TexasCHLforum.com

ScooterSissy wrote:No one has proposed that the DPS "considers General under honorable to be equal to an Honorable discharge"; only that they consider both to be "honorably discharged".

IOW, A does not equal B, except A is considered equal to B.

Great logic.

ScooterSissy wrote:

baldeagle wrote: I don't really care if you agree with me or not. The OP wrote "Those with a General Discharge, Under Honorable Conditions, have honorably served and been honorably discharged" and that is false. He did not serve honorably. If he had, he would have received an Honorable Discharge. If he said, those with a General Discharge Under Honorable Conditions are eligible for the veterans discount according to DPS, that would be true and accurate. But that's not what he said.

And yeah, this is a big deal to me. My cousin, Donald Carlson, was KIA in Vietnam, and it matters a great deal to me that people who received General Discharges Under Honorable Conditions do not represent themselves as having served with the same honor and distinction that Donald did.

Since you asked, here's my DD-214 (the relevant part):

The OP never said he "served with the same honor and distinction that Donald did." Nor did the OP ever claim he had an Honorable Discharge

He claimed he was honorably discharged. That's false.

ScooterSissy wrote:He said that he served honorably.

Thank you for finally agreeing with me. He did not serve honorably. If he had, he would have received an honorable discharge.

ScooterSissy wrote:According to the DPS, he did.

Wrong. According to the DPS he qualifies for the veterans discount.

ScooterSissy wrote:The DPS's definition, and how it applies to a CHL is what this is all about. To turn your own words back to you, if that bothers you, take it up with the DPS.

By the way, I do have an Honorable Discharge. I also know that I served honorably. I would never say that I "served with the same honor and distinction that Donald did". I did not.

That's also wrong. You did. That's what Honorable Discharge means.

ScooterSissy wrote:Finally, no where on your DD214 does it say "honorably discharged". It classifies your type of service as HONORABLE and your type of separation as DISCHARGE.

You have created a straw man, and attacked it so vigorously that you seem to have convinced yourself the truth of it. There is no truth to it. The OP never made the claim you are implying he did. This isn't a matter of how you or I define the term "honorably discharged", it's a matter of the DPS defines it.

The DPS is not defining what honorably discharged means. They are defining what is required to qualify for the veterans discount.

ScooterSissy wrote:Earlier, you made two comments in one post, that I thought expressed your viewpoint. The second comment was this:

What you have witnessed in this thread is the anger that honorably discharged vets feel when they sense that someone is trying to elevate themselves to the same position, even though they haven't earned it. (And I am NOT referring to the OP, although his words were all it took to generate this heat.)

. You seem to have changed course, and now are accusing the OP of doing exactly that. He did not.

Because in his last post that's exactly what he did.

ScooterSissy wrote:The earlier point you made is the critical one thought:

Throughout this thread I have tried to stick to the facts and the law.

Now, it appears that when the opinion of those that determine the rules (and yes, the DPS is the agency that determines those rules), you want to veer off from "the facts and the law", and base the way things "should be" on your opinion.

No, not at all. I am trying to point out the facts. The DPS has made a determination regarding who qualifies for the veterans discount. They have not made a judgement that he was honorably discharged. That is your (and now the OP's) misinterpretation of what this means.

ScooterSissy wrote:Again, the OPs statement that he (and others like him) where honorably discharged is false in your opinion. It's not your opinion that counts.

And this is precisely my point. The DPS is NOT defining what honorably discharged means. Why can you not see that? They are simply offering a discount and defining what discharges qualify for that discount. He was not honorably discharged. The DPS is not saying that he was honorably discharged. That is a false interpretation, and that is what has caused all the fluff in this thread. To be honorably discharged, you must receive an Honorable Discharge. A General Under Honorable Conditions does not cut the mustard. Yes, he qualifies for benefits that worse discharges do not. But he is not, nor will he ever be, honorably discharged unless and until he appeals his discharge (which I have also pointed out repeatedly.)

Numerous veterans in this thread have made this point in various ways.

ScooterSissy wrote:

baldeagle wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:

baldeagle wrote:

loren wrote:Those with a General Discharge, Under Honorable Conditions, have honorably served and been honorably discharged according to veterans organizations, the laws of this state, and now even DPS. Believe it or not.

Right here is where you go off the rails and is what has caused all the contention in this thread. You were NOT honorably discharged, and no amount of parsing of words will change that. You have no right to claim you were honorably discharged, and doing so is offensive to many who have served and been honorably discharged. You received a General Discharge under Honorable Conditions. What this precisely means only you can say, and you clearly have not done so, despite repeated requests. (You have every right to keep the details of your discharge private.) A General Discharge Under Honorable Conditions means that you did something wrong, which caused your discharge, but it did not rise to the level of a Dishonorable or Bad Conduct Discharge.

The DPS doesn't use the term "Honorable Discharge", they use the term "honorably discharged". Unless you (or someone else) can show a DD214 that uses the exact term "honorably discharged", then I think it's more than fair to say, that it is the Texas DPS that is "parsing words"; and they have made it pretty clear what they mean by the term.

DPS Is making a political decision. It has nothing to do with parsing words. The OP is the one insisting he was honorably discharged and is therefore parsing words.

Sorry man, but (in my opinion) you're simply wrong. From the very first post, this was about the DPS' interpretation of what the term "honorably discharged" means. DPS' requirement was not for an "Honorable Discharge", but only that one be "honorably discharged", which would appear to be a description.

You may believe that DPS made a "political decision", but I see nothing to back that up. Does your DD214 say, anywhere on it "honorably discharged"? My father was in the Army for 22 years (and was stationed in Germany when, and where, I was born), so I grew up with this stuff. I've never heard someone say "he was generally discharged". If "honorably discharged" is simply a descriptive term, then "General under honorable conditions" would qualify, but "General under less than honorable" would not.


The OP has made no claim even close to

I don't really care if you agree with me or not. The OP wrote "Those with a General Discharge, Under Honorable Conditions, have honorably served and been honorably discharged" and that is false. He did not serve honorably. If he had, he would have received an Honorable Discharge. If he said, those with a General Discharge Under Honorable Conditions are eligible for the veterans discount according to DPS, that would be true and accurate. But that's not what he said.

And yeah, this is a big deal to me. My cousin, Donald Carlson, was KIA in Vietnam, and it matters a great deal to me that people who received General Discharges Under Honorable Conditions do not represent themselves as having served with the same honor and distinction that Donald did.

Since you asked, here's my DD-214 (the relevant part):

ScooterSissy wrote:

baldeagle wrote:

loren wrote:Those with a General Discharge, Under Honorable Conditions, have honorably served and been honorably discharged according to veterans organizations, the laws of this state, and now even DPS. Believe it or not.

Right here is where you go off the rails and is what has caused all the contention in this thread. You were NOT honorably discharged, and no amount of parsing of words will change that. You have no right to claim you were honorably discharged, and doing so is offensive to many who have served and been honorably discharged. You received a General Discharge under Honorable Conditions. What this precisely means only you can say, and you clearly have not done so, despite repeated requests. (You have every right to keep the details of your discharge private.) A General Discharge Under Honorable Conditions means that you did something wrong, which caused your discharge, but it did not rise to the level of a Dishonorable or Bad Conduct Discharge.

The DPS doesn't use the term "Honorable Discharge", they use the term "honorably discharged". Unless you (or someone else) can show a DD214 that uses the exact term "honorably discharged", then I think it's more than fair to say, that it is the Texas DPS that is "parsing words"; and they have made it pretty clear what they mean by the term.

DPS Is making a political decision. It has nothing to do with parsing words. The OP is the one insisting he was honorably discharged and is therefore parsing words.

loren wrote:Those with a General Discharge, Under Honorable Conditions, have honorably served and been honorably discharged according to veterans organizations, the laws of this state, and now even DPS. Believe it or not.

Right here is where you go off the rails and is what has caused all the contention in this thread. You were NOT honorably discharged, and no amount of parsing of words will change that. You have no right to claim you were honorably discharged, and doing so is offensive to many who have served and been honorably discharged. You received a General Discharge under Honorable Conditions. What this precisely means only you can say, and you clearly have not done so, despite repeated requests. (You have every right to keep the details of your discharge private.) A General Discharge Under Honorable Conditions means that you did something wrong, which caused your discharge, but it did not rise to the level of a Dishonorable or Bad Conduct Discharge.

If a service member’s performance is satisfactory but the individual failed to meet all expectations of conduct for military members, the discharge is considered a general discharge. To receive a general discharge from the military there has to be some form of nonjudicial punishment to correct unacceptable military behavior. A general military discharge is a form of administrative discharge.

Note the use of the phrase "failed to meet all expectations of conduct". Those who are honorably discharged have succeeded in meeting all expectations of conduct. You have not. Out of respect for those who have served honorably, you ought not to describe yourself as "honorably discharged" no matter who is willing to grant you benefits for your service.

General (Under Honorable Conditions). If a member's service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions. Characterization of service as General (under honorable conditions) is warranted when significant negative aspects of the member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh positive aspects of the member's military conduct or performance of duty outweigh positive aspects of the record. A General (under honorable conditions) characterization of discharge may jeopardize a member's ability to benefit from the Montgomery G.I. Bill if they, in fact, had contributed. Moreover, the member will not normally be allowed to reenlist or enter a different military service.

Note the use of the phrase "significant negative aspects of the member's conduct or performance".

You did not receive an honorable discharge and were therefore not honorably discharged. Any attempt to characterize your service as honorable is going to irritate those who were honorably discharged, because your service was not honorable. If it had been, you would have received an honorable discharge.

This is akin to saying you were an honor student when you really weren't. It should not come as a surprise if some take offense to that. Especially those who have held dying friends in their arms or seen them vaporized by high explosive rounds.

ScooterSissy wrote:I wonder if those that did do something extraordinary (let's not exaggerate, say - saved some folks, became a Seal Sniper, and did multiple tours in the sandbox) are as resentful that folks such as yourself are "lumped into the same category with the same benefits and recognition"...

Throughout this thread I have tried to stick to the facts and the law. Obviously I can't speak for every man or woman who ever served, and I'm relatively certain that you can find some that think their service was better than others because they served in combat. However, it's been my experience that, in general, every honorably discharged vet that I know (and that is quite a few from the Vietnam era) feels that my service is every bit as honorable as theirs. I served on the east coast doing signals intelligence for my entire tour (six years). Many of these men I know served multiple years in Vietnam, in combat infantry units, special forces units and CIA service. Some of them were POWs. A few of them are even nationally famous. Several of them were career officers and a few hold Ph.D.s. To a man they treat me as an equal. Whenever I express how humbled I feel in their presence, they immediately point out that they feel humbled in mine.

I think this is the attitude that most honorably discharged service persons have toward their fellow honorably discharged peers.

What you have witnessed in this thread is the anger that honorably discharged vets feel when they sense that someone is trying to elevate themselves to the same position, even though they haven't earned it. (And I am NOT referring to the OP, although his words were all it took to generate this heat.) It takes commitment to serve in the US military, both in years and in terms of obedience and discipline. Every person who has served honorably understands what that means, and they also understand why it's important that that honor be reserved only for those who earned it. In the final analysis NONE of us has earned what those who paid the ultimate sacrifice have, and it is in honor of them that we strive to uphold the high standards of service that we all were trained to do.

loren wrote:In addition to confirmation from the American Legion and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, I just received this email response from the VFW:
"If the veteran in question has served at least 30 consecutive or 60 nonconsecutive days in Korea, or if they were awarded the Korea Service Medal or the Korean Defense Service Medal, they are eligible for membership in the VFW. A discharge of “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” meets the VFW’s requirement for honorable service."

In VFW's website description of eligibility for membership, it says:
"Assuming that a person is a United States citizen or United States national and has an honorable discharge from the U.S. armed forces, it only remains to be proven that the person has earned a recognized campaign medal or badge; served in Korea between June 30, 1949, until present; or earned Hostile Fire or Imminent Danger Pay eligibility."

Note that when VFW uses the term "honorable discharge" (as opposed to Honorable Discharge) it means to include General (Under Honorable Conditions).

Hope this helps with better understanding the term. Tell your friends!

You just won't let this go. What the VFW and the American Legion do has a lot more to do with increasing their pool of potential paying members than it does about the meaning of Honorable Discharge. No matter what some organization outside the US military says, the fact still remains that they are two different discharges. That distinction is not lost on most veterans. Your discharge is not equal to an Honorable Discharge. Never was and never will be.

For the umpteenth time, if that bothers you, appeal your discharge.

BTW, you are, for the first time in this thread, claiming you have "confirmation from the US Department of Veterans Affairs". Confirmation of what? And in what form did that confirmation come?

loren wrote:FINAL UPDATE:
The policy for determining if a veteran with a General Discharge, under honorable conditions was "honorably discharged" and is eligible for the CHL veteran's fee discount has been CORRECTED: Yes, they were honorably discharged and are eligible. The Texas CHL law has not changed, only the interpretation. And the funny thing is that the eligibility was correct a few years ago but then changed to exclude General under honorable conditions because they were getting so many veteran applications. Could the reason for the change be fewer discounts / increased revenue? Thanks to Texas Senator Campbell, chairperson of the Veterans Affairs Committee, and her aid for getting this corrected.

To review, when I started this topic the question was never about the differences between Honorable and General discharges but what did the law makers mean when they used the term "honorably discharged" for CHL's veterans fee. According to the American Legion and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, General, under honorable conditions IS considered honorably discharged. Of course the Texas law makers could define the term differently but they didn't, so it made no sense for the CHL licensing folks to do it. Also, DPS refers to veterans discharged under honorable conditions as honorably discharged for adding the word "veteran" on their driver's license. So why the inconsistency?

I spoke over the weekend with a 2-star retired AF general about the meaning of "honorably discharged". Like me, he could not understand why one would not include General, under honorable conditions. I asked him why he thought that and he said "well the word honorable is there isn't it?"

The question now is: should veterans that should have been eligible for the CHL veterans fee but were denied because of having a General Discharge, under honorable conditions, be reimbursed?

I'm not certain that this interpretation is correct. The relevant section of law is the Texas Government Code Section 411.172, Subsection (g)(2), but it applies to eligibility to obtain a CHL license when one is not yet 21

(g) Notwithstanding Subsection (a)(2), a person who is at least 18 years of age but not yet 21 years of age is eligible for a license to carry a concealed handgun if the person:
(1) is a member or veteran of the United States armed forces, including a member or veteran of the reserves or national guard;
(2) was discharged under honorable conditions, if discharged from the United States armed forces, reserves, or national guard; and
(3) meets the other eligibility requirements of Subsection (a) except for the minimum age required by federal law to purchase a handgun.

So legally someone with a General Discharge Under Honorable Conditions can obtain a CHL before their 21st birthday, but that says nothing about the discounted fee.

The discount is mentioned in another place, Section 411.135, Subsection (c).

(c) The department by rule may require, in addition to the amount of the fee or charge, the payment of:
(1) a discount, convenience, or service charge for a payment transaction; or
(2) a service charge in connection with the payment of a payment transaction that is dishonored or refused for lack of funds or insufficient funds.

So DPS can decide by rule who gets the discount and who doesn't. It appears to me that the DPS caved under the pressure of a Senator questioning their policy, but I doubt seriously others could obtain a refund for not being allowed to take advantage of the discount previously. By law, the DPS can set any prices and discounts they want and determine who is eligible.

Your 2-star AF general is confused, if you are quoting him accurately. If there were no difference between an Honorable Discharge and a General Discharge Under Honorable Conditions, then one of the two categories would not exist. Words have meaning. A General Discharge is not an Honorable Discharge, regardless of its conditions.

I don't even understand what all this means, but mine says Honorable and under Type of Certificate Issued - DD Form 256N.

baldeagle wrote:

loren wrote:Ahh, the real question I'm raising is: what does the Texas law really mean? There is no question about the merits of Honorable vs General discharges - never was. The question is what is actually intended by the Texas law makers when they use the term "honorably discharged" instead of "Honorable Discharge". Think about it. I don't really care about the license fee discount but after 58 years, learning that Texas CHL licensing thinks I was NOT honorably discharged is a little annoying when my DD-214 clearly says: separated under HONORABLE conditions.

Honorably discharged means an Honorable Discharge. You were not honorably discharged. You received a General Discharge under Honorable Conditions. I'm struggling trying to understand why you don't seem to grasp that. No matter how hard you try, you can't turn your General Discharge into an Honorable Discharge, with one exception. You can appeal your discharge with your service branch and ask for it to be changed.

You can also contact DPS and ask for a ruling. Arguing about it here will accomplish nothing.

This was the second time I stated this and this was on March 27th. Now here we are two weeks later and you're still arguing about this here on the forum. Have you contacted DPS? Have you contacted the military and asked for an appeal of your discharge status? Nothing you do here is going to accomplish anything. Only DPS and/or the military branch you served in can impact your issue.

loren wrote:Ahh, the real question I'm raising is: what does the Texas law really mean? There is no question about the merits of Honorable vs General discharges - never was. The question is what is actually intended by the Texas law makers when they use the term "honorably discharged" instead of "Honorable Discharge". Think about it. I don't really care about the license fee discount but after 58 years, learning that Texas CHL licensing thinks I was NOT honorably discharged is a little annoying when my DD-214 clearly says: separated under HONORABLE conditions.

Honorably discharged means an Honorable Discharge. You were not honorably discharged. You received a General Discharge under Honorable Conditions. I'm struggling trying to understand why you don't seem to grasp that. No matter how hard you try, you can't turn your General Discharge into an Honorable Discharge, with one exception. You can appeal your discharge with your service branch and ask for it to be changed.

You can also contact DPS and ask for a ruling. Arguing about it here will accomplish nothing.

loren wrote:My point though is that the law does not specify a veteran must have an "Honorable Discharge" but that he/she was honorably discharged. My discharge does have the word "honorable" in it.

Yes, but your discharge is a General Discharge, not an Honorable Discharge. If you're not satisfied with that, contact DPS and ask them for clarification. As quoted earlier, the difference between the two affects what benefits you have access to. Apparently the veterans discount for the CHL is one of those that's only available to honorably discharged veterans.

Here's what the Fort Hood Sentinel says about this type of discharge:

In contrast, a “General, Under Honorable Conditions” Discharge (commonly referred to as a General Discharge) is for service members whose service was satisfactory, but involved situations where the Soldier’s conduct and/or performance of duty were not so meritorious to warrant an Honorable Discharge. Recipients of General Discharges usually have engaged in minor misconduct or have received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, UCMJ. While the “under honorable conditions” terminology is slightly confusing, there is a clear disadvantage to receiving a General Discharge in contrast to an Honorable Discharge. While recipients of a General Discharge will receive entitlement to benefits such as VA medical and dental services, VA home loans and burial in national cemeteries, they will not receive educational benefits under either the Montgomery or Post-9/11 GI Bill.

Additionally, there can be quite a stigma attached to having not received an Honorable Discharge. This stigma can have negative consequences while searching for work or applying for school.

So there is a difference between the two, and that seems to accord with DPS' interpretation.