In the United States, a car title loan, is a type of secured loan where borrowers can use their vehicle title as collateral. Borrowers who get title loans must allow a lender to place a lien on their car title, and temporarily surrender the hard copy of their vehicle title, in exchange for a loan amount. When the loan is repaid, the lien is removed and the car title is returned to its owner. If the borrower defaults on their payments then the lender is liable to repossess the vehicle and sell it to repay the borrowers’ outstanding debt.

These loans are typically short-term, and tend to carry higher interest rates than other sources of credit. Lenders typically do not check the credit history of borrowers for these loans and only consider the value and condition of the vehicle that is being used to secure it. Despite the secured nature of the loan, lenders argue that the comparatively high rates of interest that they charge are necessary. As evidence for this, they point to the increased risk of default on a type of loan that is used almost exclusively by borrowers who are already experiencing financial difficulties.

Most title loans can be acquired in 15 minutes or less on loan amounts as little as $100. Most other financial institutions will not loan under $1,000 to someone without any credit as they deem these not profitable and too risky. In addition to verifying the borrower's collateral, many lenders verify that the borrower is employed or has some source of regular income. The lenders do not generally consider the borrower's credit score.

History

Title loans first emerged in the early 1990s and opened a new market to individuals with poor credit and have grown increasingly popular, according to studies by the Center for Responsible Lending and Consumer Federation of America. They are the cousin of unsecured loans, such as payday loans. Since borrowers use their car titles to secure the loans, there’s risk that the borrower can lose their vehicle by defaulting on their payments due to personal circumstances or high interest rates, which almost always have APR in the triple digitsâ€"what are sometimes called “balloon payments”.

Alternative title lending exist in many states known as car title pawn or auto pawn as they are called. Similar to a traditional car title loan, a car title pawn uses both the car title and the physical vehicle (which is usually stored by the lender) to secure the loan much like any secured loan works, and there are the same risk and factors involved for the borrower but in most cases they will receive more cash in the transaction since the lender has both the vehicle and title in their possession.

Process

A borrower will seek the services of a lender either online or at a store location. In order to secure the loan the borrower will need to have certain forms of identification such as a valid government-issued ID like a driver’s license, proof of income, some form of mail to prove residency, car registration, a lien-free car title in their name, references and car insurance, though not all states require lenders to show proof of auto insurance.

The maximum amount of the loan is determined by the collateral. Typical lenders will offer up to half of the car's resale value, though some will go higher. Most lenders use the Kelley Black Book to find the resale value of vehicles. The borrower must hold clear title to the car; this means that the car must be paid in full with no liens or current financing. Most lenders will also require the borrower to have full insurance on the vehicle.

Depending on the state where the lender is located, interest rates may range from 36% to well over 100%. Payment schedules vary but at the very least the borrower has to pay the interest due at each due date. At the end of the term of the loan, the full outstanding amount may be due in a single payment. If the borrower is unable to repay the loan at this time, then they can roll the balance over, and take out a new title loan. Government regulation often limits the total number of times that a borrower can roll the loan over, so that they do not remain perpetually in debt.

If the borrower cannot pay back the loan or is late with his or her payments, the title loan lender may seek to take possession of the car and sell it to offset what is owed. Typically lenders choose this option as a last resort because it may take months to recover the vehicle, and repossession, auction and court costs all decrease the amount of money they are able to recoup. During this time, the lender is not collecting payments yet the vehicle is depreciating. Most states require the title loan lender to hold the vehicle for 30 days to allow the borrower to recover it by paying the balance. Typically, any amount from the sale over the existing loan balance is returned to the defaulter.

Today, the internet has revolutionized how companies can reach their clientele, and many title loan companies offer online applications for pre-approval or approval on title loans. These applications require much of the same information and still may require a borrower to visit a store to pick up their money, usually in the form of a check. When filling out these applications, they may ask for things like your Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) or insurance policy numbers.

As demand for title loans increase, companies offering title loans are engineering software for mobile devices that allow people to see how much they can be loaned for the car, as well as estimated payments to be made each month.

Loan calculation

The amount a borrower can be loaned is dependent on the worth of their vehicle. A lender will typically look up the auction value of the car being used as collateral and offer a loan that’s between 30% and 50% of the worth of the vehicle. This leaves lenders a cushion to make profit if ever they need to repossess the vehicle and sell it at auction, in the event the borrower defaults.

States offering title loans

Title loans are not offered in all states. Some states have made them illegal because they are considered a welfare-reducing provision of credit, or predatory lending. Other states, like Montana have begun placing strict regulations on title loans by not allowing the APR to reach above 36%, down from the previous 400%. However, Montana has recently voted against allowing title loans in their state.

In 2008, New Hampshire passed a law capping APR at 36%. Some companies claim their average loan amounts to be between $300 and $500, and had to shut down their store fronts in that state, or their business entirely, because their business could not survive on a low APR for low loan amounts. Since then, the law has been reversed and new growth in the title loan industry has emerged, allowing title loan lenders to charge 25% interest a month, or roughly 300% APR.

Only about 20 states allow title loans in one form or another. These states are Alabama, Arizona, California, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

States continue to vote on legislation allowing or disallowing title loans. Some states have no limit on the APR that title loan companies can charge, while others continue to crack down and push for stricter regulation. Early in 2012, Illinois recently voted to cap APR on title loans at 36%, with other provisions that would limit the title loan industry in the state. The vote did not pass, but voters and politicians in Illinois and other states continue in their convictions to regulate or outlaw title loans.

Demographic of small-dollar-credit consumers

Small-dollar-credit (SDC) refers to services offered by payday and title loan industries. In 2012, a study was conducted by the Center for Financial Services Innovation. According to the study, SDC consumers are generally less educated, have more children, and are based in the South, where there is a greater concentration of unbanked or underbanked people. In addition, there’s a healthy spread of SDC consumers with a range of salariesâ€"showing 20% of SDC consumers have a household income between $50,000 and $75,000. However, 45% of respondents to the survey would classify themselves as “poor”.

Advocacy

In a BBC article, a spokesman for a company offering short-term loans says that APR is not a valid model when assessing costs associated with short-term subprime loans, and that the charges are appropriate for the convenience of quickly obtaining a short-term loan. Instead, the APR model is better for assessing costs associated with a middle- or long-term loan options.

Even so, the high interest rates on title loans are justified by defenders of the industry, stating that the higher interest rates are necessary for the lending companies to turn profit. The borrowers are considered "high risk" and may default on their debt. Therefore, the higher interest rates are a means of securing profit even if the borrower defaults, and ensures the company sees a positive rate of return.

In a 2003 article, "In Defense of Payday Lending", the author mentions that consumer advocates contend that high-interest lending services are designed to trap the impoverished in a cycle of debt, forcing chronic borrowing habits. However, he goes on to say that these allegations are largely without merit. Instead of seeing payday lending and title loan lending as a creative extension of credit, these individuals look at subprime loans as another opportunity for government intervention and regulation.

Summarizing, small-credit-loans unrightfully get a bad rap by consumer advocates and politicians seeking to increase government regulation of the industry, without giving merit to government regulation on banks as a large reason why the industry is thriving to begin with. The author states that further government regulation isn’t the answer, and defends small-credit-loans as a creative means of providing credit to those who otherwise could not get loans through any other traditional means.

An argument often overlooked by those criticizing the payday and title loan industry is that these loans provide immediate financial aid in the face of emergencies and hardship. When a disaster strikes, those who are unbanked and have no means of obtaining loans through traditional credit institutionsâ€"primarily due to low credit scoresâ€"have nowhere else to turn. Small-dollar-credit products such as title loans prove to be invariably useful to these individuals and their families, granting short-term financial relief, provided the loan is paid off quickly, before interest payments compound excessively. Furthermore, once a borrower has reestablished his/her credit history, he/she may choose to take out a more traditional loan to pay off the title loan. While critics may point to this as a way in which individuals find themselves continuing to borrow, it has been shown in a recent study that even larger loan sizes were not correlated with a higher risk of the borrower becoming tr apped in a cycle of debt. Additionally, it was discovered that access to title lending decreased the chance an individual would experience bankruptcy, rather than increasing it as is commonly held. Additionally, the study found that larger loan sizes were not correlated with a higher risk of the borrower becoming trapped in a cycle of debt.

Criticism

Critics of title loans contend that the business model seeks and traps impoverished individuals with ridiculous interest rates by lenders who aren’t entirely transparent regarding the payments. This practice lends confusion and so some borrowers are unaware of the situation that getting a small-dollar-credit loan puts them in. However, they are already locked in the loan and have no means of escaping other than paying the loan off or losing their vehicle.

The practice has been compared to loan sharking, because the interest rates are so high.

Even though states are placing stringent restrictions on things like interest rates that can be charged, regulating the practices of companies offering short-term loans, like payday loans or title loans, proves to be a difficult endeavor. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Federal Trade Commission, both federal regulatory agencies responsible for enforcing federal law with non-banking institutions admit that they do not have the authority to enforce the Military Lending Act, which states that military members and their families can pay an APR no higher than 36%, while banning loans to service members that would be secured through their banking account, vehicle or paycheck.

Some lenders can move around the Military Lending Act's restrictions by offering open-ended credit loans instead of title loans or payday loans. This allows them to continue charging triple-digit APR on their loans.

Some groups, such as the Texas Fair Lending Alliance, present title loans and payday loans as a form of entrapment, where taking out one of these means that borrowers will find themselves cycling further into debt with less chances of getting out of debt when compared to not taking the loan out at all, contending that 75% of payday loans are taken out within two weeks of the previous loan in order to fill the gap in finances from when the loan was originally taken out. In 2001, Texas passed a law capping interest rates on title loans and payday loans. However, lenders are getting around the restrictions by exploiting loopholes allowing them to lend for the same purposes, with high interest rates, disguised as loan brokers or as a Credit Services Organization (CSO).

The Vice President of state policy at the Center for Responsible Lending argues that the car title loan model is built around loans that are impossible to repay. He goes on to cite a 2007 study by the Center for Responsible Lending which shows that 20% of title loan borrowers in Chicago had taken out a loan in order to repay a previous loan to the same lender.

Evidence from The Pew Charitable Trusts cite a need for consumers to be better informed. The Pew report states that of the more than 2 million consumers who obtain title loans, one out of nine consumers default on their loans, and notes that repossession affects approximately 5 to 9 percent of borrowers who default.

Learn more »

TitleMax, Inc. is a privately owned title lending business based in Savannah, Georgia. The company has more than 1150 stores in eighteen states. TitleMax serves individuals who generally have limited access to consumer credit from banks, thrift institutions, credit card lender and other traditional sources of consumer credit. TitleMax offers a title loan product which allows customers to meet their liquidity needs by borrowing against the value of their vehicles while retaining use of their vehicle during the term of the loan. Many locations are in former fast food outlets which the company renovates.

History

On September 1, 1998, TitleMax opened the first location in Columbus, Georgia. In October 1998, TitleMax opened its second location in Savannah, Georgia. Many Savannah locations were then established, and later that year, TitleMax opened the first out-of-state store in Phenix City, Alabama. Over the next ten years, the company continued expanding, eventually growing to over 500 locations by the end of 2007, and surpassing $200,000,000 in account receivables. In 2008, TitleMax expanded into Virginia. In April 2009, TitleMax Holdings, LLC, filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy. According to TitleMax’s lawyer at the time, the cause of the default was attributed to “the maturity of an estimated $165 million loan from Merrill Lynch & Co.” In 2008, Bank of America acquired Merrill Lynch & Co.. The attorney of DLA Piper LLP in New York City was quoted in an interview conducted by Bloomberg as saying, “It’s a solvent company, there’s a significant amount of equity over the d ebt.” In April 2010, nearly one year after the bankruptcy filing, TitleMax Holdings LLC won court approval for reorganization and was able to exit bankruptcy status. Since reorganization, TitleMax continued expanding into other states.

On August 12, 2016, a judge in Nevada ordered over 6,000 TitleMax contracts to be voided.

Sister Companies

TitleMax’s parent company, TMX Finance, changed its name from TitleMax Holdings, LLC to TMX Finance LLC as of June 21, 2010. TMX Finance controls over 1450 stores and employs over 3,300 people nationwide. TitleBucks and EquityAuto Loan are the sister companies to TitleMax. In 1150 stores, TMX Finance operates as TitleMax; in 130 stores, the Company uses a TitleBucks brand. TMX Finance also offers a second-lien automobile product in Georgia under the EquityAuto Loan brand, with operations conducted within 122 TitleMax stores and through 4 standalone stores.

Criticisms

Titlemax has received criticism for predatory lending.

References

Learn more »

A payday loan (also called a payday advance, salary loan, payroll loan, small dollar loan, short term, or cash advance loan) is a small, short-term unsecured loan, "regardless of whether repayment of loans is linked to a borrower's payday." The loans are also sometimes referred to as "cash advances," though that term can also refer to cash provided against a prearranged line of credit such as a credit card. Payday advance loans rely on the consumer having previous payroll and employment records. Legislation regarding payday loans varies widely between different countries and, within the United States, between different states.

To prevent usury (unreasonable and excessive rates of interest), some jurisdictions limit the annual percentage rate (APR) that any lender, including payday lenders, can charge. Some jurisdictions outlaw payday lending entirely, and some have very few restrictions on payday lenders. In the United States, the rates of these loans were formerly restricted in most states by the Uniform Small Loan Laws (USLL), with 36%-40% APR generally the norm.

Federal regulation

Payday lending is legal in 27 states, with 9 others allowing some form of short term storefront lending with restrictions. The remaining 14 and the District of Columbia forbid the practice. Federal regulation against payday loans is primarily due to several reasons: (a) significantly higher rates of bankruptcy amongst those who use loans (due to interest rates as high as 1000%); (b) unfair and illegal debt collection practices; and (c) loans with automatic rollovers which further increase debt owed to lenders.

As for federal regulation, the Doddâ€"Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act gave the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) specific authority to regulate all payday lenders, regardless of size. Also, the Military Lending Act imposes a 36% rate cap on tax refund loans and certain payday and auto title loans made to active duty armed forces members and their covered dependents, and prohibits certain terms in such loans.

The CFPB has issued several enforcement actions against payday lenders for reasons such as violating the prohibition on lending to military members and aggressive collection tactics.

The CFPB also operates a website to answer questions about payday lending. In addition, some states have aggressively pursued lenders they felt violate their state laws.

Payday lenders have made effective use of the sovereign status of Native American reservations, often forming partnerships with members of a tribe to offer loans over the internet which evade state law. However, the Federal Trade Commission has begun aggressively to monitor these lenders as well. While some tribal lenders are operated by Native Americans, there is also evidence many are simply a creation of so-called "rent-a-tribe" schemes, where a non-Native company sets up operations on tribal land.

Some states have laws limiting the number of loans a borrower can take at a single time according to LATimes report. This is currently being accomplished by single, statewide realtime databases. These systems are required in Florida, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, North Dakota, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Virginia States Statues. These systems require all licensed lenders to conduct a real time verification of the customer's eligibility to receive a loan before conducting a loan. Reports published by state regulators in these states indicate that this system enforces all of the provisions of the state's statutes. Some states also cap the number of loans per borrower per year (Virginia, Washington), or require that after a fixed number of loan renewals, the lender must offer a lower interest loan with a longer term, so that the borrower can eventually get out of the debt cycle by following some steps. Borrowers can circumvent these laws by taking loans from more than on e lender if there is not an enforcement mechanism in place by the state. Some states allow that a consumer can have more than one loan outstanding (Oklahoma). Currently, the states with the most payday lenders per capital are Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, South Carolina and Oklahoma.

States which have prohibited payday lending have reported lower rates of bankruptcy, a smaller volume of complaints regarding collection tactics, and the development of new lending services from banks and credit unions.

In the US, the Truth in Lending Act requires various disclosures, including all fees and payment terms.

Regulation in the District of Columbia

Effective January 9, 2008, the maximum interest rate that payday lenders may charge in the District of Columbia is 24 percent, which is the same maximum interest rate for banks and credit unions. Payday lenders also must have a license from the District government in order to operate.

Banning in Georgia

Georgia law prohibited payday lending for more than 100 years, but the state was not successful in shutting the industry down until the 2004 legislation made payday lending a felony, allowed for racketeering charges and permitted potentially costly class-action lawsuits. In 2013 this law was used to sue Western Sky, a tribal internet lender.

Regulation in New Mexico

New Mexico caps fees, restricts total loans by a consumer and prohibits immediate loan rollovers, in which a consumer takes out a new loan to pay off a previous loan, under a law that took effect November 1, 2007. A borrower who is unable to repay a loan is automatically offered a 130-day payment plan, with no fees or interest. Once a loan is repaid, under the new law, the borrower must wait 10 days before obtaining another payday loan. The law allows the term of a loan to run from 14 to 35 days, with the fees capped at $15.50 for each $100 borrowed 58-15-33 NMSA 1978. There is also a 50-cent administrative fee to cover costs of lenders verifying whether a borrower qualifies for the loan, such as determining whether the consumer is still paying off a previous loan. This is accomplished by verifying in real time against the approved lender compliance database administered by the New Mexico regulator. The statewide database does not allow a loan to be issued to a consumer by a licen sed payday lender if the loan would result in a violation of state statute. A borrower's cumulative payday loans cannot exceed 25 percent of the individual's gross monthly income.

Withdrawal from North Carolina

In 2006, the North Carolina Department of Justice announced the state had negotiated agreements with all the payday lenders operating in the state. The state contended that the practice of funding payday loans through banks chartered in other states illegally circumvents North Carolina law. Under the terms of the agreement, the last three lenders will stop making new loans, will collect only principal on existing loans and will pay $700,000 to non-profit organizations for relief.

Operation Sunset in Arizona

Arizona usury law prohibits lending institutions to charge greater than 36% annual interest on a loan. On July 1, 2010, a law exempting payday loan companies from the 36% cap expired. State Attorney General Terry Goddard initiated Operation Sunset, which aggressively pursues lenders who violate the lending cap. The expiration of the law caused many payday loan companies to shut down their Arizona operations, notably Advance America.

Proposed Postal Banking

Many countries offer basic banking services through their postal systems. The United States Post Office Department offered such a service in the past. Called the United States Postal Savings System it was discontinued in 1967. In January 2014 the Office of the Inspector General of the United States Postal Service issued a white paper suggesting that the USPS could offer banking services, to include small dollar loans for under 30% APR. Both support and criticism quickly followed, however the major criticism isn't that the service would not help the consumer but that the payday lenders themselves would be forced out of business due to competition and the plan is nothing more than a scheme to support postal employees.

According to some sources the USPS Board of Governors could authorize these services under the same authority with which they offer money orders now.

Industry Growth

19th century salary lenders

In the early 1900s some lenders participated in salary purchases. Salary purchases are where lenders buy a worker’s next salary for an amount less than the salary, days before the salary is paid out. These salary purchases were early payday loans structured to avoid state usury laws.

20th century check cashing

As early as the 1930s check cashers cashed post-dated checks for a daily fee until the check was negotiated at a later date. In the early 1990s, check cashers began offering payday loans in states that were unregulated or had loose regulations. Many payday lenders of this time listed themselves in yellow pages as "Check Cashers."

1990s to present

Banking deregulation in the late 1980s caused small community banks to go out of business. This created a void in the supply of short-term microcredit, which was not supplied by large banks due to lack of profitability. The payday loan industry sprang up in order to fill this void and to supply microcredit to the working class at expensive rates. Subsequently, the industry grew from fewer than 500 storefronts to over 22,000 and a total size of $46 billion. This number has risen even higher over the years. By 2008 payday loan stores nationwide outnumbered Starbucks shops and McDonald's fast food restaurants.

Deregulation also caused states to roll back usury caps, and lenders were able to restructure their loans to avoid these caps after federal laws were changed.

State and federal regulation on growth

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, in a June 2016 report on payday lending, found that loan volume decreased 13% in Texas after the January 2012 disclosure reforms. The reform required lenders to disclose "information on how the cost of the loan is impacted by whether (and how many times) it is renewed, typical patterns of repayment, and alternative forms of consumer credit that a consumer may want to consider, among other information". The report cites that the decrease is due to borrowers taking fewer loans rather than borrowing smaller amounts each time. Re-borrowing rates slightly declined by 2.1% in Texas after the disclosure law took effect. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has proposed rulemaking in June 2016, which would require payday lenders to verify the financial situation of their customers, provide borrowers with disclosure statements prior to each transaction, and limit the number of debt rollovers allowed, decreasing the industry by 55 percent. Anoth er option would allow the lender to skip the ability to repay assessment for loans of $500 or less, but the lender would have to provide a realistic repayment schedule and limit the number of loans lent over the course of a year.

Debt Rollover

Rolling over debt is a process in which the borrower extends the length of their debt into the next period, generally with a fee while still accruing interest. An empirical study published in The Journal of Consumer Affairs found that low income individuals who reside in states that permit three or more rollovers were more likely to use payday lenders and pawnshops to supplement their income. The study also found that higher income individuals are more likely to use payday lenders in areas that permit rollovers. The article argues that payday loan rollovers lead low income individuals into a debt-cycle where they will need to borrow additional funds to pay the fees associated with the debt rollover. Of the states that allow payday lending, 22 states do not allow borrowers to rollover their debt and only three states allow unlimited rollovers. States that allow unlimited rollovers leave the number of rollovers allowed up to the individual businesses.

Payday lending legality and number of rollovers allowed

Effects of Regulation

Price regulation in the United States has caused unintended consequences. Before a regulation policy took effect in Colorado, prices of payday finance charges were loosely distributed around a market equilibrium. The imposition of a price ceiling above this equilibrium served as a target where competitors could agree to raise their prices. This weakened competition and caused the development of cartel behavior. Because payday loans near minority neighborhoods and military bases are likely to have inelastic demand, this artificially higher price doesn't come with a lower quantity demanded for loans, allowing lenders to charge higher prices without losing many customers.

In 2006 congress passed a law capping the annualized rate at 36 percent that lenders could charge members of the military. Even with these regulations and efforts to even outright ban the industry, lenders are still finding loopholes. The number of states in which payday lenders operate has fallen, from its peak in 2014 of 44 states to 36 in 2016.

Competition and Alternatives

Payday lenders get competition from credit unions, banks, and major financial institutions, which fund the Center for Responsible Lending, a non-profit that fights against payday loans.

Tech companies such as PayActiv, FlexWage, Activehours, Clearbanc, and Even are beginning to provide alternatives to traditional payday loans. PayActive provides a service to employers that allows workers to immediately receive earned income for a fee. Uber and Lyft offer Instant Pay and Express Pay for their drivers.

The website NerdWallet helps redirect potential payday borrowers to non-profit organizations with lower interest rates or to government organizations that provide short-term assistance. Its revenue comes from commissions on credit cards and other financial services that are also offered on the site.

The social institution of lending to trusted friends and relatives can involve embarrassment for the borrower. The impersonal nature of a payday loan is a way to avoid this embarrassment. Tim Lohrentz, the program manager of the Insight Center for Community Economic Development, suggested that it might be best to save a lot of money instead of trying to avoid embarrassment.

Economic Effects

While designed to provide consumers with emergency liquidity, payday loans divert money away from consumer spending and towards paying interest rates. Some major banks offer payday loans with interest rates of 225 to 300 percent, while storefront and online payday lenders charge rates of 200 to 500 percent. Online loans are predicted to account for 60% of payday loans by 2016. In 2011, $774 million of consumer spending was lost to repaying payday loans and $169 million was lost to 56,230 bankruptcies related to payday loans. Additionally, 14,000 jobs were lost. By 2013, twelve million people were taking out a payday loan each year. On average, each borrower is supplied with $375 in emergency cash from each payday loan and the borrower pays $520 in interest. Each borrower takes out an average of eight of these loans in a year. In 2011, over a third of bank customers took out more than 20 payday loans.

Besides putting people into debt, payday loans can also help borrowers reduce their debts. Borrowers can use payday loans to pay off more expensive late fees on their bills and overdraft fees on their checking accounts.

Although borrowers typically have payday loan debt for much longer than the loan's advertised two-week period, averaging about 200 days of debt, most borrowers have an accurate idea of when they will have paid off their loans. About 60% of borrowers pay off their loans within two weeks of the days they predict.

When interest rates on payday loans were capped to 150% in Oregon, causing a mass exit from the industry and preventing borrowers from taking out payday loans, there was a negative effect with bank overdrafts, late bills, and employment. The effect is in the opposite direction for military personnel. Job performance and military readiness declines with increasing access to payday loans.

Criticism

Demographics

Payday loans are marketed towards low-income households, because they can not provide collateral in order to obtain low interest loans, so they obtain high interest rate loans. The study found payday lenders to target the young and the poor, especially those populations and low-income communities near military bases. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau states that renters, and not homeowners, are more likely to be consumers of these loans. It also states that people who are married, disabled, separated or divorced are likely consumers. Payday loan rates are high relative to those of traditional banks and do not encourage savings or asset accumulation. This property will be exhausted in low-income groups. Many people do not know that the borrowers' higher interest rates are likely to send them into a "debt spiral" where the borrower must constantly renew.

A 2012 study by Pew Charitable research found that the majority of payday loans were taken out to bridge the gap of everyday expenses rather than for unexpected emergencies. The study found that 69% of payday loans are borrowed for recurring expenses, 16% were attributed to unexpected emergencies, 8% for special purchases, and 2% for other expenses.

Defaulted Loans

The Center for Responsible Lending found that almost half of payday loan borrowers will default on their loan within the first two years. Taking out payday loans increases the difficulty of paying the mortgage, rent, and utility bills. The possibility of increased economic difficulties leads to homelessness and delays in medical and dental care and the ability to purchase drugs. For military men, using payday loans lowers overall performance and shortens service periods. To limit the issuance of military payday loans, the 2007 Military Lending Act established an interest rate ceiling of 36% on military payday loans. A 2013 article by Dobbie and Skiba found that more than 19% of initial loans in their study ended in default. Based on this, Dobbie and Skiba claim that the payday loan market is high risk.

Premium Pricing Structure

A 2012 Pew Charitable Trusts study found that the average borrower took out eight loans of $375 each and paid interest of $520 across the loans.

The equation for the annual cost of a loan in percent is:

${\displaystyle [({\text{Loan cost}}/{\text{Loan amount}})/{\text{Days borrowed}}]*365{\text{ days}}}$

Asymmetric Information

The payday loan industry takes advantage of the fact that most borrowers do not know how to calculate their loan's APR and do not realize that they are being changed rates up to 390% interest annually. Critics of payday lending cite the possibility that transactions with in the payday market may reflect a market failure that is due to asymmetric information or the borrowers' cognitive biases or limitations.

The formula for the total cost of a Payday loan is:

${\displaystyle N*(1+i)^{x}}$

where ${\displaystyle N}$ is the money people borrowed from the payday loan, ${\displaystyle i}$ is the interest rate per period (not annual), and ${\displaystyle x}$ is the number of borrowing periods, which are typically 2 weeks long.

For example, a $100 payday loan with a 15% 2-week interest rate will have to be repaid as $115, but if it was not paid on time, within 20 weeks it will be $404.56. In 48 weeks it will be $2,862.52. The interest could be much larger than expected if the loan is not returned on time.

Debt-Trap

A debt trap is defined as "A situation in which a debt is difficult or impossible to repay, typically because high interest payments prevent repayment of the principal." According to the Center for Responsible Lending, 76% of the total volume of payday loans are due to loan churning, where loans are taken out within two weeks of a previous loan. The center states that the devotion of 25-50 percent of the borrowers' paychecks leaves most borrowers with inadequate funds, compelling them to take new payday loans immediately. The borrowers will continue to pay high percentages to float the loan across longer time periods, effectively placing them in a debt-trap.

Debtors' Prison

Debtors' prisons were federally banned in 1833, but over a third of states in 2011 allowed late borrowers to be jailed. In Texas, some payday loan companies file criminal complaints against late borrowers. Texas courts and prosecutors become de facto collections agencies that warn borrowers that they could face arrest, criminal charges, jail time, and fines. On top of the debts owed, district attorneys charge additional fees. Threatening to pursue criminal charges against borrowers is illegal when a post-dated check is involved, but using checks dated for the day the loan is given allows lenders to claim theft. Borrowers have been jailed for owing as little as $200. Most borrowers who failed to pay had lost their jobs or had their hours reduced at work.

Learn more »

Source is a 3D video game engine developed by Valve Corporation as the successor of GoldSrc. It debuted with Counter-Strike: Source in June 2004, followed shortly by Half-Life 2, and has been in active development since. Source does not have a concise version numbering scheme; instead, it is designed in constant incremental updates. The successor, Source 2, was officially announced in March 2015, with the first game to use it being Dota 2, which was ported over from Source later that year.

History

Source distantly originates from the GoldSrc engine, itself a heavily modified version of John Carmack's Quake engine. Carmack commented on his blog in 2004 that "there are still bits of early Quake code in Half-Life 2". Valve employee Erik Johnson explained the engine's nomenclature on the Valve Developer Community:

When we were getting very close to releasing Half-Life (less than a week or so), we found there were already some projects that we needed to start working on, but we couldn't risk checking in code to the shipping version of the game. At that point we forked off the code in VSS to be both /$Goldsrc and /$Src. Over the next few years, we used these terms internally as "Goldsource" and "Source". At least initially, the Goldsrc branch of code referred to the codebase that was currently released, and Src referred to the next set of more risky technology that we were working on. When it came down to show Half-Life 2 for the first time at E3, it was part of our internal communication to refer to the "Source" engine vs. the "Goldsource" engine, and the name stuck.

Source was developed part-by-part from this fork onwards, slowly replacing GoldSrc in Valve's internal projects and, in part, explaining the reasons behind its unusually modular nature. Valve's development of Source since has been a mixture of licensed middleware and in-house-developed code. Among others, Source uses Ipion technology bought out by Havok to drive its internal physics engine, and Miles Sound System and Bink Video respectively for music and video playback.

Modularity and notable upgrades

Source was created to evolve incrementally with new technology, as opposed to the backward compatibility-breaking "version jumps" of its competitors. Different systems within Source are represented by separate modules which can be updated independently. With Steam, Valve can distribute these updates automatically among its many users. In practice, however, there have been occasional breaks in this chain of compatibility. The release of Half-Life 2: Episode One and The Orange Box both introduced new versions of the engine that could not be used to run older games or mods without the developers performing upgrades to code and, in some cases, content. Both cases required markedly less work to update its version than competing engines. This was demonstrated in 2010, when Valve updated all of their core Source games to the latest engine build.

Since Source engine's release in 2004, the following major architectural changes have been made:

Source 2006

The Source 2006 branch was the term used for Valve's games using technology that culminated with the release of Half-Life 2: Episode One. HDR rendering and color correction were first implemented in 2005 using Day of Defeat: Source, which required the engine's shaders to be rewritten. The former, along with developer commentary tracks, were showcased in Half-Life 2: Lost Coast. Episode One introduced Phong shading and other smaller features. Since the transition to Steam Pipe, this branch was made deprecated and is now used for backward compatibility with older mods. Image-based rendering technology had been in development for Half-Life 2, but was cut from the engine before its release. It was mentioned again by Gabe Newell in 2006 as a piece of technology he would like to add to Source to implement support for much larger scenes that are impossible with strictly polygonal objects.

Source 2007

The Source 2007 branch represented a full upgrade of the Source engine for the release of The Orange Box. An artist-driven, threaded particle system replaced previously hard-coded effects for all of the games within. An in-process tools framework was created to support it, which also supported the initial builds of Source Filmmaker. In addition, the facial animation system was made hardware-accelerated on modern video cards for "feature film and broadcast television" quality. The release of The Orange Box on multiple platforms allowed for a large code refactoring, which let the Source engine take advantage of multiple CPU cores. However, support on the PC was experimental and unstable until the release of Left 4 Dead. Multiprocessor support was later backported to Team Fortress 2 and Day of Defeat: Source. Valve created the Xbox 360 release of The Orange Box in-house, and support for the console is fully integrated into the main engine cod eline. It includes asset converters, cross-platform play and Xbox Live integration. Program code can be ported from PC to Xbox 360 simply by recompiling it. The PlayStation 3 release was outsourced to Electronic Arts, and was plagued with issues throughout the process. Gabe Newell cited these issues when criticizing the console during the release of The Orange Box.

Left 4 Dead branch

The Left 4 Dead branch was a complete overhaul of the Source engine through the development of the Left 4 Dead series. Multiprocessor support was further expanded, allowing for features like split screen multiplayer, additional post-processing effects, event scripting with Squirrel, and the highly-dynamic AI Director. The menu interface was re-implemented with a new layout designed to be more console-oriented. This branch later fueled the releases of Alien Swarm and Portal 2, the former released with source code outlining many of the changes made since the branch began. Portal 2, in addition, served as the result of Valve taking the problem of porting to PlayStation 3 in-house, and in combination with Steamworks integration creating what they called "the best console version of the game".

OS X, Linux, and Android support

In April 2010, Valve released all of their major Source games on OS X, coinciding with the release of the Steam client on the same platform. Valve announced that all their future games will be released simultaneously for Windows and Mac. The first of Valve's games to support Linux was Team Fortress 2, the port released in October 2012 along with the closed beta of the Linux version of Steam. Both the OS X and Linux ports of the engine take advantage of OpenGL and are powered by SDL. During the process of porting, Valve rearranged most of the games released up to The Orange Box into separate, but parallel "singleplayer" and "multiplayer" branches. The game code to these branches was made public to mod developers in 2013, and they serve as the current stable release of Source designated for mods. Support for Valve's internal Steam Pipe distribution system as well as the Oculus Rift are included. In May 2014, Nvidia released ports of Portal and Half-Life 2 to their Tegra 4-based Android handheld game console Nvidia Shield.

Source 2

As far back as May 2011, one of Valve's largest projects has been the development of new content authoring tools for Source. These would replace the current outdated tools, allowing content to be created faster and more efficiently. Newell has described the creation of content with the engine's current toolset as "very painful" and "sluggish".

On March 3, 2015, coinciding with the Game Developers Conference, Valve announced the Source 2 engine, and that it will be free for developers. Valve also announced that the engine would receive a rendering path for the Vulkan API. In addition, Valve confirmed that it would be using a new in-house physics engine named Rubikon. On June 17, 2015, Valve released a beta update for Dota 2, titled "Reborn", becoming the first game using the Source 2 engine. The original Source client for the game was phased out in September 2015, with the Source 2 update becoming official.

Tools and resources

Source SDK

Source SDK is the software development kit for the Source engine, and contains many of the tools used by Valve to develop assets for their games. It comes with several command-line programs designed for special functions within the asset pipeline, as well as a few GUI-based programs designed for handling more complex functions. Source SDK was launched as a free standalone toolset through Steam, and required a Source game to be purchased on the same account. Since the release of Left 4 Dead in 2009, Valve began releasing "Authoring Tools" for individual games, which constitute the same programs adapted for each game's engine build. After Team Fortress 2 became free-to-play, Source SDK was effectively made open to all Steam users. When some Source games were updated to Source 2013, the older Source SDKs were phased out. The three applications mentioned below are now included in the install of each game.

There are three applications packaged in the Source SDK: Hammer Editor, Model Viewer, and Face Poser. Hammer Editor, the engine's official level editor, uses compilation tools included in the SDK. The tool was originally known as Worldcraft and was developed independently by Ben Morris before Valve acquired it. The Model Viewer is a program that allows users to view models and can be used for a variety of different purposes, including development. Developers may use the program to view models and their corresponding animations, attachment points, bones, and so on. Face Poser is the tool used to access facial animations and choreography systems. This tool allows one to edit facial expressions, gestures and movements for characters, lip sync speech, and sequence expressions and other acting cues and preview what the scene will look like in the game engine.

Source Dedicated Server

The Source Dedicated Server or SRCDS is a standalone launcher for the Source engine that runs multiplayer game sessions without requiring a client. It can be launched through Windows or Linux, and can allow for custom levels and assets. Most third-party servers additionally run Metamod:Source and SourceMod, which together provide a framework on top of SRCDS for custom modification of gameplay on existing titles.

Source Filmmaker

The Source Filmmaker (SFM) is a video capture and editing application that works from within the Source engine. Developed by Valve, the tool was originally used to create movies for Day of Defeat: Source, but is more associated with Team Fortress 2. Today, it is open for public use and downloadable via the Steam client.

Destinations Workshop Tools

In June 2016, Valve released the Destinations Workshop Tools, a set of free virtual reality (VR) creation tools running using the Source 2 SDK.

Valve Developer Community

On June 28, 2005, Valve opened the Valve Developer Community (VDC) wiki. VDC replaced Valve's static Source SDK documentation with a full MediaWiki-powered community site; within a matter of days Valve reported that "the number of useful articles nearly doubled". These new articles covered the previously undocumented Counter-Strike: Source bot (added by the bot's author, Mike Booth), Valve's NPC AI, advice for mod teams on setting up source control, and other articles.

Papers

Valve staff occasionally produce professional and/or academic papers for various events and publications, including SIGGRAPH, Game Developer Magazine and Game Developers Conference, explaining various aspects of Source engine's development.

Notable features

• Direct3D rendering on Microsoft Windows, Xbox and Xbox 360; OpenGL rendering on Linux (including SteamOS) and OS X; OpenGL ES rendering on Android
• Steam integration on Windows, Linux, OS X, and PlayStation 3
• High dynamic range (HDR) rendering
• Lag-compensated client-server networking model
• Network-enabled and bandwidth-efficient physics engine (derived from Havok in Source 1, in-house in Source 2).
• Scalable multiprocessor support
• Pre-computed radiosity lighting and dynamic shadow maps. Deferred lighting is supported on consoles.
• Facial animation system. Lip-sync using the system is auto-generated and localizable.
• Blended skeletal animation system, including inverse kinematics
• Water flow effects
• 3D bump mapping
• Dynamic 3D wounds
• Alpha to coverage edge smoothing for foliage etc.
• Map-logic scripting with Squirrel programming language.
• Significant source code access for mod teams
• Distributed VMPI map compiler
• Keyframed vertex animation (introduced in Dota 2)

Reception

The Source SDK tools are criticised for being outdated and difficult to use. For example, the interface and workflow of Valve's Hammer Editor has not changed significantly since its initial release for GoldSrc and the original Half-Life in 1998. A large number of the tools, including those for texture and model compilation, require varying levels of text-editor scripting from the user before they are executed at the command line; with sometimes lengthy console commands. This obtuseness was cited by the University of London when they moved their exploration of professional architectural visualisation in computer games to Bethesda Softworks' Gamebryo-based Oblivion engine after a brief period with Source. Third-party tools provide GUIs, but are not officially supported by Valve.

Games using Source

Valve games

• Half-Life 2 (2004)
• Half-Life 2: Deathmatch (2004)
• Half-Life: Source (2004)
• Counter-Strike: Source (2004)
• Day of Defeat: Source (2005)
• Half-Life 2: Lost Coast (2005)
• Half-Life Deathmatch: Source (2006)
• Half-Life 2: Episode One (2006)
• Half-Life 2: Episode Two (2007)
• Team Fortress 2 (2007)
• Portal (2007)
• Left 4 Dead (2008)
• Left 4 Dead 2 (2009)
• Alien Swarm (2010)
• Portal 2 (2011)
• Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (2012)
• Dota 2 (2013) (ported over to Source 2 in 2015)

Games by other developers

• Vampire: The Masquerade â€" Bloodlines (2004)
• Garry's Mod (2004)
• SiN Episodes (2006)
• Dark Messiah of Might and Magic (2006)
• The Ship (2006)
• Kuma\War (2006)
• Dystopia (2007)
• Insurgency: Modern Infantry Combat (2007)
• Insurgency (2014)
• Zeno Clash (2009)
• NeoTokyo (2009)
• Bloody Good Time (2010)
• Vindictus (2010)
• E.Y.E.: Divine Cybermancy (2011)
• No More Room in Hell (2011)
• Nuclear Dawn (2011)
• Postal III (2011)
• Dino D-Day (2011)
• Dear Esther (2012)
• Black Mesa (2012)
• Tactical Intervention (2013)
• The Stanley Parable (2013)
• Blade Symphony (2014)
• Consortium (2014)
• Contagion (2014)
• Titanfall (2014)
• Portal Stories: Mel (2015)
• The Beginner's Guide (2015)
• Infra (2016)
• Titanfall 2 (2016)

Learn more »

Firearm laws in Arizona regulate the sale, possession, and use of firearms and ammunition in the state of Arizona in the United States.

Summary

Arizona gun laws are found mostly in Title 13, Chapter 31 of the Arizona Revised Statutes. There is no registration or licensing of non-NFA firearms in Arizona. Section 13-3108 subsection B prohibits any political subdivision of the state from enacting any laws requiring licensing or registration. According to state law, a person must be 18 years of age to purchase any non-NFA firearm from any source; however, there is a federal age limit of 21 years on handgun purchases from federal firearms licensees.

Open carry

On foot, any adult person who is not a "prohibited possessor" may openly carry a loaded firearm visible to others. Generally, a person must be at least 18 years of age to possess or openly carry a firearm. However, this does not apply to:

1. Juveniles within a private residence.
2. Emancipated juveniles.
3. Juveniles accompanied by a parent, grandparent or guardian, or a certified hunter safety instructor or certified firearms safety instructor acting with the consent of the juvenile's parent or guardian.
4. Juveniles on private property owned or leased by the juvenile or the juvenile's parent, grandparent, or guardian.
5. Juveniles fourteen years of age and up engaged in any of the following activities:

• Lawful hunting or shooting events or marksmanship practice at established ranges or other areas where the discharge of a firearm is not prohibited.
• Lawful transportation of an unloaded firearm for lawful hunting.
• Lawful transportation of an unloaded firearm between the hours of 5:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. for shooting events or marksmanship practice at established ranges or other areas where the discharge of a firearm is not prohibited.
• Activities that require a firearm related to the production of crops, livestock, poultry, livestock products, poultry products, or ratites or in the production or storage of agricultural commodities.

The law does not expressly require openly carried weapons to be in a holster, case or scabbard; however, the open carrying of weapons not in a holster, case or scabbard while on foot in a populated area could be construed as reckless display or, if others feel threatened by such, even assault with a deadly weapon.

In a vehicle, any adult person who is not a prohibited possessor may openly carry a loaded firearm in a vehicle whether in a holster, case, compartment, or in plain view. Persons under 21 may openly carry a loaded or unloaded firearm in a vehicle only if it is in plain view, i.e. discernible from the ordinary observation of a person located outside and within the immediate vicinity of the vehicle.

Concealed carry

In Arizona, anyone who is not prohibited from owning a firearm and is at least 21 years old can carry a concealed weapon without a permit as of July 29, 2010. Arizona was the third state in modern U.S. history (after Vermont and Alaska, followed by Wyoming) to allow the carrying of concealed weapons without a permit, and it is the first state with a large urban population to do so.

Arizona is classified as a "shall issue" state. Even though Arizona law allows concealed carry by adults without permit, concealed carry permits are still available and issued by the Concealed Weapons Permit Unit of the Arizona Department of Public Safety for purposes of reciprocity with other states or for carrying firearms in certain regulated places. Requirements for issuance include taking a training class (provided by a licensed third party) or hunter education class, submitting a finger print card, and paying a $60 fee. Applicants must be at least 21 years of age. New permits are valid for five years. Renewing a permit requires only an application and finger print card. However, effective December 31, 2007 the finger print card requirement for renewal is scheduled to end. Arizona recognizes all valid out-of-state carry permits.

State preemption

The Arizona legislature has largely preempted political subdivisions (counties, cities) to choose what laws that they want. Political subdivisions may regulate the carrying of weapons by juveniles or by their own employees or contractors when such employees or contractors are acting within the course and scope of their employment or contract. They may also bar the carrying of weapons at public establishments and events by those who do not have concealed carry permits. Public establishments and events where carry by non-permit holders is prohibited must provide secure storage for weapons on-site, which must be readily accessible upon entry and allow for immediate retrieval upon exit.

Tribal Law

Native American reservations, which comprise over a quarter of the land area of the state, may have gun laws identical to or more restrictive than state law. Some tribal governments in Arizona may not recognize Arizona law on the concealed carrying of firearms without a permit while on tribal land.

All Arizona tribes recognize federal law, including the "safe passage" provision of the federal Firearm Owners Protection Act Act (FOPA). FOPA provides that, notwithstanding any state, tribal, or local law, and while making a continuous journey, a person who is not a prohibited possessor is entitled to transport a firearm or ammunition for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm or ammunition if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle. In vehicles without a trunk, the unloaded firearm or ammunition must be in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console. Recent U.S. Court of Appellate rulings have confirmed that FOPA`s protections only ap ply to unloaded firearms not readily accessible to the traveler, and many tribal governments have strict laws with respect to firearms being carried or transported on tribal lands. For example, in the event of a vehicle stop, Navajo Nation police will seize any loaded firearm found to be accessible to the driver or passenger. and confiscated firearms are not returnable unless the owner can establish proof of ownership of the firearm and ammunition by presenting a bill of sale or other evidence at the police station at a later date.

Discharging a firearm

It is generally illegal to discharge a firearm within or into the limits of any municipality. However, this prohibition does not apply to persons discharging firearms in the following circumstances:

• On a properly supervised range.
• In an area recommended as a hunting area by the Arizona game and fish department, approved and posted as required by the chief of police (Any such area may be closed when deemed unsafe by the chief of police or the director of the Arizona game and fish department.)
• For the control of nuisance wildlife by permit from the Arizona game and fish department or the United States fish and wildlife service.
• By special permit of the chief of police of the municipality.
• As required by an animal control officer in the performance of duties.
• Firing blank cartridges.
• More than one mile from any occupied structure as defined in section ARS 13-3101.
• In self-defense, or defense of another person against an animal attack if a reasonable person would believe deadly physical force against the animal is immediately necessary and reasonable under the circumstances to protect a person from harm.
• In self-defense or, in defense of another person against a criminal attack as permitted by the laws regarding defensive use of force.

According to the Arizona Gun Owners Guide by Alan Korwin, while discharging a firearm using blanks within the limits of a municipality is not expressly prohibited by law, disturbing the peace (ARS 13-2904) or other charges could still apply.

Prohibited areas

State law prohibits the carrying of firearms in certain areas. These prohibited areas include:

• Hydroelectric or nuclear power generating stations. However, this does not apply to:

• A peace officer or any person summoned by any peace officer to assist and while actually assisting in the performance of official duties.
• A member of the military forces of the United States or of any state of the United States in the performance of official duties.
• A warden, deputy warden, community correctional officer, detention officer, special investigator or correctional officer of the state department of corrections or the department of juvenile corrections.
• A person specifically licensed, authorized or permitted pursuant to an Arizona or federal statute.

• Polling places on election day. However, this does not apply to:

• A peace officer or any person summoned by any peace officer to assist and while actually assisting in the performance of official duties.
• A member of the military forces of the United States or of any state of the United States in the performance of official duties.
• A warden, deputy warden, community correctional officer, detention officer, special investigator or correctional officer of the state department of corrections or the department of juvenile corrections.
• A person specifically licensed, authorized or permitted pursuant to an Arizona or federal statute.

• Secured areas of airports. However, this does not apply to:

• General aviation areas not included in the security identification display area or sterile area as defined in the airport security program approved by the transportation security administration.
• The lawful transportation of deadly weapons in accordance with state and federal law.
• A peace officer or a federally sworn officer while in the actual performance of the officer's duties.
• A member of the military forces of the United States or of any state of the United States in the actual performance of the member's official duties.
• An individual who is authorized by a federal agency in the actual performance of the individual's official duties.

• Inside a jail or on the grounds thereof.
• K-12 School grounds. However, this does not apply to:

• Firearms possessed for the purposes of preparing for, conducting or participating in hunter or firearm safety courses.
• Firearms for use on the school grounds in a program approved by the school.
• Unloaded firearms carried inside a means of transportation and under the control of an adult, provided that if the adult leaves the means of transportation, it is locked and the firearms are not visible from the outside.
• A peace officer or any person summoned by any peace officer to assist and while actually assisting in the performance of official duties.
• A member of the military forces of the United States or of any state of the United States in the performance of official duties.
• A warden, deputy warden, community correctional officer, detention officer, special investigator or correctional officer of the state department of corrections or the department of juvenile corrections.
• A person specifically licensed, authorized or permitted pursuant to an Arizona or federal statute.

• Establishments which are licensed to sell alcohol for consumption on the premises. However, this does not apply to:

• The licensee or an employee of the licensee acting with the permission of the licensee to be in possession of a firearm while on the licensed premises.
• A person who is on the premises for a limited time to seek emergency aid, if such person does not buy, receive, consume, or possess alcohol while there.
• Hotel or motel guest room accommodations.
• The exhibition or display of a firearm in conjunction with a meeting, show, class or similar event.
• A person with a concealed carry permit who carries a concealed handgun, provided that there is no notice posted forbidding such, and provided that the concealed carry permit holder consumes no alcohol while on the premises.
• Peace officers or members of a sheriff's volunteer posse while on duty who have received firearms training that is approved by the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training board.

• Any private property or private establishment where the owner or any other person having lawful control over the property has given reasonable notice forbidding the carrying of deadly weapons or firearms. However, this does not apply to:

• Officers of the law who are legally executing official duties
• Lawfully possessed firearms that are in a locked and privately owned vehicle or in a locked compartment on a privately owned motorcycle and that are not visible from outside the vehicle or motorcycle.

• Any public college or university where the carrying of deadly weapons or firearms has been prohibited by the governing board
• On the grounds of or in a secure care facility under the jurisdiction of the department of juvenile corrections
• In a correctional facility or the grounds of a correctional facility

In addition, political subdivisions have limited power to prohibit the carrying of firearms in certain areas as described above. Carrying a firearm at a jail, correctional facility, juvenile secure care facility, or in a hydroelectric or nuclear power generating station is a felony. Carrying a firearm in any other prohibited area, absent any other concomitant criminal conduct, is a misdemeanor. Carrying a firearm on private property or in a private establishment where it has been forbidden by the owner or another person having lawful control over the property is not expressly prohibited by law, but is held to constitute misdemeanor trespass. Carrying a firearm at a public college or university where it has been prohibited by the governing board is not expressly prohibited by law, but is held to violate provisions of ARS 13-2911, which prohibits "interference with or disruption of an educational institution". The restrictions pertaining to licensed liquor establishments do not apply to liquor stores or other stores that sell only closed containers of alcohol for consumption off the premises.

Prohibited possessors

State law prohibits the possession of firearms and other deadly weapons by certain categories of "prohibited possessors". According to current statute, these categories are defined as follows:

• Anyone who has been found to constitute a danger to self or to others or to be persistently or acutely disabled or gravely disabled pursuant to court order under ARS 36-540, and whose right to possess a firearm has not been restored pursuant to ARS 13-925.
• Anyone convicted of a felony, or who has been adjudicated delinquent for a felony, and whose State civil right to possess or carry a gun or firearm has not been restored by separate order of the court.
• Anyone who has been found incompetent to stand trial and who has not subsequently been found competent.
• Anyone who has been guilty except insane of committing a crime
• Anyone who is, at the time of possession, serving a term of imprisonment in any correctional or detention facility.
• Anyone who is, at the time of possession, serving a term of probation pursuant to a conviction for a domestic violence offense or a felony offense, parole, community supervision, work furlough, home arrest, or release on any other basis, or who is serving a term of probation or parole pursuant to an interstate compact.
• Anyone who is an undocumented alien or a nonimmigrant alien, traveling with or without documentation for business or pleasure, or who is studying in Arizona and maintains a foreign residence, except for:

• Nonimmigrant aliens who possess a valid hunting license or permit lawfully issued by a state in the United States.
• Nonimmigrant aliens who enter the United States to participate in a competitive target shooting event or to display firearms at a sports or hunting trade show sponsored by a national, state, or local firearms trade organization devoted to competitive or sporting use of firearms.
• Certain diplomats.
• Officials of foreign governments or distinguished foreign visitors who are designated by the United States department of state.
• Persons who have received a waiver from the United States attorney general.

Notably, the prohibition against owning a firearm by a person found to be a danger to himself or others or persistently or acutely disabled or gravely disabled continues in effect even after the expiration of the mental health court order itself (365 days). Instead, a person whose right to possess a firearm was forfeited as part of a mental health order must have that right judicially restored by filing a petition with the court requesting a hearing and a court order restoring the right to possess a firearm.

Arizona appellate courts have ruled that ARS 1-244 bars the retroactive application of changes to the prohibited possessor statute unless there is an express legislative declaration of retroactive intent. Although the statute has been amended numerous times during its history, no such retroactive declarations have ever been passed into law. Thus, the possession of deadly weapons by some individuals may be governed by older versions of the statute which are either more or less restrictive than the one currently in force. For example, persons found to constitute a danger to self or others or to be persistently or acutely disabled or gravely disabled prior to September 30, 2009 do not need to petition the courts for a restoration of rights, as statutes in effect prior to that date either did not prohibit their possession of deadly weapons or prohibited such possession only temporarily, during their term of court-ordered treatment.

Prohibited weapons

State law prohibits the possession certain types of firearms and other deadly weapons by any citizen. These weapons are defined as follows:

• An item that is a bomb, grenade, rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces is an explosive, incendiary or poison gas, or any combination of parts or materials that is designed and intended for use in making such or converting a device into such, unless it has been classified as a "curio or relic" under federal law, or is registered under the federal National Firearms Act.
• A device that is designed, made or adapted to muffle the report of a firearm, unless it has been classified as a "curio or relic" under federal law, or is registered under the federal National Firearms Act.
• A firearm that is capable of shooting more than one shot automatically, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger, unless it is has been classified as a "curio or relic" under federal law, or is registered under the federal National Firearms Act.
• A rifle with a barrel length of less than sixteen inches, or a shotgun with a barrel length of less than eighteen inches, or any firearm that is made from a rifle or shotgun and that, as modified, has an overall length of less than twenty-six inches, unless it is has been classified as a "curio or relic" under federal law, or is registered under the federal National Firearms Act.
• An instrument, including a nunchaku, that consists of two or more sticks, clubs, bars or rods to be used as handles, connected by a rope, cord, wire or chain, in the design of a weapon used in connection with the practice of a system of self-defense.
• A breakable container that contains a flammable liquid with a flash point of one hundred fifty degrees Fahrenheit or less and that has a wick or similar device capable of being ignited, or any combination of parts or materials that is designed and intended for use in making such or converting a device into such.
• A chemical or combination of chemicals, compounds or materials, including dry ice, that is possessed or manufactured for the purpose of generating a gas to cause a mechanical failure, rupture or bursting or an explosion or detonation of the chemical or combination of chemicals, compounds or materials.
• An improvised explosive device, or any combination of parts or materials that is designed and intended for use in making such or converting a device into such.

Regarding Police contact

• If a law enforcement officer contacts a person who is in possession of a firearm, the law enforcement officer may take temporary custody of the firearm for the duration of that contact.
• If required to carry the permit by State law, any person with a concealed carry permit issued under 13-3112 is required to present the permit for inspection to any law enforcement officer on request. As of July 29, 2010, however, State law no longer requires an individual to carry a permit on their person.

Learn more »

StarTex Power is a Texas-based retail electricity provider headquartered in Houston, Texas.

History

Texas deregulated the electricity market in 2002. StarTex Power was founded in 2004 by Marcie and Bob Zlotnik. Their management team has over 60 years combined experience in deregulated markets, with over 30 in the Texas Electricity Market.

Marcie previously served as President and Director of Gexa Energy, a retail electricity provider she co-founded in 2001.

The Company

StarTex power serves roughly 170,000 customers. StarTex Power has grown exponentially since its inception in 2004 and is one of the fastest growing businesses in Texas. The company sells its services to commercial and residential customers as well as collaborating with different companies to provide StarTex Power Green.

In 2009 StarTex Power was ranked #1 by JD Power and Associates for customer satisfaction.

In 2010 StarTex Power was a Pinnacle award recipient by the Better Business Bureau for their exceptional customer care and commitment to ethical practices.

In 2010 StarTex Power was also named a Houston Chronicle Top workplace after the recent launch of an Employee Stock Ownership Plan and a continuing culture that fosters employee growth and encouragement.

On May 27, 2011 Constellation Energy announced its intention to purchase StarTex Power which was completed on June 1, 2011.

References

Learn more »

Learn more »