.png)
Blue Grit Podcast: The Voice of Texas Law Enforcement
2024: Ranked #1 Law Podcast
Host: Tyler Owen and Clint McNear discussing topics, issues, and stories within the law enforcement community. TMPA is the voice of Texas Law Enforcement, focused on protecting those who serve. Since 1950, we have been defending the rights and interests of Texas Peace Officers by providing the best legal assistance in the country, effective lobbying at state and local levels, affordable training, and exemplary member support. As the largest law enforcement association in Texas, TMPA is proud to represent 33,000 local, county and state law enforcement officers.
Blue Grit Podcast: The Voice of Texas Law Enforcement
#080- "Faith and Legislation" with John Wilkerson and Bryan Flatt
How do you balance the demands of law enforcement with the principles of integrity and faith?
Join us as we host John Wilkerson and Bryan Flatt in a captivating discussion on the legislative landscape impacting law enforcement. They share insights from their work at the Capitol, including testifying on crucial bills like the less lethal bill. Bryan reflects on his journey from the Potter County Sheriff's Office to TMPA, emphasizing perseverance and commitment. He also opens up about maintaining his faith while performing his duties and evolving into a respected chaplain within the law enforcement community.
You don't want to miss this one!
A podcast hosted by 911 First Responders to discuss issues and stories in the field.
Listen on: Apple Podcasts Spotify
email us at- bluegrit@tmpa.org
The environment that the world of law enforcement has been in for the last couple of years of yeah, there's a lot of ugliness out there, and if we can sit there and say, hey, you know, we don't always get it right, but as long as we're faithful and always then because at the end of the day, it's not about what you think about me or somebody else thinks about me or anything like that, it's about what the good Lord thinks about me.
Speaker 2:Welcome back. Viewers, watchers, listeners, I'm your host. Tyler owen got a guest host today. That's been here several times and it's already been pointed out that, uh, our other guest today has never been on. This is his first time on. We got our legislative team, the liaisons, the crew, john wilkerson and brian flat with two t's, two common spelling. Welcome on, guys, two t's.
Speaker 2:Hey, thanks for having us man yeah you, uh guys, took some time away from the capital and I'm sure sitting down for just a couple of hours is probably, uh, you know, well deserved and very much appreciated, since you guys are always constantly busting your ass there in the capital halls yeah, during session, but keep in mind there's still a lot of work that's done outside of session.
Speaker 3:You have interim hearings. We were there last week testifying on less lethal bill Obviously a big issue. We've got to get some good legislation going on that next session. So we were there. Members reach out to us with problems on implementation of bills. We'll talk about some of that today during the show. But even though we're not down at the building walking around, we're still pretty busy.
Speaker 2:You're still out and about.
Speaker 3:You're still out, and about Still pretty active yeah.
Speaker 2:Well, for those that do know or have any involvement with our Ledge team, we have had some changes. We added a, with Brian Flack being a new addition to the team. Anyone that knows Brian and J-Dub these guys typically have been tied at the hip for some time and just have become really good friends, at least since I've known you guys. For you guys to be paired up in a team now at the Capitol, I'm super excited about it. It's just going to be an asset to us. Not saying that Brian's an ass, because I wanted to point that out, that was said at the beginning, but he is going to be a huge asset to us out there at the Capitol.
Speaker 1:Words matter.
Speaker 2:Yeah, words matter, man. For those that don't know, brian, let's talk about you real quick. Talk about intro, you know. Talk about your career, talk about how long you've been with TMPA, where you came from, with the training division and so forth, and then we'll kind of segue into not our legislative agenda, because that's not really been set forth with as far as the guidance from the board, but we do have some key points that we know definitively that we are going to try to address at that Capitol building. So, brian, where are you from? Man, tell us about you.
Speaker 1:So born and raised in Amarillo, Texas, so all the way up in the Panhandle.
Speaker 3:So about five that's right.
Speaker 1:So pretty much in the middle of the Bible belt. Did 24 years worth and retired 10 years ago. So I've been with TMPA for 10 years. Started out working at Potter County Sheriff's office in the jail start off in the jail started off. So many members start Office in the jail Started off in the jail.
Speaker 2:Started off in the jail. So many members started off in the jail or explorers, but a lot of the jail time.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and you know over the years, you know at the time it was man. This is because when they hired me or I was going through my interview board and they had told me back then I don't know if it's still that way now under our old sheriff God rest his soul you had to do a minimum of two years in the jail before you're even eligible to test for deputy. And then, even if there was going to be an opening, it doesn't mean you're going to get it. Because they were like hey, we have people that have been working in the jail for five years, 10 years, 15 years, you know, and all that. And I told them initially I go, I'll give you three years, and if I haven't made deputy in three years, I'm probably on the greener pastures. And they were like what the heck? And I got, fortunate, got out in two and a half, and even though it seemed like it took forever to get out look back on it now it was just a blink of an eye.
Speaker 2:I'm going to say this or ask this question, and I mean this lovingly. Some people that that I've grew I grew up with um grew up in a very structured, innocent type home. What I mean by that is is when they're 18 years old, they don't have a lot of street knowledge and kind of how the streets really work, and so and I I was one of those kids that I was completely naive of really the darkness that really uh, was within my community that I grew up in, and so when I went to the jail, it was a great experience because it opened my eyes to things that the world is really dangerous and there's some dangerous people out there that are locked up for the most part. Did you grow up like that and then being exposed to the jail, was it kind of that transition or did you kind of have that life experience?
Speaker 1:Yeah, I mean, I was brought up in a Christian home. You know we were at church on Sunday morning, sunday night and on Wednesdays, and whenever I got into law enforcement it was just a happen, chance kind of a thing. I had no desire growing up to be a cop, never even thought about it, it just kind of happened. And, yeah, you truly got to see kind of the real world, right, and even though I wouldn't trade the two and a half years for anything, because it was great experience going to the street, um, the first, during the first two months when I almost got killed in the jail I would trade that any day.
Speaker 1:But after that then it was all about, um, truly knowing how evil the world could be and so, like I know a lot of people are, like man, I absolutely hated working the jail it, you know, sometimes you do your time and no pun intended, and especially for the, because most of the people will say, hey, that's where I really learned to communicate. And I had supervisors, that a couple that actually came out and said, if you can learn to communicate in here, that will help you so greatly out on the street. And one of the most poignant things that was ever told to me was they are letting you keep them under control in here, right, and so, yeah, you'd come, you know, go in.
Speaker 1:And so it was a great experience, and so did about 24 years worth up in the panhandle, then, you know, in the middle of the Bible Belt. And then I moved down to the greater Austin area and came to work for TMPA as a full-time instructor, and I was a full-time instructor for a year and a half. Then I took over as training coordinator for the next almost eight and a half years and then moved over to legislative affairs and Estoriga says we've been scheming together ever since.
Speaker 1:Yeah. I don't think he's really grasped that yet. No, no, I do want to touch point.
Speaker 2:You know knowing you for what? I guess I'm going on seven years now at TMPA. You've always maintained I don't think you're officially called TMPA's chaplain. I don't think that title has ever been given to you, but if you've ever attended our conference you are now the Texas FOP chaplain.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I've been a Texas FOP chaplain now for I guess four years and so, and I'm also on the national for national FOP the chaplain advisory committee for that as well.
Speaker 2:One of the things I've always loved and admired about you is that I'm just going to call it what it is. This may come out extremely blunt, but there are people in our profession that are extremist when it comes to their religion and then you have realist that know and understand. I grew up in a very church environment and it was challenging for me because some other situations with a pastor and so it steered me away from the church. But that's my own and I believe in God and I'm a Christian. One of the things I love about you is that you're very balanced, and one of the things that I did not do a good job when I was on patrol is being a Christian.
Speaker 2:You have some opportunities really in the streets. I mean, you talk about people being dangerous and so forth, touch on or talk about. Did you find a struggle or was it challenging for you to be such an outspoken Christian and such kind of a chaplain-oriented type guy? Did you find it hard working the streets and trying to find a balance of being a cop and then being a Christian as far as spreading the word of Jesus? Was it hard?
Speaker 1:So, especially early on. I was 22 years old when I hit the streets and even though I was brought up in a Christian family and went to church and all that, I had my time of rebellion, you know, and I don't think it was very early on that I ever had an opportunity to share my faith, because I'm a sinner just like everybody else, and so I'd have good days and bad days, and I just never really shied away from it. You know, it's kind of one of those things of if there's an opportunity to help somebody because I mean, there's a lot of besides all the ugliness that's out there, there's a lot of people that are in need of help. And when you get somebody that's truly broken out there and they just have nowhere else to go, and that's at the time that you're like this is all I have to offer you. I can't offer you money, I can't offer you a place to stay. This is what I can give to you and share with them any type of experience or knowledge that I have about my faith, and 99.9% of the time people were absolutely responsive to that.
Speaker 1:I gave away several devotion books that I had, and it was just one of those things of. You're figuratively tapped on the shoulder and it's like today's the day. You give that away and one of my favorite books at the time and gave to a we've been in the business for a long time absolute meth addict female that still lived at home with her family. They still allowed her to live there, even though she stole pretty much everything from them. And you just do that, and so we're, especially in the environment that the world of law enforcement has been in for the last couple of years of. Yeah, there's a lot of ugliness out there, and if we can sit there and say, hey, you know we don't always get it right, but as long as we're faithful and always, then because at the end of the day, it's not about what you think about me or somebody else thinks about me or anything like that, it's about what the good Lord thinks about me at the end of the day.
Speaker 1:And you have to daily, you have to wake up. Whenever I walk outside, one of the first things I do is look up somewhere into the sky, because we have no idea where he is, and say good morning Lord. Yeah, right, and it might be 10 minutes later, driving on the way to the office, you know, and close to downtown Austin, and that's when your faith is tested and it's how you deal with that. You know, just like whenever we're going to go work at the Capitol. Uh, I've told JW, you know it's politics and people don't always agree and they don't always like law enforcement. Uh, the the day that session starts, every day that I walk in, I'm going to say a prayer, I'm going to put a hand on the building and after that it's. It's not up to me, wow.
Speaker 2:So that's pretty amazing and anyway, but from from me to you, I've always appreciated you maintaining that, uh, somebody that we can look up to and say, as far as the faith is concerned, um, you, you do a really good job of balancing it.
Speaker 3:So I just want to point out on my drive in this morning I was tested multiple times on the one 83. I just want to make that clear.
Speaker 1:It's austin traffic. What do you? I was about 20 minutes behind you, so I understand yeah.
Speaker 2:well, speaking to the capital, uh, again, your background speaks for itself. You know, coming from being a cop walking the hallways, you have a so much better understanding and better perspective of what needs to be passed and what bills we need to identify. And I say, say we, we as an organization, or a collaborative effort with with other organizations that we do work with, that we need bills that we need to kill, and so having that, that, that experience, just as you know, such as you do, and adding you to the team, is, like I said, it's a, it's a, it's a bonus. So, but transitioning to the Capitol, we got the session coming up next year and, like I said before, we haven't had the, I guess, guidelines given to us or y'all by the board of like these are the priorities, but we do have some understanding of what bills are going to be important.
Speaker 3:Yeah. So you know, to clarify on that, as the year progresses, there's issues that come up and we'll take it to the board and internally, after we discuss it, if we're like, yeah, this is a pretty major issue. So there are a few things that the board has already said. Yes, we're going to make that a priority for us, but not a full-blown list of these.
Speaker 2:Are all of our priorities. Well, give an example of something that you think that an internal discussion is going to be had, and then we as an association, are going to take.
Speaker 3:The approach of this is where we stand. This is what we're going to do now. Go forth and conquer. Uh. So a great one would be, uh, probably like the drone uh issues that were brought to us. I think it was you that got me involved with the drone conference uh, deal, uh. So drones are a vital part of law enforcement. They help help save lives, they help catch bad guys, they keep our members out of harm's way when they're utilized.
Speaker 3:So, even though we don't know exactly what needs to happen with that bill, we do know that it's going to be a major hot button topic for us, like it was last session, right, if you remember last session.
Speaker 3:So down at the Capitol, there's this thing called a vendor bill, right, and that's where somebody goes in and they'll file a bill that says something along the lines of if you're a state agency or government agency, you have to purchase, and it can only be within these parameters, right?
Speaker 3:And when you look at what's in those parameters, it's typically only one or two companies that offer within those parameters, and so what they do is they try to write a vendor bill that carves everybody else out, forces everybody to buy their product, right? That's what we saw last session. And then with that came some changes out of the Fifth Circuit on a pending lawsuit or pending case got remanded or reversed back down, some sanctions lifted off and all that kind of good stuff, and so that's opened up this whole new spectrum of when can law enforcement use a drone and what are the privacy issues associated with it, right? So obviously we're going to have to pay some attention to that. We've, you know our board has already said yes, we can work with the drone association, figure out what legislative changes need to be made and work on trying to get those made. So that's just one example.
Speaker 2:Yeah Well, speaking of the drone I think the most iconic drone, I guess situation that was referred to during session was it not the Dallas 5 incident? Was that not referred to during that it? Was it not the dallas 5 uh incident? Was that not referred to during that where it was? I mean, I mean it and that wasn't a drone, it was a robot so that was actually a couple sessions ago, right?
Speaker 3:um, I'm trying to remember. Uh, the the legislator's name filed a bill. Uh, that would have, that would have prohibited us from using. Um, I'm not, I'm not going to say drones.
Speaker 2:It was something like unmanned, Unmanned yeah, Unmanned yeah.
Speaker 3:And that came out of, I think. I think it came out of the Dallas situation, right, and I think what happens is is you have these special situations like happened right there. I think that Chief Brown, when he made that call to strap R2-D2 with some explosives and send them on in there, I think great idea, right. But you know, in the building there can be some of those that think, oh man, law enforcement did this, and then it's like they go from this extraordinary situation to now they can envision predator drones flying over you know, dropping nukes and all that kind of stuff, right, so kind of a knee jerk reaction that happened and we were able to get that fended off. And I think that, at the end of the day, the bill that passed out of there is needed. The language on it's needed. You know, if you're going to do something, if you're going to use force with you know, with something like that, then there needs to be protocols put into place.
Speaker 2:I wish there would have been an exception to everybody being quote-unquote licensed to operate the drone. I'm just throwing it out there because that course is extreme.
Speaker 3:I heard that course is pretty hard. I mean, I haven't taken it, but I know somebody that did.
Speaker 2:Let's just say I didn't get my wings.
Speaker 3:Oh, that was you.
Speaker 2:Sorry, I forgot. I expected Top Gun and me and Maverick were going to be flying around and it just didn't work out. But yeah, so there's nothing on here. Is there drone lane changes coming up expected for this next session?
Speaker 3:So during the committee hearing that was had last week and man that. So it's funny, you can sit in those committee hearings and you can kind of pick and see what's coming out right. And on one of the interim charges, it had to do with interoperability with communications like 911, communication amongst law enforcement agencies, everything else. And I thought it was pretty ironic that there were two or three companies at that table that uh uh sold drones and and so just makes me think that there's, there's going to be something in the pipes, uh, with interoperability and that kind of stuff again. Uh, the way I read into what they were saying was they're probably looking for a way to get a vendor bill filed.
Speaker 2:Yeah, yeah, well, speaking of other interest groups and how politics plays in those, one other major, major, major problem we see at the Capitol that we're trying to address year after year, session after session, is workers' comp. Oh yes, you put a significant amount of time into it last year, way, way more than I think anybody else would have. As far as showing the dedication, uh, we got there, but we didn't finish the line and it was not anything. Uh, due to your at least dedication or effort. So talk about workers comp, what we're expecting to happen this session and how we're trying to fix the issues yeah.
Speaker 3:so there's a couple different mindsets and mentalities on it, depending on which office you talk to, right? So some say, you know what, since it's so complicated and everything, then we need to break it all out. We need to have first responders with their own comp system and then everybody else with theirs, and then you have the insurance company saying, well, that may not be constitutional, because now you're passing a law that only affects one class of individual, etc. Etc. So there's all that to be worked out, but let's quit over complicating it. The bills house bill 790 last session. That bill is very simplistic, filed by yep, filed by uh representative jr patterson. Yep, uh, very, very good to us.
Speaker 3:Senator Mays Middleton picked it up on the Senate side without going into too much detail. It got murdered in the Senate to all of our viewers, listeners, watchers, watchers, voyeurs, all those folks. It is imperative that you donate to PAC, because what got that bill killed in the Senate? I firmly believe what got that bill killed is the insurance companies killed it. But 790 is real simple. The philosophy is real simple and I don't know why these insurance companies? Well, I know why it cuts into their profit margin, but it's real simple.
Speaker 3:Tyler Owen works on the streets. Tyler Owen gets hurt. Tyler Owen files that workers' comp deal right and it gets denied Fine. You take that denial letter. If you're also on your wife's insurance now, you go on that insurance and you get fixed and you get back to work. If your local association has to sell cookies to get you the surgery that you need, then that happens. Whatever it takes to get Tyler Owen fixed and back to work as quick as possible, that bill would have allowed that to happen. And then, after you're back to work, you go through the appeal process and if you prevail the insurance carrier, all they do is they reimburse the money that you're out.
Speaker 2:That sounds simple to me, sounds real simple. Now, this is mental. Let me just ask this question If I am suffering from a mental, I've been involved in a shooting, I've seen a pretty traumatic, which is a daily occurrence in law enforcement, not shootings, but, as far as you see, in some traumatic event and I'm having some PTSD or I'm having some kind of mental situation has that portion of workman's comp been addressed?
Speaker 3:So this will help with that as well. And so the PTSD portion of workers comp. Here's the big issue with that. For one, you don't have very many doctors out there that specialize in PTSD right, and then out of the ones that you do have, none of them want to deal with workers comp. Because it's a nightmare to deal with workers comp right it's you know you're. You're having to file 10 times as much paperwork and your reimbursement from them is less than what it is with Medicare. So you're having to do more work and you're getting paid less.
Speaker 3:And so when you find a mental health professional that's willing to take a comp case, you better put them on your Christmas card list because they're good-hearted people that are seriously just trying to help law enforcement or public safety or public safety.
Speaker 3:So again, kind of getting back to the okay, if you know, if comp's going to deny and comp denies it's a war of attrition, is what it is. So when they deny and they take you down, that war of attrition and they just want you to give up, it's really easy to do. On the mental health spectrum side of it, I've talked to a lot of members and where you run into your real big issues is like, say, the city of Austin who's self-insured with a third-party administrator. I've talked to several public safety folks that tried to get help with mental health but because of the city of Austin's workers' comp self-insurance and their third-party carrier, nobody wants to work with that system. So a lot of problems with it. We have to take it one step at a time, take small bites out of the apple to eventually get it where we need to be?
Speaker 2:Do you think that the original 790 bill that passed the House last time, what manipulation or rewording do you think should or could happen to get it passed the finish line to the Senate this time?
Speaker 3:Or, if any, I don't think any needs to happen. I think we're definitely going to have to re-strategize on how to get it to the Senate. I don't doubt for one bit we'll get it to the House again. It passed unanimously out of the House last session, so all 148 state reps that were present that day voted in support of that bill and none of them went back and changed their vote afterwards. Everybody understood and recognized that this is a very important piece of legislation for TMPA and for the public safety as a whole very important piece of legislation for tmpa and for the public safety as a whole.
Speaker 2:So last session was so interesting too, though, because I think there was a was a big storm brewing uh at the capitol, and it at least it seemed like to me just the average texan citizen that had law enforcement experience was. Anything that did pass out of the house unanimously was almost targeted or going to be targeted when it went to the senate, just because of the situation brewing and kind of ongoing. At least it looked that way to me.
Speaker 3:Yeah, and it was frustrating for us, let me tell you. It was very frustrating because you know you've got all these different political fronts down there, right, You've got this chairman of this committee wants to get his bill through, so he's going to hold up a bill from this representative, but then somebody else injects because they want their bill to come through, and so you've got all these different pulling parts and then everybody's blaming each other, which is why you started and it got comical sometimes. It was frustrating for the most part, but it was comical at other times because you'd see state reps walk up to the back mic. They'd get a bill from the Senate, so they'd work out a deal, and you saw this on both sides. You would see where you know they'd say okay, look, I'll carry your bill here, you carry my bill there.
Speaker 3:Well then they felt like the other side, whether it's house or Senate they felt like the other side wasn't moving it fast enough, or moving it far enough, or moving at the speed that they wanted, and so it was almost like this you know this, this show off. You know it's like okay, Tyler, I've got your bill. You need to, you need to get my bill heard, you need to get it moving and then all of a sudden you'd go off and you'd work my side of the house, or my, my side of the Senate and you'd get that bill put up. Well, it's still up to me to push that bill. So what do I do? I take the back mic and I just postpone the bill until, say, September 26, 2035.
Speaker 2:Okay, Wow, yeah, that's just well. It's politics, though, yeah, and that's something that I've. It's very interesting for those that during session, you can follow every single committee, follow bills, and we do a decent job. I'll say this On the communication side of things we can't show our cards too much, uh, because there's strategies behind it, and so some members have said in the past man, I, I really want to know about this bill and this bill, um, you can call us and we can talk to you. We just are very careful on what we put out there when we put it out there for strategy reasons on the legislative side, right? So, uh, anyway, it's just a complex and things, things change so quickly down there they do you know?
Speaker 3:a great example of things changing quickly the kobe bryant bill, right, the, you know, don't photograph dead bodies and that kind of stuff share it, right? So the senator that filed that bill, he originally had a criminal penalty associated with it. Well, obviously it didn't have strong enough language in there that would protect, say, your homicide investigators that are doing a conference and teaching or doing a school or something like that A very far-reaching district attorney not that we have any in this area, but a, you know, a district attorney that's, you know, targeting police. I could see them going after something like this, right, just to kind of get a dig in there. So, you know, we approached their office and we're like, hey, we want this pulled out. And they're like, no, no, that's got to stay in. So I'm like okay, so we're opposed to it.
Speaker 3:So I'm walking, the bill's coming up for hearing, I'm walking up to the kiosk, which is an iPad, and I'm plugging in my information, that registered TMa against the bill. Right when I hit submit, I get a call from ray hunt, from hplu, says hey, hey, the senator is going to go and remove that. Oh crap, well, can you tell him? Uh, we'll change our position at a later date, but we're registered against the bill right now, so literally it changes that quick.
Speaker 2:Wow, that's interesting. Well, speaking of uh, is that the invasive visual recording bill? Is that something different?
Speaker 3:no, so a member, uh, with the, the South Texas ICAC, back when we were teaching a legislative update class, he brought that bill up and basically and our board agreed with the philosophy on that If you're committing that act and here's the best way he explained it a complete stranger violates somebody else's privacy with that. That level of offense is exactly the same as if it's done to say a guy does that to his stepdaughter.
Speaker 3:Give me an example of what that bill would target. So what it would do is it would create enhancements. So right now I believe it's a state jail felony for invasive visual recording.
Speaker 2:Like a hidden cam.
Speaker 3:Yeah, a hidden cam. Right, You're recording the intimate areas of a person in their bathroom, in their bedroom, something like that. Well, with the changes that we're looking at is, if the person that's being recorded as a minor under the age of 17, there needs to be an enhancement. And if that person looks to the person that's doing it for protection parent figure, something like that then there needs to be a bigger enhancement on that as well okay, yeah, it makes sense.
Speaker 3:I mean again, there's some of the shit just makes sense I mean you can't say any other way and the biggest and the biggest thing is that came from our members. Right, those are our members that are out there doing the job day in and day out, and they're communicating these things to us and that's part of our job, that's what Brian and I do. Is we take what our members are saying?
Speaker 2:we take it down to that building and we try to get some good changes made. Is it too late right now, you think, for of what? We've already kind of set some guidelines and what our mission is for the session. At what point is kind of a cutoff of? Like man, it's kind of too late. You know, brian, to reach out to me for this next session. However, moving forward, for you know, the next session for what I guess would be the 90th or is this upcoming? Is this the 90th coming up? 89., 89., 89. Be the 90th or is this coming upcoming? Is this the 90th coming up? 89, 89, 89, so the 90th? We'll go ahead and set this uh, you know guideline or recommendation. We'll try to work with bills. Then when's a good cutoff for members to be calling you guys to work on these topics during the off season?
Speaker 3:well, I'll tell you a cutoff is probably mid-march and I and I say that loosely and the reason why I say that's cut off is because about mid-March, late March, that's when the cutoff is to file bills. If any of our members have an idea for legislation, bring those to us, because I'll give you a great point Past President Joe Tovar, right last session. One of the things that he put on our plate that the board approved was trying to get the minimum threshold for crash reporting raised from 1,000 to 5,000. Well, let's say that that was not something that was brought to us in advance, but that's something where we have members that reach out to us midstream and they go hey, you know, this would be really nice. Now, that is a very simplistic fix and not all of them are simplistic. There's a lot of unintended consequences when you start changing bills, right, but on something like that, we can find another bill that's germane to the transportation code to crashes. Big word, big word. We can find something that's there and we can go that author and we can try to get that language put in. And that's something that we did because the bill that we had a state representative I'm trying to remember his name that filed that I want to say Munoz filed that one for us. No, no, I take that back. Fred Frazier filed that one for us. His bill didn't get any traction. But Senator Alvarado had a bill that was germane, and so we worked something out in there, but then, unfortunately, that bill got killed too Right? So if you have an idea, bring it to us. I would say, if you have an idea and you're like this needs to be changed right now, during this next session, that's something that you need to be bringing to us months in advance, so that way we can do the legwork of getting it dissected.
Speaker 3:What you know? Give you a great example. Let's say civil service. Right, somebody says you know what? There's this little section in the civil service statute that we need to get changed. Okay, there's a couple issues with that. There's several different types of civil service. But then here's the big thing you can open up a bill, or you can get a bill filed, and when you open that statute up, it's subject to amendments being filed on it. So somebody can come to us and say, hey, there's a really great idea that I have for, say 143, municipal civil service. I think this needs to be in there. We look at it. We're always apprehensive on those. Reason being is because you can file that, it can work its way through and everything's going beautiful. And then all of a sudden, boom, boom, amendment drops that completely, repeals 143 altogether, and if that's what passes, 143 is gone yeah, can.
Speaker 2:You can. Can a rep file a bill that's quote-unquote closed, or you can essentially attach an amendment to any bill.
Speaker 3:So it cannot violate the two-subject rule and it has to be germane. Okay, so dumb that down for me, I wish.
Speaker 2:I could.
Speaker 3:You know for germane it has to be related right Right, but the two-subject rule is open to interpretation.
Speaker 2:I have tried to understand that You've been in that building too long.
Speaker 3:That's way political answer. All that way I have tried to understand the two-subject rule and I've seen where the parliamentarian has ruled, where I'm looking at it and I'm going, oh, that clearly violates the two-subject rule. And they're like, nope, it doesn't. And then others Move along, yeah, and then others it's like, okay, that's the same subject. They're like, nope, this is too subject to rule violation. I'm like, oh God, I don't know.
Speaker 2:And back to Joe Tovar, or past President Tovar's spirit of that bill. For our non-listeners you may not be aware of this, but law enforcement, we're not required to work any accident. The only accident report that we are required as peace officers is to complete accident reports that involve death. The spirit behind past President Tovar, because it's a recommendation, because you may walk up to an accident and say, oh, there's clearly a thousand dollars worth of damage. I may walk up there. Good example is where you live at on the North side of the Austin area and where I live at on the South side of Boston area and where Brian lives at on the Western side. I guess your interpretation for what the current prices of what those body shops may go for may be spectrums apart and so it's up to interpretation. There's no requirement for us to do an accident report unless there's death involved.
Speaker 3:Now, just for clarification the only time we have to in law, the only time we have to do a crash report is if we investigate the crash.
Speaker 2:I disagree, and the only reason why is because it clearly says in there that if a death occurs, the act report shall be completed. I've never read anything where it says shall be for us quote unquote investigate. I've never read that. I'm not saying it's not there.
Speaker 3:There's no law saying that you have to investigate. Well, that's true. The law says if you do investigate, you have to file a report, right?
Speaker 2:But what is the like time frame for investigation? Show up on the scene and say hell, no, this isn't $1,000?.
Speaker 3:Well, leave the $1,000 out of it. Right, right, right. And so there's. There is specific language in there that talks about what an investigation is, and it's very, is it, vague?
Speaker 2:too. It's very vague yeah.
Speaker 3:And so you know my recommendation. And then you know I was pulling patrol shifts there in July 4th and I bet I responded to four different crashes that weekend and not once that I pull up and say what happened. I responded to four different crashes that weekend and not once did I pull up and say what happened. I pulled up and said need an ambulance. Guess how many crash reports I did Zero, zero.
Speaker 2:Well, that's true.
Speaker 2:Did you know this? Maybe we can talk off air that fire departments, when they show up to a scene and there's insurance, they technically can bill for each engine arriving to that scene, which is a moneymaker, and that's a slippery slope, in my opinion, for cities. But if fire departments can do it, I don't understand why all these cities and municipalities to include counties as well why they can't at least bill for time and effort spent on investing. Because, let's face it, the only reason, in my opinion, this again, this is no reflection of TMPA, but in my opinion, the only reason why law enforcement completes traffic reports is for insurance purposes only, with the exception of death, because it's basically civil. In my opinion, it falls under the civil aspect of it.
Speaker 2:I don't I I don't agree with us working them, uh, but we do, and so we're going to continue to do it. And so I think, with the retention, recruitment and financial situation that all law enforcement issues are across, I don't think it it would harm anything for us to be able to build the caveat to that, that is, that those are also our taxpayers, the taxpayers we work for them, and so, in return, their premiums are going to shoot up, and so it may be a slippery slope, but I didn't know if you knew that or not.
Speaker 3:Yeah, actually I do, and the only reason I know that is because, in order for our volunteer fire department, where I live at, they had to come to the city council and get the city council to file a document and sign the agreement that would allow them to do so. I got you, I got you.
Speaker 2:Well, it's very interesting. That whole accident report system is crazy. But speaking of counties, you said that while I go about civil service, let's talk about civil service in this next legislation and kind of what we're expecting, what we're planning to do. We've had some success, recent success in Williamson County. Our field rep, david Kerlowicz, did a really good job. You guys assisted with that as well, with Williamson County getting civil service. So talk about what our next, I guess, upcoming agenda is with pertaining to civil service.
Speaker 3:on counties, yeah, we've got to strengthen it. And therein lies the problem. If you go back and you look at municipal civil service versus county civil service, right 143, municipal civil service when a city adopts 143, you've got pages and pages and pages of law that they have to adopt with it. And the only way that you variate off of that is if you enter into a collective bargaining agreement or a meet-confer agreement. There is a little bit of wiggle room in there for the Civil Service Commission to make some of their own rules. But generally speaking, when a city adopts municipal civil service, they adopt everything in that law. County civil service it's a stepchild. They appoint the Civil Service Commission and the Civil Service Commission makes whatever rules they want to. So you can actually run a referendum and get the voters to approve county civil service and at the end of the day the county civil service commission can say man, we're going to leave everything the same, but there's guidelines, I mean, of what counties can qualify for that.
Speaker 3:Yes, yes. So there and that's where it gets even more confusing, because you got some that's 300,000, some 250, some 500,000. You got subchapter A county civil service, subchapter B county civil service. But bottom line is is, whatever the county service system is that gets adopted, we've got to find a way to get some better protections for our members in there.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I agree. Well, working for a county can be very complex, very challenging. Your boss is elected I said this on last podcast is that I don't think any elected official pertaining to law enforcement that be the sheriff, district attorneys, judges I don't personally think they should have any type of party affiliation because it can be just. It's a challenging situation to be in and the fact of the matter is is law is black and white, it's not red and blue, and so I don't see why there's a need to have a party affiliation when it comes to elections pertaining to law enforcement or people that are involved in the criminal justice system.
Speaker 3:You know I've never put any thought into that, but I tend to agree with you. I mean, the mayors don't have to declare, that's right.
Speaker 2:And so I don't understand the understanding behind it, because it can change the dynamics of a sheriff's office within, you know, seconds. I mean it's just crazy. But anyway, general thoughts and legislative ideas. Brian, with your training experience you know we all every cop out there that has any involvement with following the session we always get tense, you know, when session comes out because they're going to add the dreaded T-Cole hours to the upcoming stuff. With your past experience being a trading coordinator for TMPA and also a 20-year comp, is there something that you would like to see Now that you're on the team I mean, you're the frontrunner with J-Dub Mitch Landry and John Siriga down there Is there something that you already had kind of an idea for moving forward to this next session of, kind of like man, this needs to happen. This is why, or do you just kind of be kind of the liaison between training and our ledge team? Is there an idea that you have or no?
Speaker 1:Gosh, I have a million ideas because you know it is like you say once, a session meets every two years and that new list comes out.
Speaker 2:As cops we're always like oh we have to sit here and take.
Speaker 1:X, y and Z.
Speaker 2:And what's funny is it's always a hiccup that law enforcement has of why we've got to do the training. A couple years ago we had the impaired driver course. I mean, these are good classes for law enforcement to take, not under it, but the dog shooting of the dog incident.
Speaker 1:Don't shoot Fluffy the dog. Yeah, don't shoot Fluffy the dog, but anyway.
Speaker 1:Yeah, it's like what you say and you probably did when you were still working. Our policy manuals were this thick for a reason and in some places you know exactly who that policy was in reference to Right, and so we take that in Texas and then it also hits us nationwide. You know that's happened over the last several years. I mean, there's things that I look at just from my history and what I was truly passionate about on the use of force and defensive tactics and tactical kind of stuff and whatnot. That it's like whenever you, up until knowing, like whenever JW was asking me, hey, do you want to come and work with me at the Capitol, and I was like you've got to be out of your mind, you're crazy, right. And then finally it happens. I was like it's time and where you know, going all over the state, you know over almost 10 years' worth and thousands of students come into classes and you know you hear it. You know, especially when you teach legislative update class and you know you're trying to bring that passion to that class.
Speaker 1:You know, and one of the first things I always asked was how many of you followed this last legislative session. Not one hand, very few that would ever raise their hand. And then I would follow it up with okay, how many of you like politics? No hands, right. And then how many of you don't like politics. And then you know most of the hands come up. And then, whenever you would ask them, I'd go. Why are we not involved with this? And I'm a victim of that as well, especially early on why are we not part of this? If we're going to sit there and gripe and moan and complain about it, why are we not at that table having those meetings to say, hey, because you know, you think in Texas there's 80,000 peace officers, 25,000, 26,000 jailers, I think it's upwards of 8,000 to 10,000 telecommunicators, now dispatchers Wow, everybody has their own unique need, right. So it's like, you know, after this last session, the incident, you know that happened in Uvalde and what transpired with that.
Speaker 1:And then you know now the alert training for everybody, and I was hearing that you know just teaching it, and it's like, okay, it's valid training, right, and we should probably do this. And then, whenever it comes out as hey, here's this laundry list of classes that you can take to fulfill that mandate. And just from my background, I'm like, well, that's not really what I was looking at. But okay, where you have all that and yet we still have like, and I still get asked about this of how come we don't?
Speaker 1:And there was many man, it was probably, I don't even know. It was many years ago. I got a took an email one day and this guy had asked he was very actively involved in jujitsu for cops and he was like, hey, what, what's your thoughts on making it mandatory for jujitsu training for cops? Well, I was a defensive tactics guyatives guy and did jiu-jitsu, you know a little bit. And I was like, hey, I'm absolutely on board with that. Any training you can get to to help us out on the street, absolutely, is there a chance that that's going to pass for every cop to do that? Never, never going to happen. Because there's no, no requirement in tico where an agency has to have an annual or every other year use of force, combatives, arrest and control training period.
Speaker 2:There's no law on that, and it's not because they don't believe in it, it's the funding. It always comes Well, it's always the funding, the lack of, funding the insurance premium.
Speaker 3:You know there's always the oh. You know people get hurt Insurance premiums.
Speaker 1:People get hurt. You know there's always the oh, you know people get hurt. We'll have quality instruction and I mean we can get hurt walking up a set of stairs, right, it is what it is. But I mean, yeah, I have a lot of things that you know, like when we were at the, I was listening to and watching JW testify at that hearing last week on the less lethal and even though I haven't been there for a session yet on this side of things and listening to some of the members of the committee up there, some of the comments that they had to people that were up there and the questions that they asked.
Speaker 1:And you sit back there and go and some of y'all don't, just, you just don't have a clue about this. You just don't have a clue, right? And so that old adage of hey, unless you've been in our shoes and taken that walk with us, yep, right, and so it's going to be very challenging but very rewarding. Um, people have asked you know, hey, what's your? You know, what are you looking forward to? I was like I'm just ready for it to get started. Yeah, you know, and I've. I've tell everybody that I talked to to, hey, if you have something that you want to try to push forward, contact us, like JW talked about, so we can get you out. And I've had a couple people like, hey, I absolutely never knew that a cop could come down and by cop I mean everybody in the field that we had the opportunity to come down and testify in a committee hearing. Like it blew some of them away.
Speaker 2:It's like you know what? I just have this idea if we can pull it off, it'd be great and we had a lot of success. You two were very much instrumental and involved with the use of force uh media day that we had with the uh. Oh shit, what was the, the organization? Uh, anyway, it was in. It was in williamson, county man, how, how cool would that be to invite some legislators to do use of force training and we may or may not invite the media, depending on kind of how that would benefit us but I think it'd be cool, I think it'd be really beneficial, honestly.
Speaker 3:Yeah, and so with that committee hearing last week, one of the things that we're going to do is we're going to follow back up and we're going to invite those folks out. We made some great relationships with Axon and some of those other groups and you know that's part of what we do here with the legislative team is we try to get them exposed as much as possible. And so one of the things that we're going to circle back with some of those committee members on we're going to try to get like a range day set up where some of those members can come out and they can fire some less lethal rounds, they can pop off some tasers. Uh, brian volunteered to get shocked.
Speaker 2:I was waiting for that. I was waiting for that, and I'll.
Speaker 1:I'll take a uh 40 millimeter If you get to. Oh my God, what you would only if I get to shoot it but, oh my God, you know how we're always scheming, true, true.
Speaker 2:And the cool thing about, we've got so many quality, awesome ranges thanks to some good law enforcement leadership here in the area. We've got Williamson County with Sheriff Gleason. We've got well interim Chief Henderson with Austin PD and our friends over at APA. There's Chicago and Leander, I think, has got you know, round Rock's got a phenomenal facility Burn it.
Speaker 2:Yeah, so we've got some facilities that we can use. But back to your point about people who don't really follow. There was a point thank God I've already got two kids and I'll make this point in a minute is that there was a point during the 87th session where there was a piece of legislation filed. It didn't pass. It got to the finish line almost and minutes were counting down and it didn't make it with the child transfer bill.
Speaker 2:And me and Janet no shit, we were laying in bed every single night watching committee hearings, waiting for this bill to come up, and I just walked out using the restroom and saw her in bed you know she's got her cell phone, watched the committee hearing. It was a different committee than I was watching and I was like this is the life of Tyler Owen. We're watching committee hearings at 1030 at night. That's a daily occurrence for you guys, whether you're there or watching them to monitor kind of what's going on. It was just kind of interesting. But speaking of that Bill, that's one thing We've gotten a lot of phone calls on this Right before we walked in this room.
Speaker 3:I was on this right before we walked in this room.
Speaker 2:I was on the phone with one, the spirit of the bill was great and we are so appreciative of the initial filing by then State Rep Chris Patty. And then thank God that Candy Nobles picked it up. Representative Nobles carried it across the finish line of the House and then ultimately I think Senator Hughes is the one that picked it up there in the Senate and we got it passed.
Speaker 3:Got it passed, yeah.
Speaker 2:But we found some. Well, we didn't. The school district seemingly found some loophole.
Speaker 3:Well, yeah, so, and this is a great opportunity to talk about this and maybe I'm hopeful that we'll get some folks that will watch this and they'll get a better understanding of it. So bottom line what happened is, when you get a bill filed, it goes to this group called Texas Ledge Council. Texas Ledge Council a bunch of lawyers, they make sure it's constitutional, they make sure it's got the right language in it, et cetera, et cetera. Somehow a little bit of language got stuck into that bill that basically says that the transfer of that peace officer's kid is the same as a transfer under this other section. That other section is what authorizes two school districts to enter into an agreement for transfer of kids. The intent of putting that in there was to kind of make it a little bit more clear, cut on. You know kind of what the process is. But the way that the school districts interpret it. But the way that the school districts interpret it and the way that the legal minds interpret it is is that if there is an agreement in place, then now 1959, house Bill 1959 would compel those two schools to transfer the kid. But if there's not an agreement in place, then they don't have to enter into that agreement. And so there's that little catch, there's that little loophole.
Speaker 3:Talk to Tiger Hanner, one of our really badass attorneys, and he's done a lot of work for school districts and Tiger told me he said a lot of school districts don't enter into agreements anyways. They kind of do this ad hoc. This kid, we're going to take this one to the board and, you know, maybe not this one, because they're fearful if they enter into an agreement then it'll open the floodgates for more, et cetera, et cetera. Good news about it is I talked to Representative Kenny Noble about it. She's not happy with the way that this has been handled and she's all on board with getting it fixed. Talked to the public education chairman, brad Buckley.
Speaker 1:Great guy.
Speaker 3:Yep, great guy, he's on board with getting it fixed. We just got to wait for the session to start.
Speaker 2:The spirit behind the bill. What began? It was jokingly called during the 87th here internally at TMPAs, the Tyler Owen bill. But what happened was my daughter, I tried to. I lived in a very small rural town in East Texas and she ultimately became bullied because of my profession.
Speaker 2:I was part of a, a unit that we went out and apprehended people task force and yeah, and so I did not typically wear that type of stuff around my kids at school and I was running late. We had just served a warrant and basically was in school with all my my gear on. Well, if you think about the environment of that, some of the kids that she went to school with they're family members. I don't want to use the word targeted, because we were just simply doing our jobs, because those were violent offenders. But she became bullied about it.
Speaker 2:So when I began doing my research of trying to transfer my child out of the school district that we lived in to neighboring school districts, it was obvious to me it was impossible or there was a cost associated with it of upwards to around $2,000 to $3,000 for the transfer price. Doing a little bit of research, it showed that if you're an employee of the school district of a neighboring school district, then you could bring your kids over. Or if you were a military veteran. And so I called bullshit where bullshit needed to be called, and this simply reached out. Me and my state rep had a great working relationship together. He was awesome Again, Chris Patty, and just called him up and said hey, I need your help. My kid's being bullied. How can we fix it? And then they happen. And so that's the spirit behind the bill. Uh, again we got legislation passed.
Speaker 2:It seems to be cleaned up just a little bit yeah, and we've got the commitment from the movers and shakers down there well, and what's interesting is that we got, when this came out, that this bill was was going, and this probably happens with all so many other bills that you guys do or you guys are associated with. What I didn't realize is there was a situation in north texas where one of our members was involved with a critical incident where a bad guy pulled a gun on officer officer, unfortunately had to do his job and and ended up taking the guy's life because it was a justified use of force situation. What he didn't know is that bad guy and his child, the bad guy's child and his child, the officers, officers they went to school with each other. You talk about awkward and so it created problems, clearly, and so, yeah, there's been so many different stories come out of those. But what's so fascinating to me is how many bills were filed last session Approximately. I mean, there's thousands and thousands of bills.
Speaker 3:I didn't mean to put you on the spot, yeah you did I got that you sucked.
Speaker 2:My point is this I want to say there's about 12,000. My point is this is that that's stories, like I just said, of situations that I had an idea, and at that time I was operating under the umbrella, that I was just a citizen of Texas, right, I was operating under the umbrella, that I was just a citizen of Texas, right, tmpa, I don't want to say jump on board, but they got involved later on because Chris Paddy reached out to our executive team. But every single bill has a story just like that where it's a Texan or a citizen or a cop or a fireman has an idea of like man, we love Texas. Texas is the best country in the world. Let's make it better, let's make it better for our kids, let's make it better for us, for you, for me and for everybody around us. And so that's what I find so fascinating about the session and all the bills filed.
Speaker 2:Now I'm not saying that some groups or some state elected officials don't do things for personal reasons. Those happen, right, they do. But for the most part we've got a good group of legislators coming in and it's going to be a different group. There was a lot of politic changing and moving and maneuvering around last election.
Speaker 3:I think last I counted we're looking at about 32 new House reps.
Speaker 2:Which is significant.
Speaker 3:It is considering, there's only 150.
Speaker 2:Well, and it's almost like, because there's so many, I mean, again, if you watch session, you need to, if you haven't already but there's certain rules in place of what you can and can't do.
Speaker 2:And so the first couple of weeks of session is almost like well, brian, you're going to be experiencing this, is watching it, rule of order, you know, and they have to. Basically there's a training part Right During, because it's not like you go there, you get trained up and then now you're a state rep, they're a state rep right now, and so when they have to go to session and there's like training wheels and so then you watch them kind of kind of fly and they start spreading their wings and now we're good to go. So, anyway, it's just an interesting time. And, man, I've just an interesting time and and uh, man, I've got so much uh praise for you guys, because what you guys are doing, uh, number one, it's not highlighted enough, because sometimes we just can't. Uh, you guys are kind of like the secret service of tmpa, because some of the shit that you guys do is behind closed doors that nobody really needs to know about or or should know about, you know two things on that.
Speaker 3:One, where where change really happens is not in the committee rooms. Where change really happens is not on the house floor, on the senate floor. Where change happens is when we have a good relationship with those members down there and when we see a bad piece of legislation that's filed. And I'll give you a great example of this. Love the guy to death, ben bum gardner. I sing his praises everywhere I go, reason being his times with him in springer.
Speaker 3:Yeah, uh, reason being is is there was a really, really bad piece of legislation I forget what it was, but had to do with officer rights and I walked into his office and ben bum gardner, out of 150 state reps. You walk into any state reps office. You talk to their scheduler first, and then maybe their ledge director, then maybe their chief of staff and you get it lucky, on a day maybe you get to run into the state rep. You walk into Ben Bumgarner's office. He's got his desk right there. His philosophy is I'm elected by the people. They walk in here to see me. They need to see me, so he doesn't hide out in the back office I'm not saying that those because they stay busy and they've got to be able to designate their time. But I always respected that about him. But anyway, so I'm in there and this bad piece of legislation and he's getting pressure from some of the other freshmen during that time period to support this piece of legislation. And he asked me about it and look at, I said man, that's shit. I think it was had to do with officers providing statements after critical instances, with with uh being recorded. I man, I can't remember there were so many bills uh, but I I do distinctly remember having to do with with officer rights, uh and due process. And so anyways, he uh uh. No, no, I take that back. That was on the standalone. I remember which bill it was. It was on the standalone bill to do away with due process on SOA hearings for F5 discharges. So that eventually got passed out of Senate Bill 1445, but there was a standalone bill.
Speaker 3:And so he's getting pressure to support this bill and he's like, hey, tell me about this, what do you think? And I said we're opposed to it. He says why? And I said because it's a shit bill. He said well, it makes it that way. And so I explained to him. I told him just a few stories of our members who maybe got on the bad side of their chief or the bad side of their sheriff, and their chief or sheriff retaliated against him, gave him a bad F five, and that happens, I didn't. So his response shout out Texas city, yeah, uh, his. His response on that was oh fuck, that rips to build up and says I'm against it. Having that kind of relationship with those folks is what makes change down there.
Speaker 2:Yeah, no, I'm great, great point, great yeah, no, I'm great, great point, great point. Man, is there anything else?
Speaker 3:that you guys want to cover or go over? No Okay, I don't think so. So just one thing Want to give props to my boy here. He's going through his FTO program right now.
Speaker 2:I was going to ask you, and he gets frustrated.
Speaker 3:He gets frustrated with me because we'll go to the cap and I'm like all right, take me to this office, and that building can be a little cumbersome to get around if you're not too familiar. Oh so it's kind of like the.
Speaker 2:Where are we at? Oh yeah, in the, in the cop car deal it is. Are you? Are you doing good?
Speaker 1:and he, he throws that out when you, just like we did as ftos, out on the street when they don't even see it coming.
Speaker 2:Well, those that have never walked the hallways of the Capitol, every single hallway. In the back they're literally painted. The walls are painted the same, the wood is the same stain color. You can get lost pretty easy. It is very much a maze, absolutely.
Speaker 3:I'm glad you're passing, Brian.
Speaker 1:I don't want to bust him out, but the other day he had me going up a flight of stairs, across down a flight of stairs, and we ended up right back where we started. Yeah, well, for whatever reason, I don't think I hadn't had my second cup of coffee yet, I don't know. Uh, knowing full well that where we were going, that we go downstairs first, and for whatever reason, I was like let's take that staircase well again.
Speaker 2:I I greatly appreciate it. Majority of everybody else that that is involved with the session appreciates you guys. So looking forward to this session and looking forward to you getting another I guess one year under your belt, this will be your third session, so it'll be a good time.
Speaker 2:I hope you study, because there is a couple of questions that we typically do on Blue Grid Podcast. We were unable to do it last podcast because our guest was not a cop. But are you ready? Sure, what is your favorite drink of choice? I'm sorry, let's start off with this your favorite cop car, your favorite line from a cop movie or your favorite cop movie and your favorite drink of choice.
Speaker 1:Probably favorite cop movie for me would be then obviously will show my age would be hill street blues. That's a good one. That's a good one, absolutely on that favorite cop car crown vick crown vick that is the work predominant thing that I wrote. You know that I drove, and especially because I'm old enough, the very first crown v Vic I drove was my sheriff, jimmy Dunn Boydston. Back then it was passed on from him. It was the sheriff's car, so whenever he had it got it brand new and that's the old kind of box style.
Speaker 2:It's probably like a civilian model, probably.
Speaker 1:Well, he never had to test that, like he drove from his house to the office, which was, I think, only like four or five miles a day on that. So by the time it got to me like it had never been like broken.
Speaker 2:Broken.
Speaker 1:Like to get the accelerator to go fast, like you would get a cramp in your foot and your leg because you're pressing that gas pedal down so hard and I would have to pull the steering wheel to get that counter and like it just wasn't broken. So that was my first one. So, yeah, absolutely able to get that counter and like it just wasn't broken, so that was my first one.
Speaker 2:So, um, yeah, absolutely. And that was, you know, the first time I got to crown vic and it had cruise control. Remember the old style like steering wheels, just they were slick, they just had the big old four oval. Uh I, I was like man, they've upgraded. And so I, I for the longest thought I was so proud that the department that I came from had upgraded to the premium police package, and then later I was told that that's standard. Now we're up at age that we have electric windows and everything else. What's your favorite drinking choice?
Speaker 1:Well, really it's Dr Pepper. But as far as adult beverage, because I'm not a huge drinker, I might drink a beer once or twice a month, and that's usually beer. So I'm not. I mean, I got introduced to the old-fashioned thing.
Speaker 2:And it's not bad, it's not bad.
Speaker 1:But I'm just not, because if I'm at the house and I've had two beers, then it's time for bed and I've had two beers, then it's time for bed. So you know, as far as beer goes would be, usually it's a Blue Moon or a Shock Top. Those are so good. But I'll also drink a Lone Star yeah.
Speaker 2:So I'm not a Lone Star will put you on your ass if you ain't careful.
Speaker 3:Do you not have tap water out of the sink?
Speaker 2:We do oh okay, we do, it's about the same I'm oh well for buffalo and buffalo trace and angel envy guys that I would say the same thing. I stay away from those. Uh, I'm a beer guy. Angels envy and buffalo traces, uh, does not do good things I've heard you got some experience with angels.
Speaker 3:All right well that's uh.
Speaker 2:That's it from our ledge team. If you guys need to reach out to our Ledge guys, I'll put the email there in the description. Thank you so much for tuning in. You guys. Stay safe, stay cool. We are experiencing this is the hottest part of Texas. We are experiencing that there down in Wimberley, football season's kicked off, favorite time of the year across the state. Texas high school football kicks off in a couple weeks and super exciting times. So, anyway, that's it for Must Be Stay safe, stay cool. God bless you and, as always, may God bless Texas. We're out, thank you.
