RE: Good news for Texas retirees

Maybe TCLEOSE could print them like the new ID cards they issue, with "Retired" listed as status. Most firearm Bills are passed these days with intense lobby effort conducted by the National Rifle Association (NRA) at both the State and Federal level. This is a shameless plug for the NRA...an organization which does much to ensure the future rights of gun owners, hunters, and LEO's. They also have a tremendous training program in the Law Enforcement Activities Division (LEAD). Please support them and allow them to serve you.

RE: Good news for Texas retirees

Steve, it's HB 3613...the section dealing with retirees uses the language "may" not "shall" relative to agencies issuing ID cards to retirees, so it looks like respective departments can still refuse to issue retirees ID cards...don't agree with it, but there it is!!

On a related note, TCLOSE will issue a photo ID--certificate of proficiency to retired out of state officers and certain retired Feds (those listed in the code of criminal procedure as special investigators) for a small fee...don't think there is a 24/7 number to verify the issuance. Unfortunately for me, I retired from a Federal agency that is not listed in the CCP, although I was covered by deputation as a Special Deputy US Marshal...made state arrests based on the Marshals Service being listed...as a retiree, though, I can't complete the affidavit for a state issued photo ID because I did not retire from an agency listed in the CCP. One good thing, however, in the application that is available on the TCLOSE web sight, the actual certificate of firearms proficiency listed on page two of the application provides for either a TCLOSE certified firearms instructor OR a DPS licensed CHL firearms instructor to administer the course of fire required by TCLOSE rule 217 as the minimum standard for active peace officers...as far as the LEOSA goes, a retired Fed or out of state officer can satisfy the LEOSA requirement of meeting the state's proficiency standard by getting a CHL instructor to administer the course of fire...I know that many departments are hesitant to let non-employees/retirees fire on their ranges...so, it opens up the sources for those wanting to qualify. Now, if only 1) TCLOSE would modify the language in the affidavit listed in their application for a photo ID card, or 2) the legislature would broaden the categories of who are special investigators in the code of criminal procedure, I would be happier...

RE: Good news for Texas retirees

Dannt,

Thanks for the correction. Sometimes I get dyslexia in my fingers as I type.

I missed the may versus shall part since I was looking at it primarily for how it affects our active agents, and our retirees. We carry most of our retirees as special agents anyway, which keeps them as active peace officers. We will be issuing the ID cards (as I understand it) to our other retirees, so the shall/may was not a real concern. I was more concerned with the 24 hour phone number for verification, as I thought this was a great thing for LEOSA. We have problems because we do not have a 24 hour telephone number at any of our offices and I don't know how it is going to be handled yet.

I agree on the TCLEOSE ID. I would like to see the state law changed so that 46.02 is specifically made to match LEOSA on who can carry. I expect trouble to come up in some agency that does not realize which federal agencies are actually covered, with BOP being the big potential problem I can easily foresee. The covered officer will win in the long run, but I would like to avoid the problem.

The other problem I have is that the TCLEOSE ID is a waste of money (especially at $25/year) as it is right now. You would still need the picture ID from your agency and then any letter from a firearms instructor would work. I would only recommend it if they were changing it to specify anyone who was covered under LEOSA (active or retired). That way it would be a premade determination for the street officers that the person really was covered. This would make it a benefit to everyone involved.

RE: Good news for Texas retirees

To update this thread, with even better news for retirees and good news for others like BOP retirees, TABC published its legal update yesterday. One of the bills I missed was referenced there, which was HB 638.

This bill modified the government code where it provides for agencies to qualify retirees to include any retired officer qualified to carry under LEOSA.

It also modifies the code on ID cards to require the last agency that employed a retired Texas peace officer to issue an ID card using the shall issue wording. It also gives them a deadline of Jan 1, 2008 to do so.

Texas Retirees

Steve,

I'm a little late at getting back, but I'm thrilled that the legislature recognized those retired Feds who do not fit into those previously defined as special investigators under the Code of Criminal Procedure 2.122...for purposes of obtaining a certificate of proficiency from the state.  In my previous comment, I noted that TCLEOSE has a form on its website that includes an application for out of state retired peace officers/Feds for a photo ID issued by TCLEOSE verifying that the holder has met the TCLEOSE handgun proficiency requirements at TCLEOSE Rule 217.21 (c) (1), and that the application contained at page 2, a form to be completed by the firearms instructor, either a TCLEOSE certified instructor or a DPS licensed CHL instructor.  I used this form last year for our gathering of out of state peace officers and Feds.  However, the affidavit which appears below the actual certificate of proficiency included language addressing retired peace officers, retired officers whose active service was covered under one of the Feds designated as special investigators AND covered under the LEOSA (18 USC 926C).  The TCLEOSE form has yet to be changed to include language to the effect of "OR otherwise covered under 18 USC 926C."  So, I continue to fire my annual course of fire administered and certified by a TCLEOSE instructor, I obtain the certificate of proficiency from page 2 of the TCLEOSE application, plus a stand alone cert from the PD identifying both semi auto and revolver (something the TCLEOSE cert does not address), but cannot go the extra step of filling out the affidavit as it stands to send in to TCLEOSE for a photo ID.  I don't travel out of state often, but it would be a nice option to have in terms of proof of proficiency vis a vis the LEOSA, should Mr. Murphy raise his ugly head and I be stopped by the local constabulary for whatever reason...at any rate, the Texas legislature is trying to accomodate us retired Federale's who don't fall within those few agencies defined in the CCP.  By the by, some of those have been changed and the CCP language has not kept up...e.g. Customs and INS have been blended into ICE...NIS has become NCIS, etc...well, I ramble on...stay safe out there!!

Last edited @ 9/30/2007 5:14 PM

RE: Good news for Texas retirees

How does all this work when one has worked for multiple towns, mulitiple states, and two of these towns don't have storage space for records? I retired prior to LEOSA and found it easier to go with Colorado's CCW requirements for most purposes. There is no qualification requirement. Any ideas. I'm at niwenterprises@yahoo.com
Bob

RE: Good news for Texas retirees

For multiple towns is easy in Texas. Sort of. The state licensing agency (TCLEOSE) has the records for all employments in Texas since the 70's. The state even mandates that the last agency you worked for must issue the retiree ID card if you meet the requirements.

I would think other states would have the same kind of records (not the ID requirement though), but I could be wrong.

But the law is pretty easy and does not say how to prove the requirements. I would think it would be easy IF your last agency would give you the ID from their records and your job applications. If you retired long enough ago that there are no more records (for some towns, more than 5 years would let them destroy the records), you would be out of luck. The key part of the law that hurts you is the requirement for the retiree ID card. If you can find one to give it to you, you are good and if not, you are out of luck I think.