
Moderators: Charles L. Cotton, carlson1, SRVA, longtooth

Liberty wrote:A 25% reject rate sounds pretty absurd. I know that in the past the FBI wasn't rejecting them at anywhere near at that rate. Somein is getting pretty picky at opur expense. Sounds like these rejects are being done to help out the FAST people. Moving towards FAST means more hassle for applicants and mokes it almost imposible to get it all done in one day. Forcing FAST on us by rejecting more prints isn't streamlining, but sharing the wealth to another psuedo government agency. It means that our aplication fees get a little more expencive.
There have been huge advances in Digital image processing. Before private digital prints were available I will bet that rejects rates were never 25% Yet the DPS is for some reason today is having a more difficult time reading the prints.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:ELB wrote:Excellent, thank you Mr. Cotton.
Is there a date at which they will be making announcements about the changes?
thx
elb
I'm sure there will be no announcements about changes in processing procedures, personnel assignments, etc., ...
Chas.
Charles L. Cotton wrote: However, I agree that having to make an appointment with FAST and go to another location will be less convenient on the front end. I don't know what other instructors are going to do, but I will reduce the cost of my classes by the fee I pay to a LEO to roll the prints. (I don't charge for photos since I do them myself.) Hopefully, some FAST franchise holders will be willing to travel to classrooms to do the prints, but even if they do, I suspect they will have a minimum class size requirement.
Chas.
Liberty wrote:Charles L. Cotton wrote: However, I agree that having to make an appointment with FAST and go to another location will be less convenient on the front end. I don't know what other instructors are going to do, but I will reduce the cost of my classes by the fee I pay to a LEO to roll the prints. (I don't charge for photos since I do them myself.) Hopefully, some FAST franchise holders will be willing to travel to classrooms to do the prints, but even if they do, I suspect they will have a minimum class size requirement.
Chas.
It could make it very difficult. For instance If I had to go to Houston during a work day, during work hours, I would have to consider nor renewing. For those living the in big City, and don't have to go to work every day, the inconvenience isn't so great. The One Stop aspect makes it a whole lot easier for working people.
Liberty wrote:Of course, no fingerprints at all in 2011 would be even better.![]()
stash wrote:Liberty wrote:Of course, no fingerprints at all in 2011 would be even better.![]()
Mr. Cotton - I hope I am not reading to much into this little statement. Sure would be nice.
Stan

Charles L. Cotton wrote:
It could make it very difficult. For instance If I had to go to Houston during a work day, during work hours, I would have to consider nor renewing. For those living the in big City, and don't have to go to work every day, the inconvenience isn't so great. The One Stop aspect makes it a whole lot easier for working people.

Return to General Texas CHL Discussion
Users browsing this forum: davidtx, dicion, shooter76blue, Terlingueno and 4 guests