Harris County Applicants

[agbullet2k1]

Plastice showed up yesterday!

Did the walk at one of the big box home improvement stores.

....as in, Walmart?

/Congrats!!

[HGWC]

Allrighty, y'all, here's the latest.

Nope. Just same ol' bull. Let's take a look.

Last week, a nice lady named Marion called my house. Mrs. KingOfDirk answered (as I was fervently checking DPS site...err..I mean, "working" at the time) and was told the folks in Austin had received a request from my State Rep (Garnet Coleman) to move things along for us. Marion told my wife they'd be pleased to ask the Harris County background folks to try to expedite things. She left an email and phone number. I was impressed.

In my book, nice doesn't cut it. Not after this nonsense. The only reason she's calling you at all is because the DPS is getting hassled by your representatives. If it were just you, about all they do is cash your check in a hurry, but after that, you're not getting the time of day, indefinitely.

The long and the short of it is this; Harris has an awful lot of people living in it, consequently has a lot of applications, got pimp-slapped (a technical term) by Ike, is part of a country now ruled...err.. I mean, governed by the new guy at 1600 Pennsylvania - and therefore had a spike in applications/renewals, justified or not - all at the same time. Marion told me the background check folks have gotten some more help here and in Galveston/Brazoria etc, and they are working overtime to try to clear the backlog. They know they're behind, aren't making excuses (anymore), and seem eager to get us processed. She even recited my cell phone back to me, and told me she'd call when she hears back from the field personnel.

Come on man. Don't make excuses for these folks. They had one person working on background checks for all of Harris county, one of the most populous counties in the country. They've been saying they're adding more people all year long. That's just one big load of excuses. They know they're behind, and all they're doing is making excuses.

There's a lesson here. As much as we may lose patience with this process, please remember there are humans, Texans , on the other end of that phone. Marion is an example of what's right with DPS. Don't blame them for their lack of funding or lack of resources - that's your State Rep/Senator's fault. I can read the statutes as well as the rest of the folks here on this board, and I know "sixty days" means sixty days, but the only way they can do the job the legislature commands them to do is if the legislature then gives them the tools they need to do it. They are in session now; take the opportunity to write/call/fax/annoy the men and women who represent you and ask them to, well, represent you. That's the only way the service we get from DPS will improve. All politics is local, as Tip O'Neill once said.

Read those statutes again, one more time. In particular, read Gov. code 411.176b.

"The director's designee as needed shall conduct an additional criminal history record check of the applicant and an investigation of the applicant's local official records to verify the accuracy of the application materials. The scope of the record check and the investigation are at the sole discretion of the department, except that the director's designee shall complete the record check and investigation not later than the 60th day after the date the department receives the application materials."

That's right. The background check, even whether they do it at all, is completely at their discretion. The only thing not at their discretion is to allow the BC to take more than 60 days. And don't kid yourself. They're doing absolutely nothing worth while in this local background check. This one woman can't be spending more than a few minutes on each of these applications. Why don't you ask your friend Marion how many felons the DPS is preventing from carrying a firearm in public? Be prepared to hold back your belly laugh if she even dares to give you an answer, which we know she won't. Then at least ask her how many applicants pass all the initial checks they allowed up to 30 days for and then fail this local background check. Out of all the people in Harris county alone that they've inconvenienced and denied their rights, how many total applications for 2008 were denied because of the local background check?

Let's be real. It is the DPS that is causing all the delays. They could simply do a NICS check and issue the license. They could then whine to the legislature about their budget and err on the side of respecting the citizen's rights. They could recognize that issuing thousands of licenses, post haste, will make a much bigger impact on crime than holding every license up, indefinitely, to keep a small handful of people with outstanding student loans and maybe a disorderly conduct charge from getting the license. They are not required by law to do the background check. Even if the intent is that they perform the BC, this police agency, that's so concerned about us violating the law, is already flagrantly violating the statute. So if violating the only mandatory clause of 411.176b (ie 60 day limit) is entirely within their discretion, so is doing the background check at all. Let's not continue to make excuses for the DPS. They are a police agency that is in the business of violating our constitutional rights. There is just no excuse, no matter how nice Marion was in your telephone call.

[KingOfDirk]

Nope. Just same ol' bull. Let's take a look.

Sorry, HGWC, by "here's the latest" I meant "here's what's most recently been said/done to me/for me." I apologize if you misunderstood me.

The only reason she's calling you at all is because the DPS is getting hassled by your representatives.

Incorrect. The only reason she's calling me is because I'm hassling my representatives.

If it were just you...

It is just me. I'm a pretty unimportant guy. I've come to terms with it.

Come on man. Don't make excuses for these folks.

I wasn't. By "long and short of it" I meant "here's the long and the short of what she told me." I apologize if you misunderstood me. This way you get the benefit of hearing the excuses I was given without having to speak with "my friend" Marion yourself.

They've been saying they're adding more people all year long.

Willing to believe you. I've only been speaking with them for about seven days now, so I'm ignorant of what's been said over the last year.

Why don't you ask your friend Marion how many felons the DPS is preventing from carrying a firearm in public?

Be my guest. Sounds like a good question. It wasn't something I really wanted to know while I had her on the phone, but I'd bet it's a pretty small number as per your point.

I note your disdain for law enforcement folks. That's your right; we can agree to disagree. I wonder what you thought of my point about your elected "representatives." I completely agree that DPS is in violation of the statutes, and I take your point about the director's designee's discretion with regard to bg checks. Are you of the opinion that the department should make decisions about who/how many to check based on the height of the stack on their desk? By your logic they should throw up their hands and print plastic when they get busy. I feel they should have more people so the stack doesn't get as high. I think you and I, ultimately, agree on what the end result should be - you and I (and everyone else here) get to avail ourselves of our unalienable rights. I'm not too dense to see the irony in that last statement. That DPS (or any department or legislative body) is in the position to deny rights I'd call "unalienable" makes them a little more alienable in reality. That's a different argument, though, and I have not been placed in a position where I'd have to decide what to do if that right was abrogated, as opposed to the current situation in which it's just a little harder to enjoy. I shouldn't have to send them $140, but that's the reality for now. If you and I (and a whole bunch more folks like us) complained less and voted more, perhaps we wouldn't have to. Blame DPS if you like, but it's the legislators to whom they answer who deserve your contempt.

And with that, kind sir, I'll bid you happy trails. When/if my plastic shows up I'll post so folks can see the timeframe, and in the meantime I'll keep my opinions to myself so as not to offend.

[knightx]

i'm going to go out on a limb and see if i can find neutrality between the two opinions posted.

i can see the one point of view that they say 60 days or know the reason why, and the hypocracy of it ( meaning, if you had an unpaid ticket and the court date passed, they wouldn't accept the argument that you were swamped, or there was a line ahead of you)

i can see the point of you have a certain entitlement to your license once you meet the criteria ( but on the other hand, if you have survived the past 30, 40, or 50 years without a side-arm, odds are, the addition of 2 or three more weeks may be a moot point)

granted, at the time of need, those two or three weeks become relevant, but there is less likelyhood of that circumstance in that timeframe, and for all of us, i pray never in our respective lifetimes.

both of y'all present very lucid, well articulated, and well thought arguments, and to a common good. from two ends of an argumentative spectrum

now, off my soap-box while i check the status of my application....again

[Ken73]

Quite frankly I'm appalled that there's any kind of financial requirement to defend yourself. So only those who are in good standing with the state of Texas are allowed to defend themselves? I'm fortunate enough that I don't owe on any school loans (I don't have any, never did) and don't owe any back child support (I have no children) but what about those that do? They're not allowed to defend their life and their families lives outside of their homes? I'm of the opinion that if someone owes me money, I'd like them to live another day to pay me back! Why should a financial difference determine whether or not you can defend yourself? What's next? Is my credit rating to be added - if I have a score lower than 619 I can't get a CHL?

I can fully understand a criminal check but that should take all of a few minutes and be done; the FBI NICS should be appropriate. If a 20+ year old breaking and entering in Massechussetts comes up on a NICS check that prevented a friend of mine from getting her gun (she finally fixed it, it was a bogus charge, she now passes the check) then it should pick up ANY criminal background here in Texas as well.

Of course, I still think that 2A says "the right to keep and BEAR arms" not just "keep" them, and we'll regulate bearing them.

I have already written my state representative to this fact. I'm fed up with having our rights taken away as we stand idle. I encourage you to do the same. I'm doing what I can to be legal right now, but I think these "legalities" themselves need to be changed.

[HGWC]

I wonder what you thought of my point about your elected "representatives."

I'm not sure exactly which point you're asking about, but I agree with you that ultimately these nonsensical laws were written by the legislature. I just disagree that the law as written justifies the bureaucratic implementation by the DPS.

I completely agree that DPS is in violation of the statutes, and I take your point about the director's designee's discretion with regard to bg checks. Are you of the opinion that the department should make decisions about who/how many to check based on the height of the stack on their desk? By your logic they should throw up their hands and print plastic when they get busy.

The DPS has to comply with the law just like everyone else whether they think it makes good public policy or not. There is no justification for them violating the law. They simply don't have the discretion to systematically delay and restrict gun rights beyond what the legislature has allowed. The 411.176b statute gives them complete discretion to decide what BC's are needed and it gives them no discretion in letting the BC exceed 60 days. That's the bottom line. That's the law, and as a police agency, they above everyone else need to comply with it.

The local background check isn't needed at all, and the law specifically gives them discretion to decide if it's needed at all. If someone can pass the NICS check, they can certainly buy a gun, and there is nothing preventing them from carrying it in public with or without the CHL. So I think the DPS should err on the side of complying with the law and not denying citizens of a fundamental right, even under the Texas constitution. If funding and staffing doesn't allow for their ideal BC, then like you've been saying, it's not the fault of the DPS. If they have to skip BCs on half or all of the applications to comply with the law, then they're still obligated to comply with the law. They may not agree with that as good public policy, but they have no discretion but to implement it according to the law. If the public and the legislature aren't happy with that legal implementation, then like you said, our representatives, including the governor can improve the implementation however they see fit within the law. Until then, they need to err on compliance with the law and the rights of the citizens.

I feel they should have more people so the stack doesn't get as high.

I disagree that our tax dollars should be wasted on this bureaucracy of political correctness. This law does nothing to keep criminals from accessing firearms. We have felons and others that can't pass the NICS check. They have no problem accessing firearms. We have a large majority of folks that can pass the NICS and could potentially obtain a CHL. They have no problem buying and carrying firearms with or without a CHL. What we're talking about is a very very small percentage of individuals that have made an effort to apply for a CHL, pass the NICS check, but for some unusual reason fail a local background check.

I just don't see how it's worth it. It's not worth the tax dollars they're already spending, and it's certainly not worth more money. They're wasting our money as it is. They're doing nothing to make our society safer from gun violence. They're denying our rights, and by putting up these road blocks, they're discouraging people from carrying firearms in public. I think that has a much bigger impact on the safety of our society than keeping this tiny fraction of our population from getting this little piece of plastic.

I think you and I, ultimately, agree on what the end result should be - you and I (and everyone else here) get to avail ourselves of our unalienable rights. I'm not too dense to see the irony in that last statement. That DPS (or any department or legislative body) is in the position to deny rights I'd call "unalienable" makes them a little more alienable in reality. That's a different argument, though, and I have not been placed in a position where I'd have to decide what to do if that right was abrogated, as opposed to the current situation in which it's just a little harder to enjoy. I shouldn't have to send them $140, but that's the reality for now. If you and I (and a whole bunch more folks like us) complained less and voted more, perhaps we wouldn't have to. Blame DPS if you like, but it's the legislators to whom they answer who deserve your contempt.

It's not that they're making it a little harder to enjoy our rights. That's another euphemism and excuse. The DPS sent every applicant in the most populous counties in the state a letter that said they would be delaying all applications for an undetermined period of time. This isn't just a delay. It's recognized by the legislature as an implicit denial of the application. They are flat out denying one of our most fundamental rights.

Our state constitution guarantees us the right to keep and bear arms and that right can only be restricted by the legislature with regulations on wearing of those arms. We're entitled to every tiny bit of the right that's leftover when the legislature gets finished hacking it up for political correctness. Never make excuses for the executive branch when it takes more of our 2nd amendment right than the legislature allows. It's not the legislature that's responsible for the delays beyond 60 days. It's the DPS, the governor, and the executive branch of our government, and they have no authority at all to do that.

And with that, kind sir, I'll bid you happy trails. When/if my plastic shows up I'll post so folks can see the timeframe, and in the meantime I'll keep my opinions to myself so as not to offend.

No offense taken KingofDirk. My offense is entirely rhetorical. I just don't think we should excuse our government when they trample on our rights. I think we should use forums such as this to lobby the public into not accepting excuses and to not tolerate having our 2nd amendment rights trampled.

Good luck on getting your CHL. I hope you get it as soon as possible.

[HGWC]

i
i can see the point of you have a certain entitlement to your license once you meet the criteria ( but on the other hand, if you have survived the past 30, 40, or 50 years without a side-arm, odds are, the addition of 2 or three more weeks may be a moot point)
:

It's not just 2 or 3 more weeks. What we're talking about is an undetermined indefinite delay that for many is now well over six months. What we're talking about is implicit denial. It's not just the few folks you see here on this site either. They're filling up every seat in every CHL class all throughout Harris county as well as Brazoria and Galveston. Last we heard, there was only one woman assigned to the background checks for all of Harris county. Rumor has it, they're adding more manpower, but we heard that all throughout 2008. Yet at the end of 2008, the reality is we had only one person. They didn't add any additional resources, and they didn't improve their compliance with the law, at least not in the most populous county.

Don't make excuses for the DPS!

[HGWC]

Quite frankly I'm appalled that there's any kind of financial requirement to defend yourself. So only those who are in good standing with the state of Texas are allowed to defend themselves? I'm fortunate enough that I don't owe on any school loans (I don't have any, never did) and don't owe any back child support (I have no children) but what about those that do? They're not allowed to defend their life and their families lives outside of their homes? I'm of the opinion that if someone owes me money, I'd like them to live another day to pay me back! Why should a financial difference determine whether or not you can defend yourself? What's next? Is my credit rating to be added - if I have a score lower than 619 I can't get a CHL?

I agree. It's bull. I bet the reality is that the DPS isn't checking this. The have to check multiple agencies to check for protective orders, student loans, and taxes. I would bet that with only one person processing every single application, they just simply don't have the time to do that. We'll never know because they're not making that information public. I bet all they're doing is checking local databases for criminal issues that should already be reported through NICS.

I can fully understand a criminal check but that should take all of a few minutes and be done; the FBI NICS should be appropriate. If a 20+ year old breaking and entering in Massechussetts comes up on a NICS check that prevented a friend of mine from getting her gun (she finally fixed it, it was a bogus charge, she now passes the check) then it should pick up ANY criminal background here in Texas as well.

They're already allowing 30 days to do that 5 minute NICS check.

Of course, I still think that 2A says "the right to keep and BEAR arms" not just "keep" them, and we'll regulate bearing them.

Keep in mind that the legislature can only regulate the wearing of arms. They can't regulate keeping. They can't regulate bearing. They can only regulate the wearing of arms. We learned that the hard way in 1868, when we amended the constitution to allow the legislature to regulate both keep and bear "under such regulations as the legislature may prescribe."

That didn't work out too well. In 1871 we got the law we've had for over one hundred years which outlawed public possession of handguns and even the famous Bowie knife. Along with it, we got a despot re-constructionist governor, marshal law, legalized government murder, topped off by having to remove the governor from the state capital by armed force in 1873. They amended the constitution again in 1876 to correct that big mistake they made in 1868. It was intended to repeal the vile 1871 gun ban, but that never happened. The legislature doesn't have carte blanche to regulate our right to keep and bear arms at their whim. They can only regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime. I don't think any of these ordinances lie within the constitutional bounds, especially not the 1871 law that prevents us from open carry.

I have already written my state representative to this fact. I'm fed up with having our rights taken away as we stand idle. I encourage you to do the same. I'm doing what I can to be legal right now, but I think these "legalities" themselves need to be changed.

Politically, I don't think we'll ever get satisfaction from the legislature. Unfortunately, there are too many "gun rights supporters" who firmly believe in "reasonable gun control." The only way out of this problem is to challenge these laws and their implementation in court.

[KingOfDirk]

Happy to report a phone call from the DPS licensing division; my bg is done, all systems go. I suppose some time next week I'll see some plastic. Today is the 85th day.

Boy, that was a nice call to get on a Friday...I guess it's time to start surfing holster sites!

Have a good weekend, y'all,
-KoD

[HGWC]

Happy to report a phone call from the DPS licensing division; my bg is done, all systems go. I suppose some time next week I'll see some plastic. Today is the 85th day.

Boy, that was a nice call to get on a Friday...I guess it's time to start surfing holster sites!

Have a good weekend, y'all,
-KoD

That's great KoD. It's almost as if they gave you good service with a smile at only 85 days. Yet like I've said before, while your representative had the DPS folks scurrying around digging out your one application for special treatment, my brother in law, my friend, and countless others who filed their application long before I did in August are still waiting, indefinitely.

Let's all give the DPS a nice round of applause!

[KingOfDirk]

Happy to report a phone call from the DPS licensing division; my bg is done, all systems go. I suppose some time next week I'll see some plastic. Today is the 85th day.

Boy, that was a nice call to get on a Friday...I guess it's time to start surfing holster sites!

Have a good weekend, y'all,
-KoD

That's great KoD. It's almost as if they gave you good service with a smile at only 85 days. Yet like I've said before, while your representative had the DPS folks scurrying around digging out your one application for special treatment, my brother in law, my friend, and countless others who filed their application long before I did in August are still waiting, indefinitely.

Let's all give the DPS a nice round of applause!

Thanks, HGWC. I know you're happy for me, despite the odd feeling I get that somehow I've done something to tick you off.

If my application had gotten special treatment, I'd have had my CHL in hand in November. Instead I waited quietly for the period allowed by statute to expire, and then made it my mission to get one of my employees to find out why DPS hadn't done their job. The employees I contacted included a) my State Rep, b) my State Senator, c) my Governor, d) the State Rep near Dallas who chairs the Law Enforcement committee (thus DPS oversight) and e) the Colonel in charge of the DPS. I had a success rate of 20%; ONE of them followed up. 80% of them let me down. How much time have your brother in law and friend spent hounding folks for results? You know I agree that they shouldn't have to, but the reality is they do. If they haven't, maybe it just doesn't mean as much to them as it does to me. In the meantime, I absolutely refuse to apologize for demanding service for my $140. It's a lot of money to me.

I'm happy to email you the letters I wrote if your family/friends can use them. Cut my reps out, paste theirs in and click send. That way they can get some special treatment, too, and they won't even have to try real hard.

[that1otherdude]

Anyone else having success with Nov. applications?

[Totally Frustrated]

I took my class in August and DPS received my Packet Sept. 5. I paid the same $140 dollars as everyone else. It does suck that people that haven't been waiting nearly as long are getting their plastic before me. obviously they do not work on the packets in the order they are received, as they should. I think that is what HGWC is getting at. I contacted State Reps, Senators and the Gov. as well. Obviously it didn't do any good for me, I can't hold it against the people that had more influential assistance. I'm just Totally
Frustrated!

[FAAPOD]

I took my class in August and DPS received my Packet Sept. 5. I paid the same $140 dollars as everyone else. It does suck that people that haven't been waiting nearly as long are getting their plastic before me. obviously they do not work on the packets in the order they are received, as they should. I think that is what HGWC is getting at. I contacted State Reps, Senators and the Gov. as well. Obviously it didn't do any good for me, I can't hold it against the people that had more influential assistance. I'm just Totally Frustrated!

TF - When you contacted your reps, was it by e-mail or by telephone? I did both, but things didn't start moving for me until I contacted my State Reps office by phone. So if you haven't done so, I highly recommend that you call in. And keep calling. I hate that you and far too many others have had to wait for as long as you have.

If the system was as efficient as it should be, we would all see "Application Complete - License Issued or Certificate Active" not later than Day 61. But it isn't. And the pols are to going to press the issue for those that make the most noise. If it's just a few calling in, then those apps are going to get moved ahead - that's just the way these folks operate. If everyone called their reps, then maybe they'd get off their tails and address the real problem.

[Totally Frustrated]

I emailed and snail mailed all. I, nor anyone else should have had to. After only getting the standard response from the Govs office, I finally heard From DPS saying should be done within a week. that was four days ago so we'll see. I honestly am tired of the entire process, and am not sweating it any longer. I guess its OK for the state to break the law. just don't you do it though!

I am going to remember this come the next election that's for sure.