I was a little amused by this story in today’s local newspaper, which describes the situation where the Texas law governing the issuance of concealed handgun permits to retired law enforcement officers differs from the federal statute. It seems that in Texas, some officers have to undergo the same requirements as regular citizens to obtain a permit, whereas the federal statue automatically grants them a license by virtue of their law enforcement experience.
The amusing part of the story occurred in this quote (emphasis mine):
I suppose ordeal is in the eye of the beholder, but a few hours of classroom time and shooting a box of rounds at a target hardly seems to qualify.
But it does make one think about the nature of a true ordeal. Here are a few items that might be used as measuring sticks the next time you consider what a horrible turn your life has taken:
A true ordeal is…
- going through election season without a mute button on your TV remote control.
- watching the Dallas Cowboys play football (yesterday’s surprising win notwithstanding)
- sitting through Bristol Palin’s (bless her heart) Dancing With The Stars late season performances.
- waiting for the next platter of Sunday brunch cinnamon rolls to emerge from the Wall Street Bar and Grill’s kitchen after the guy in front of you took the last ones.
- trying to use the wifi (or find a parking space) at Midland Memorial Hospital.
- watching Oprah interview Whoopi.
I’d say if that’s the worse thing he had to endure all day, he’s living a pretty charmed life.
But beyond that, citizens neither need nor have any business owning handguns. Those should be reserved for active law enforcement officers and military personnel. Most gun-rights advocates seem to cite self-protection as the need for having a handgun, but I have to wonder what tiny percentage of handgun owners have EVER fired their firearms for the sake of protecting themselves or their families. It’s more the IDEA of self-protection rather than any actual NEED for said, that drives gun sales.
(Mind you, I’m not opposed to upholding our 2nd Amendment rights, but we can accomplish that without handguns.)
Well, this post wasn’t really about handgun ownership, and I disagree with you on just about every point of your argument, but I’m nothing if not fair and [un]balanced. So, your comment gets approved. 😉
Sometimes, timing can add an undesired perspective … this article appears so soon after November 11th, when we remember so many men and women who experienced a genuine ordeal. Makes this guy (or the reporter) look like some kind of schmuck.
I felt the same way about some of the people rushing to television cameras after that cruise ship FINALLY reached port this past week. Worst cruise ever, one woman moaned. I couln’t help but think that, as bad as her experience may have been (Spam … shudder), she fared A LOT better than many of the passengers on the Titanic.
Jeff, I didn’t read too much into the particular quote, other than to use it as a jumping off point for what was meant to be a light-hearted post. I figured at worst it was just a poor choice of words under the stress of meeting a deadline.
But, you’re absolutely right…there’s almost nothing we can experience that someone else, somewhere, at sometime, has been through worse.
From the article I’m not sure what “ordeal” is being noted.
The CHL licensing would certainly seem less of an ordeal than the ordeal to get the law changed. But having to stay certified as a retired officer could be more of an “ordeal” than maintaining a CHL if they’re referring to the CHL course.
Actually there are three different ways a retired officer can be licensed to carry. The federal statute (HR218) allows a retired officer to carry in all states but the restrictions are generally the same as a citizen’s CHL and when and where one carries varies from state to state. The Texas statute (PC Title 10 CH 46.15), allows a retired officer the same privileges as any active officer, including open carry, in Texas. And finally, a retired officer can get a Texas CHL by only paying the ~$25 licensing fee – the CHL course is not required (although documentation from the head of a law enforcement agency must accompany the applicaton).
Both the federal statute and Texas statute require retired officers to annually re-certify (qualify) to the state’s peace officer standard in order to carry.
Although this comment is probably interesting to nobody, I appreciate the typing practice.