Background checks

What should be on the 2007 agenda for CHL's?

Moderator: Charles L. Cotton


Topic author
LarryArnold
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2004 10:35 am
Location: Kerrville
Contact:

Background checks

#1

Post by LarryArnold »

The state requires employers to conduct background checks on all sorts of folks, like school bus drivers. Costs lots of money annually.

What if there was a state law allowing employers to accept a Texas CHL for such a state-required check, just like the Feds accept a Texas CHL in lieu of a NICS check.

The CHL background check is more thorough than the average run-their-record BG check, and any problem between renewals gets the CHL suspended.

Unlike most laws this would save state agencies and private employers money. And it would make the anti-gun folks pee their pants.
User avatar

MoJo
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 4899
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 6:10 pm
Location: Vidor, Tx
Contact:

#2

Post by MoJo »

I like it!!!! 8) 8) 8)
"To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
Texas and Louisiana CHL Instructor, NRA Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Personal Protection and Refuse To Be A Victim Instructor
User avatar

dws1117
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1759
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 11:54 pm
Location: Spring, TX.

#3

Post by dws1117 »

Sounds nice on the outside, but I do see some complications that could arise.

Since some companies have such strict anti gun policies, this might have the effect of causing someone to not be hired for a job that they ordinarily may have been hired. I can see where thet employer might see the CHL and automatically think, "Oh no, he/she carried a gun we don't want to take on that liability" We all know how some get scared at the mere thought of a gun.

I personally know two people at my company that have been fired for just talking about guns. The company "didn't want the liability.":evil:

I don't get people. :evil:

The convenience of what you propose would be very nice. Probably in a world where others are less frightend of of objects it could work.

It also makes too much dang sense, and we just can't have that! :cry:

Topic author
LarryArnold
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2004 10:35 am
Location: Kerrville
Contact:

OTOH

#4

Post by LarryArnold »

  1. An anti-gun company wouldn't be required to accept the CHL, therefore probably wouldn't ask for it.
  2. Save a company several hundred dollars a year in BG checks, and the attitude might change.
  3. Just about everyone in a profession where background checks are required, child care workers for instance, would have a great incentive to get a CHL, multiplying our numbers.

one eyed fatman
Banned
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 402
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 7:50 pm
Location: Tx

#5

Post by one eyed fatman »

dws1117 wrote:Sounds nice on the outside, but I do see some complications that could arise.

Since some companies have such strict anti gun policies, this might have the effect of causing someone to not be hired for a job that they ordinarily may have been hired. I can see where thet employer might see the CHL and automatically think, "Oh no, he/she carried a gun we don't want to take on that liability" We all know how some get scared at the mere thought of a gun.

I personally know two people at my company that have been fired for just talking about guns. The company "didn't want the liability.":evil:

I don't get people. :evil:

The convenience of what you propose would be very nice. Probably in a world where others are less frightend of of objects it could work.

It also makes too much dang sense, and we just can't have that! :cry:
Just like some company's will not hire you if they know you smoke cigarettes.
User avatar

dws1117
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1759
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 11:54 pm
Location: Spring, TX.

#6

Post by dws1117 »

Just like some company's will not hire you if they know you smoke cigarettes.
I haven't run into that that I know of yet. I do know that my company makes it very difficult for us smokers.

One observation is that when a company is small thier policies on everything from guns to smoking are usually more relaxed. The more the company grows, the stricter the policies can get.

When I started my job there were only 200 employees. Things were a lot looser. As we grew that changed. things that were tolorated 2 years ago are grounds for instant, no questions asked escort you off the grounds termination today.

While we were small more than half of the employees were shooters. Now that we have over 700 people including an office in New Jersey that percentage has drastically dropped.

At both points in our history firearms on property was instant termination.

Warhorse545
Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 145
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2004 1:58 am
Location: Round Rock, TX

#7

Post by Warhorse545 »

And decent sort of back ground check with show you have a CHL. It is public record. So if the company is anti-gun and does a background check they are going to know up front.

And with the 4 year renewals there could be all kinds of problems crop up between license and renewal that could be problems for employers that would be missed if the CHL was used. Things that would not revoke the license, but me as a manager would not like to see in a possible employee. Petty theft charges as one example.


Stacey

Topic author
LarryArnold
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2004 10:35 am
Location: Kerrville
Contact:

#8

Post by LarryArnold »

Warhorse545 wrote:And with the 4 year renewals there could be all kinds of problems crop up between license and renewal that could be problems for employers that would be missed if the CHL was used. Things that would not revoke the license, but me as a manager would not like to see in a possible employee. Petty theft charges as one example.
An indictment for a disorderly conduct class C misdemeanor ($500 fine for public intoxication, fighting in public, peeping tom, etc.) will get your CHL suspended. Indictment for any offense more serious than that will also result in immediate license suspension, with revocation if you're convicted. That should cover even the pettiest theft.

rickb308
Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 9:41 am
Location: The Colony, Texas (Denton County)

#9

Post by rickb308 »

LarryArnold wrote:
Warhorse545 wrote:Petty theft charges as one example.
Indictment for any offense more serious than that will also result in immediate license suspension, with revocation if you're convicted. That should cover even the pettiest theft.
Not trying to pick nits, but, for a non-CHL, petty theft may not even show up during a background check. Depends on the case & disposition of the case.

Many, many moons ago, I used to catch shoplifters for a living.
'86-'88. Joske's, Bloomingdale's, & Sears.
No less than 3 cases a month. (3 was the magic number to keep your job)
Only one was a Class "C" misdemeanor. One was a Class "A", and a few felony credit card frauds.
Never spent a minute in court on ANY case. Never knew the disposition of any case. Was never contacted by ANY ADA. Every one of them but the class C went out of the store in handcuffs to a waiting squad car. (PD was called on EVERY case, Corp. policy - liability issues) Class C was issued a ticket on the spot by the PD and released.
Looking over the code, looks like they have changed some "thresholds":
(1) a Class C misdemeanor if the value of the property
stolen is less than:
(A) $50; (used to be $20. My one "C" case was a $10 pair of underwear.
$20/Class B was the "magic" number that actually counted towards your 3 cases/month)
(2) a Class B misdemeanor if:
(A) the value of the property stolen is:

(i) $50 or more but less than $500; (used to be $20 - $750)(Over $750 was the "brass ring" case every store investigator shot for. Tough when dealing with clothing)
(3) a Class A misdemeanor if the value of the property
stolen is $500 or more but less than $1,500;


Credit card fraud/theft is now a state jail felony.
Like I said, never once did I spend a minute in court on any case.
How many of those cases WON'T show up on a non-CHL background check, but how many will get your CHL yanked by the arresting PD?
Rick Bowen
TSRA Life Member
lex talionis
I am not a lawyer, and I don't play one on the internet.

Warhorse545
Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 145
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2004 1:58 am
Location: Round Rock, TX

#10

Post by Warhorse545 »

Valid points RickB and LarryArnold.

Depends on what is reported and how it is handled. If say a person committed a crime and did not have weapon or CHL on him the license would not be yanked on the sport. And the officer or agency then has to submit paperwork to DPS to start the revocation process. I wonder how many officers would take the time to submit the paperwork on what most would seem minor offences. I wonder how long it would take DPS to catch the fact that someone with a CHL has committed one. Sure they would probably catch it when the renewal time came, but are active searches done regularly for holders?

The CHL is not a catch all for background checks for employers in my opinion. You can be issued CHL after 5 years of being convicted of a class A or B misdemeanor.

I, as an employer, would be more then interested in then just the 5 years back that the CHL requires. < Provided any crimes were reported :wink: > And a CHL background check deals with criminal matters. The type of background checks that a lot of employers use also include financial history as well if there is any handling of cash or high value items.

I just see where the CHL wouldn't fit all that I need in a check. Just stating a different view on things. And both have holes that we could argue circles around I am sure.


Stacey
TSRA Life Member

Topic author
LarryArnold
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2004 10:35 am
Location: Kerrville
Contact:

#11

Post by LarryArnold »

Warhorse545 wrote:If say a person committed a crime and did not have weapon or CHL on him the license would not be yanked on the spot.
Officers would pick up on a CHL as soon as they ran the DL, and so would the DA. I have to think no matter how minor the offense LEOs would want a CHL pulled. I certainly would.
Warhorse545 wrote:I just see where the CHL wouldn't fit all that I need in a check. Just stating a different view on things.

That's why my suggested law says an agency may accept the CHL in lieu of a BG check. You would have the option to run (and pay for) the BG check if you felt it necessary.

TraCoun
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 389
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 7:52 pm
Location: Friendswood, Tx
Contact:

Re: OTOH

#12

Post by TraCoun »

LarryArnold wrote:
  1. An anti-gun company wouldn't be required to accept the CHL, therefore probably wouldn't ask for it.
  2. Save a company several hundred dollars a year in BG checks, and the attitude might change.
  3. Just about everyone in a profession where background checks are required, child care workers for instance, would have a great incentive to get a CHL, multiplying our numbers.
The idea of letting businesses accept CHL's for background checks has some appeal, but there are some other issues to think about. The idea that an anti-gun company probably wouldn't ask for it might turn out to be the reverse. They might ask for it just to see if you have one, then you don't get the job. From a business there are some other thoughts. I work at a plant where background checks are required for everyone, and the stuff that is collected goes beyond the CHL check. So the business would still have to pay for the part that the CHL doesn't cover. It may REDUCE costs, but not eliminate them. Also, you are not just necessarily dealing with the company you want to work for. If you happen to work for a contract company (as I do) then the 'big company' your company has the contract with may very well want to see the background checks, too. Also, companies like to have documentation that they covered these bases. That would mean at the least that they would have to get a photocopy of the CHL (or driver's license if that is used), and then it is in their files ... anyone who looks at the file then knows you have a CHL.
Interesting discussions, a bunch of people have put in a lot of good thoughts.
TraCoun

Topic author
LarryArnold
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2004 10:35 am
Location: Kerrville
Contact:

Proposed legislation

#13

Post by LarryArnold »

HB 362, by Talton, would require that anyone accepting a driver's license as ID must accept a Texas CHL for the same purpose.

Largely symbolic, given that the Texas CHL isn't valid without a Texas DL or ID.

rspeir
Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Austin

#14

Post by rspeir »

GC §411.192 Confidentiality of Records should prevent the disclosure to an employer that an individual had a CHL unless the employer makes a written request and pays a fee to DPS.
Warhorse545 wrote:And decent sort of back ground check with show you have a CHL. It is public record. So if the company is anti-gun and does a background check they are going to know up front.

And with the 4 year renewals there could be all kinds of problems crop up between license and renewal that could be problems for employers that would be missed if the CHL was used. Things that would not revoke the license, but me as a manager would not like to see in a possible employee. Petty theft charges as one example.


Stacey

Mrjayjay00
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 7:50 pm
Location: Texas City, TX

Background check ?

#15

Post by Mrjayjay00 »

Just wondering if anyone knew exactly what all they check for when they do a background for CHL. Never have really known how or what they all check for this just wondering. I think it would be good to know what all the state checked and the FBI or whomever else may check. I know that when they run you DL for local police it usually just shows any outstanding warrants and other criteria in relation. So if anyone could post correct or exact answers and not probably's or maybe's that would be great .

Mrjayjay00
Texas City
CHL holder
Bersa Thunder .380 s/a w/3 7rd. mags
Just enough to stop'm
Locked

Return to “Goals for 2007”