Actually the lowly constables and the once on top Texas Ranges are the only
constitutionally authorized law 'men' in Texas. The others, DPS.....Sheriff...
and local police... are new to the game and created by governments.

Some years ago, the Texas Rangers were put under the DPS commander. I had
heard to be a Ranger one had to be a DPS and they don't start there.
Other re-orgs put former departments of governments under the University control
and thus just down bumped from power and direct taxes.

Fort Hood is a multi-function - massive and city like. Civilian Police on the
base as well as MP's.

Normally the FBI is brought in on Federal lands if the local Federal Marshall
or MP's are not able or need help.


Martin

Stephan Rothstein wrote:
wrote:
On Nov 18, 4:26 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
John R. Carroll wrote:

Something else about this that's an absolute outrage. You didn't
wander around on post with a weapon. PERIOD.
Weapons were surrendered to the armory and logged in and out,
personal or not. Only MP's and Coasties were allowed to carry.
Hood is huge and they base commander was issuing hunting permits ON
POST. What a jackass.
He ought to be stripped of his rank and discharged for the good of the
service.
I prefer that an military base conform to the state law where the
base is
located. If you have a concealed weapon's permit, you can carry
concealed.
If the state is an open carry state, strap that hog leg to your hip.
Further, the base commander should be able to issue base-only concealed
weapons permits.

Had this been the case at Ft Hood, Hasan would have gone down the
street and
shot up a school or something and our soldiers would have been safe.

I think federal or military facilities can do what they want, but
there are many twists and turns along the way.

Is an army base really a kindergarten? For every rank?

Can the Texas Rangers (or DPS or any state police) carry their
jurisdiction onto federal or military facilities? I heard so from a
Ranger, so I believe it. It has to do with the incorporation of Texas
into the US.

Are there other ramifications?

Texas Rangers have no more or less authority than any other peace
officer in Texas, just a better mythology behind them.

But, the truth is that some military installations are exclusively
federal jurisdiction, others are concurrent jurisdiction between the
state and the feds. I know that the existence of the post before the
state made it exclusive (from being assigned to Ft. Leavenworth, the
oldest white settlement in what became Kansas). I don't know about Ft.
Hood or the other bases in Texas. I do know that Randolph and Lackland
Air Force bases do not allow Texas Peace officers to carry on their
grounds when off-duty but I don't know about on duty officers. Ft. Sam
Houston used to be open and had public streets owned by San Antonio
running through it, so it was clearly concurrent. They closed it to the
public after 9-11-2001 but I don't know if the legal status changed. I
remember reading about the city arguing about closing the street, but I
never heard the final agreement - but the street is still closed.


Steve Rothstein