamedic2293 wrote: US Attorneys are not permitted to carry weapons.

Not permitted? ...I must be reading that wrong..
Your saying by virtue of the job position they are forbidden from carrying a weapon?
That's just silly, I assume I'm taking the wrong meaning from your post

Just a week or so ago, Cornyn wrote Holder to ask why AUSA (federal prosecutors) are not allowed to carry on Federal property even if they have a CHL.

viewtopic.php?f=83&t=64886" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

“It has come to my attention that federal law…exempts law enforcement officers, agents, and federal officials (such as prosecutors) from prohibitions on carrying firearms in federal court facilities. Yet I am told that as a matter of policy, federal prosecutors are barred from carrying personal self-defense firearms to their offices (and parking facilities) even if they hold a state-issue concealed carry license,” Cornyn writes in the letter.

“If this information is accurate and is a matter of federal court policy, then the safety and security of federal officials demands the policy’s immediate reconsideration,” Cornyn continued. “Prosecutor safety should start with enabling them to defend themselves from violent attack.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/04/corny ... z2Qfg098Vq" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ninjamedic2293 wrote:

MeMelYup wrote:Is she a CHL permit holder? Was she carrying at the time?

I actually have an open records request in to the Travis County Sheriffs Office about this very topic requesting the arrest report, vehicle inventory, and any documents related to a firearm recovered during the arrest. It would surprise me greatly if she wasn't carrying as she is the DA of a major metropolitan area prosecuting trans-national drug traffickers. Also after the Kaufman County incidents it would surprise me if any DA or ADA wasnt carrying.

Do law enforcement officers carry by virtue of CHLs? Or do they qualify by virtue of their office to an exemption?

We saw in the letter from Sen. Cornyn to AG Holder that apparently US Attorneys are not permitted to carry weapons.

Pressure mounts!

http://www.myfoxaustin.com/story/219851 ... -to-resign

texanjoker wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:She has admitted she's guilty and will plead guilty. She didn't say she was going to resign and I find this absurd. How can she or someone in her office go before a jury and ask them to send another DWI defendant to jail or prison?

Chas.

The part that does bother me is that they keep referring to her as the top law enforcement official. The rest of us that are the real law enforcement officials would automatically loose our police license for 10 years and be fired for a dwi conviction. Funny how attorneys that are described as the top law enforcement official don't fall under that same standard...

You are hired by an organization that has established rules, policies, etc. An elected official is "hired" by the electorate which is the sole judge of performance, suitability. There are no policies, no standards, whatever you can get away with. We have witnessed thoroughly despicable men and women returned to office despite the most immoral, heinous and irresponsible conduct, and good men turned out of office for trivial, or no, reason at all, other than the opponent was "cooler."

If you wish to contemplate what I hope is the outer limits of this explanation, consider the case of one Alcee Hastings, who distinguished himself sufficiently to be appointed to the US District Court bench, a prestigious assignment for a lawyer. After some years of "bench warming," Hastings managed to become one of a small handful of persons in US history to be impeached by the House of Representatives, for taking a $150,000 bribe, for crying out loud, convicted in the Senate and removed from office. He was spared conviction in criminal court only because his "bribor" could not be made to testify. Apparently on the theory that "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em," Hastings ran for Congress, was elected and has now served more than 20 years!

Some people, devoid of shame or scruples, manage to get themselves elected and remain in office anyway. I leave it to you to figure out the party affiliation and other characteristics of most of these.