Search found 2 matches

by koolaid
Sun Nov 15, 2009 6:25 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Delay: "Disposition information"
Replies: 17
Views: 2725

Re: Delay: "Disposition information"

seamusTX wrote:A problem with the Texas CHL law is that NICS did not exist when it was passed. The CHL law went into effect in 1995. NICS was rolled out in 1998.

Some reform of the Texas background checks should be on the agenda for the next legislative session.

Whether that will happen depends upon how much financial support the TSRA PAC receives in the next year and a half (hint, hint).

- Jim
Yes, I suppose that only left them with six legislative sessions to update it... :txflag:

On that note, TSRA does a great job and I'm glad we have them around.
by koolaid
Sun Nov 15, 2009 5:21 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Delay: "Disposition information"
Replies: 17
Views: 2725

Re: Delay: "Disposition information"

ferretray wrote:One of these incidents occured in Alabama. Their records aren't even computerized, AFAIK. I'll have to hire an attorney there to take a walk over to the county clerk, or whatever it is they have there in gooberville.
I'll have to spend more money for San Diego, Ca. Their computer database erases any misdemeanor record after 10 years. This information took a few minutes of research on the internet. So I'll be paying to acquire a letter saying there is no record of the offense. Reckon the DPS bereuacrats should be doing this, and paying for it. Thats what the application fee is for, right?
So I've got one office flunky that should be communicating with other office flunkies and instead, I'm doing their work for them.
I feel for you. It ended up costing me $500 and several months to get a piece of paper saying that the court in question didn't have any records on me. I actually had trouble convincing the out of state lawyer I was using to even get the records search done because there was no possible way a record of the incident would exist in the court system because there were never any charges brought and he couldn't figure out why someone would need written documentation of something impossible.

There is no reason DPS needs this sort of documentation for arrests (especially with no charges) that would not be a disqualification even if there was a conviction. There is a clearly defined set of things that will disqualify you from being able to hold a license. What reason is there for them to know anything beyond that?

I'm of the opinion that if you can pass a NICS check to purchase and own a new firearm, and can demonstrate that you understand the law as written, you should be able to carry. I can't even imagine what the backlash would be if this kind of drama was involved in applying for a drivers license...something not constitutionally protected, available to younger citizens, and which is a much more dangerous activity.

I also can't imagine if drivers ed courses consisted of so much conjecture and desperate attempts to figure out what the law actually allows.

Return to “Delay: "Disposition information"”