TexasCHLforum.com

This is a clear example of why the security guard licensing laws are so ridiculous. Does anyone honestly think that it would be better if these guys were all randomly out patrolling with no coordinated plan and no communication?

I do think the marked vehicles are a bit unnecessary, but they are harmless.

crazy2medic wrote:The thing I see coming is the liberal press will make them out to be a bunch of blood thirsty vigilantes, if they should happen to shoot a bad guy then it'll be made out that they were just lookin to kill somebody!

me personally I think there should more of this, people taking responsibility to protect their own!

I don't think they are doing themselves any favors with statements like "criminals will be lucky if the police get to them before we do". The article was pretty balanced, I believe, but it would be great if this group could cut down a bit on the bravado. That said, I liked the comment amount members using deadly force "if they are threatened".

These types of groups could be extremely valuable in enhancing crime deterrence along with LE organizations. Kind of like volunteer fire departments supplementing paid fire departments. I would love to see more of this.

bblhd672 wrote:

RPBrown wrote:How are they allowed to be an armed security force without a license and an armed church security force is not allowed??????

I didn't think about that angle. My guess would be they didn't think it necessary to ask the security industry for permission to protect their own homes and neighborhoods.

I think this is more aligned with the part of Texas law that says you can use deadly force to protect your neighbors property, but only if that neighbor has asked you to protect their stuff.