OK I'll admit my subject was a bit inflammatory, on purpose. But the fact remains that rich people in Texas are allowed to have armed protection where others cannot. They just have to hire a level IV PPO security officer, which is effectively impossible for the vast majority of Texans due to cost. Level IV PPOs are not prohibited from carry in nearly as many places as CHL licensees are. 30.06 doesn't apply, and other CHL-carry prohibited areas such as professional sports competitions, voting locations on voting day, etc. don't apply. Now, there is a bill (HB308) which would remove restrictions on CHL carry in many of these areas, so I'm grateful that progress is being made there.
That leaves 30.06. Why doesn't this apply to PPOs? Is it because PPOs are more highly trained? I've looked at the PPO requirements and while they're more stringent than a CHL class and range test, they're still not terribly difficult and many if not most CHL licensees could probably pass it. But the thing is, PPOs can't always ignore 30.06; they have to be on duty protecting their client to carry at all on their PPO commission. I assume most PPOs also have a CHL, and they would be affected by 30.06 when carrying on their CHL, so the on-duty requirement shows that it's not just about training or capabilities.
I hate to support restricting carry further, but since we've been told that 30.06 isn't going anywhere (despite other states with good CHL laws like Florida disallowing no-carry signs on private property from having force-of-law) logically I don't see why PPOs should not also be restricted by 30.06 when on duty.
Thoughts?