KHOU Houston - Texas police chiefs fighting 'unlicensed carry'

CHL discussions that do not fit into more specific topics

Moderators: Charles L. Cotton, carlson1


Abraham
Senior Member
Posts: 6796
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:43 am

Re: KHOU Houston - Texas police chiefs fighting 'unlicensed carry'

Postby Abraham » Fri May 05, 2017 3:15 pm

Yes, and some pass the driving test who seem like pretty shaky drivers, but pass the written and practical.

Some folks would declare, sorry buster/busterette you ain't good enough to get behind the wheel. You seem too problematic. Now, go away...

Some forget, the LTC/CHL isn't a training program. You take the tests. Pass or fail. Not, now listen up troops, first thing we learn is about this or that. Nope. Pass the written/practical ( and pay of course) and you have a license. Don't agree with that? Talk to some legislators.

In my first CHL class we had a guy who was shaky.

I never heard of him or others who weren't as proficient as I am or you are with guns being some huge problem.

Why?

Because, it isn't.


Caliber
Junior Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 3:44 pm

Re: KHOU Houston - Texas police chiefs fighting 'unlicensed carry'

Postby Caliber » Fri May 05, 2017 5:02 pm

ScottDLS wrote::iagree:

Additionally, what makes one think that the LTC course will train someone to properly handle a handgun. If you don't already know by the time you get there, the shooting test isn't going to "learn" you.... :lol:


True, but like I said, at least the course weeds them out. I'm for some sort of required training if you're going to carry around a handgun. And, if it's shown you can't handle a firearm, then you shouldn't be able to carry one around in public. In your house, I don't care. In your car, I don't really care either. In a restaurant sitting next to me, I care.

Had you folks seen that lady in that CHL class, it would have made you think twice!

User avatar

Vol Texan
Senior Member
Posts: 1469
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 2:18 am
Location: Houston

Re: KHOU Houston - Texas police chiefs fighting 'unlicensed carry'

Postby Vol Texan » Fri May 05, 2017 5:07 pm

Caliber wrote:
ScottDLS wrote::iagree:

Additionally, what makes one think that the LTC course will train someone to properly handle a handgun. If you don't already know by the time you get there, the shooting test isn't going to "learn" you.... :lol:


True, but like I said, at least the course weeds them out. I'm for some sort of required training if you're going to carry around a handgun. And, if it's shown you can't handle a firearm, then you shouldn't be able to carry one around in public. In your house, I don't care. In your car, I don't really care either. In a restaurant sitting next to me, I care.

Had you folks seen that lady in that CHL class, it would have made you think about the situation!


First of all, welcome to the forum.

Second, can you tell me any other amendment to the constitution that you would say this about? What makes the right to keep and bear arms any different from the right to free speech, or any other right?
Your number one option for personal security is a lifelong commitment to avoidance, deterrence, and de-escalation.
When those fail, aim for center mass.

NRA Certified Pistol Instructor | www.Texas3006.com Moderator

User avatar

Vol Texan
Senior Member
Posts: 1469
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 2:18 am
Location: Houston

Re: KHOU Houston - Texas police chiefs fighting 'unlicensed carry'

Postby Vol Texan » Fri May 05, 2017 5:08 pm

Vol Texan wrote:
Caliber wrote:
ScottDLS wrote::iagree:

Additionally, what makes one think that the LTC course will train someone to properly handle a handgun. If you don't already know by the time you get there, the shooting test isn't going to "learn" you.... :lol:


True, but like I said, at least the course weeds them out. I'm for some sort of required training if you're going to carry around a handgun. And, if it's shown you can't handle a firearm, then you shouldn't be able to carry one around in public. In your house, I don't care. In your car, I don't really care either. In a restaurant sitting next to me, I care.

Had you folks seen that lady in that CHL class, it would have made you think about the situation!


First of all, welcome to the forum. I see that you've been on since 2011, but this is only your 30-ish post.

Second, can you tell me any other amendment to the constitution that you would say this about? What makes the right to keep and bear arms any different from the right to free speech, or any other right?
Your number one option for personal security is a lifelong commitment to avoidance, deterrence, and de-escalation.
When those fail, aim for center mass.

NRA Certified Pistol Instructor | www.Texas3006.com Moderator


Caliber
Junior Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 3:44 pm

Re: KHOU Houston - Texas police chiefs fighting 'unlicensed carry'

Postby Caliber » Fri May 05, 2017 5:09 pm

I understand your point. But, "speech" can't kill anyone.

User avatar

parabelum
Senior Member
Posts: 1638
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2015 12:22 pm

Re: KHOU Houston - Texas police chiefs fighting 'unlicensed carry'

Postby parabelum » Fri May 05, 2017 5:16 pm

Caliber wrote:I understand your point. But, "speech" can't kill anyone.


Tell that to families of those gassed in Nazi Germany. It all begun with "speech".

Anywho. You're on wrong end of U.S. Constitution. Re-read the 2A. Doesn't say "...with proper required training...".

Shall not be infringed! Not by you and not by these political maggots dressed up as cops.

User avatar

Liberty
Senior Member
Posts: 5190
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:49 pm
Location: Galveston
Contact:

Re: KHOU Houston - Texas police chiefs fighting 'unlicensed carry'

Postby Liberty » Fri May 05, 2017 6:16 pm

parabelum wrote:
Caliber wrote:I understand your point. But, "speech" can't kill anyone.


Tell that to families of those gassed in Nazi Germany. It all begun with "speech".

Anywho. You're on wrong end of U.S. Constitution. Re-read the 2A. Doesn't say "...with proper required training...".

Shall not be infringed! Not by you and not by these political maggots dressed up as cops.

The reference in the 2nd amendment to "a well regulated militia" is about training. At least to me it does, I think while it is claims that we have a right to arm ourselves there is a suggestion that we should be trained and prepared to use them. While I won't suggest that the 2nd amendment demands that we all need CHLs and training. I think that the militia reference suggests that we should not only be armed but well trained.
Last edited by Liberty on Fri May 05, 2017 6:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Liberty''s Blog
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy

User avatar

Flightmare
Senior Member
Posts: 1167
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 7:00 pm
Location: Plano, TX

Re: KHOU Houston - Texas police chiefs fighting 'unlicensed carry'

Postby Flightmare » Fri May 05, 2017 6:19 pm

Caliber wrote:
ScottDLS wrote::iagree:

Additionally, what makes one think that the LTC course will train someone to properly handle a handgun. If you don't already know by the time you get there, the shooting test isn't going to "learn" you.... :lol:


True, but like I said, at least the course weeds them out. I'm for some sort of required training if you're going to carry around a handgun. And, if it's shown you can't handle a firearm, then you shouldn't be able to carry one around in public. In your house, I don't care. In your car, I don't really care either. In a restaurant sitting next to me, I care.

Had you folks seen that lady in that CHL class, it would have made you think twice!


I saw someone in my class manage to chamber a round BACKWARDS. The RSO was shocked and said he's never seen one go in all the way backwards before. I agree that people should get training, but I believe it should be started MUCH earlier. We used to teach firearms safety in schools. I believe when the schools stopped teaching that, it increased how dangerous the average person is. I'd love to see firearms safety instruction returned to students in school.
Deplorable lunatic since 2016

User avatar

parabelum
Senior Member
Posts: 1638
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2015 12:22 pm

Re: KHOU Houston - Texas police chiefs fighting 'unlicensed carry'

Postby parabelum » Fri May 05, 2017 8:07 pm

Liberty wrote:
parabelum wrote:
Caliber wrote:I understand your point. But, "speech" can't kill anyone.


Tell that to families of those gassed in Nazi Germany. It all begun with "speech".

Anywho. You're on wrong end of U.S. Constitution. Re-read the 2A. Doesn't say "...with proper required training...".

Shall not be infringed! Not by you and not by these political maggots dressed up as cops.

The reference in the 2nd amendment to "a well regulated militia" is about training. At least to me it does, I think while it is claims that we have a right to arm ourselves there is a suggestion that we should be trained and prepared to use them. While I won't suggest that the 2nd amendment demands that we all need CHLs and training. I think that the militia reference suggests that we should not only be armed but well trained.


Keep in mind that the definition of "well regulated" was common during the time that Constitution was written, and beyond, with a meaning which was nowhere that of what is perceived to mean today.

"Well regulated" was a term commonly used to describe a proper working order of something. "Well regulated clock" would have been a term to describe a clock functioning properly.

Often, if one called out government official out for openly being caught up in a lie, that person would have been regarded as "well regulated", or in "proper working order", or not a leftist maggot :biggrinjester: ...

English is not my first language but I did learn few things, here and there, over time. Mainly reading books :shock: .

Now, the militia part. Clearly this was not meant to imply members of armed forces solely and exclusively, as that would imply that only military is allowed to carry guns. So...

As Alexander Hamilton points out in Federalist 29:

"The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, nor a week nor even a month, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry and of the other classes of the citizens to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people and a serious public inconvenience and loss. "

It appears that Hamilton saw well-regulated militia as a state of readiness acquired through training.

If I train on my farm am I not prepared? What gives any entity the proper right to rule over my Right, granted to me by the Constitution, to define whether I am trained or not?

The rub is there are one offs who don't train and/or don't know how to use their weapon properly. I get it. However, my freedom to be free includes my freedom to be free from them, period.

If you are not training (proverbial "you"), why then shall my Right be usurped?

Esoteric, I know.

Summary,

"Well regulated" implies properly functioning person in this context, in other words not a mental case.

"Milita" implies properly trained and in a state of readiness. Doesn't prescribe that government bureaucracy decides what is "properly trained and in a state of readiness". It isn't in the Constitution. Doesn't exist.

Some States recognize the rather obtuse argument I wrote above, hence Constitutional Carry in those States.

To argue and support otherwise is to allow leftist judges to further defile our Constitution by creating all these carve outs, clauses, the "you qualify if you do xyz's" etc. all while little by little, the walls of the original Constitutional intent are breached more and more.


My opinion, is that 2A was an imperative component of defense of a Nation in the event where we as a Nation are overtaken by foreign body. In a case where military and/or police have been defeated or severely degraded, we, the free Citizens of this Nation, stand as last defense, and our Right to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

Again, my simpleton opinion.
Last edited by parabelum on Fri May 05, 2017 8:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.


OlBill
Senior Member
Posts: 303
Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2013 12:36 am

Re: KHOU Houston - Texas police chiefs fighting 'unlicensed carry'

Postby OlBill » Fri May 05, 2017 8:25 pm

Liberty wrote:The reference in the 2nd amendment to "a well regulated militia" is about training. At least to me it does, I think while it is claims that we have a right to arm ourselves there is a suggestion that we should be trained and prepared to use them. While I won't suggest that the 2nd amendment demands that we all need CHLs and training. I think that the militia reference suggests that we should not only be armed but well trained.


http://www.constitution.org/2ll/schol/2amd_grammar.htm

Copperud:] "(2) The right is not granted by the amendment; its existence is assumed. The thrust of the sentence is that the right shall be preserved inviolate for the sake of ensuring a militia."

Copperud:] "(3) No such condition is expressed or implied. The right to keep and bear arms is not said by the amendment to depend on the existence of a militia. No condition is stated or implied as to the relation of the right to keep and bear arms and to the necessity of a well-regulated militia as a requisite to the security of a free state. The right to keep and bear arms is deemed unconditional by the entire sentence."

The militia exists because of the right, not vice versa.


Caliber
Junior Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 3:44 pm

Re: KHOU Houston - Texas police chiefs fighting 'unlicensed carry'

Postby Caliber » Fri May 05, 2017 8:42 pm

Jusme wrote:
Caliber wrote:Well, I'm not for unlicensed carry for the following reason:

When I took my CHL class a long time ago, there was a woman in the class that could NOT handle a firearm. She struggled to load, fire, and couldn't hit the target half the time. She clearly had no business trying qualify for a CHL.

So, I can imagine that if unlicensed carry passes, there would be some people that would go buy a gun and not learn how to use it which puts themselves in danger as well as you and me. With required licensing, at least of those idiots are weeded out.



Those "idiots' have the same Constitutional right to keep and bear arms as anyone else. They "should" take the responsibility to be properly trained with firearms, but it should not be mandated by the government. No other Constitutional right, requires, proving that you know how to exercise it properly.


The constitution does not discriminate by age or mental capacity either. So, using your argument, is it OK for a 5-year old child to "bear arms"? I don't think applying some reasonable restrictions on the 2nd amendment is unreasonable.
Last edited by Caliber on Fri May 05, 2017 8:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar

parabelum
Senior Member
Posts: 1638
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2015 12:22 pm

Re: KHOU Houston - Texas police chiefs fighting 'unlicensed carry'

Postby parabelum » Fri May 05, 2017 8:45 pm

Caliber wrote:
Jusme wrote:
Caliber wrote:Well, I'm not for unlicensed carry for the following reason:

When I took my CHL class a long time ago, there was a woman in the class that could NOT handle a firearm. She struggled to load, fire, and couldn't hit the target half the time. She clearly had no business trying qualify for a CHL.

So, I can imagine that if unlicensed carry passes, there would be some people that would go buy a gun and not learn how to use it which puts themselves in danger as well as you and me. With required licensing, at least of those idiots are weeded out.



Those "idiots' have the same Constitutional right to keep and bear arms as anyone else. They "should" take the responsibility to be properly trained with firearms, but it should not be mandated by the government. No other Constitutional right, requires, proving that you know how to exercise it properly.


The constitution does not discriminate by age or mental capacity either. So, using your argument, is it OK for a 5-year old child to "bear arms"?


Reducto ad absurdum argument. Heard it all before. :tiphat:


Caliber
Junior Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 3:44 pm

Re: KHOU Houston - Texas police chiefs fighting 'unlicensed carry'

Postby Caliber » Fri May 05, 2017 8:49 pm

parabelum wrote:
Caliber wrote:
Jusme wrote:
Caliber wrote:Well, I'm not for unlicensed carry for the following reason:

When I took my CHL class a long time ago, there was a woman in the class that could NOT handle a firearm. She struggled to load, fire, and couldn't hit the target half the time. She clearly had no business trying qualify for a CHL.

So, I can imagine that if unlicensed carry passes, there would be some people that would go buy a gun and not learn how to use it which puts themselves in danger as well as you and me. With required licensing, at least of those idiots are weeded out.



Those "idiots' have the same Constitutional right to keep and bear arms as anyone else. They "should" take the responsibility to be properly trained with firearms, but it should not be mandated by the government. No other Constitutional right, requires, proving that you know how to exercise it properly.


The constitution does not discriminate by age or mental capacity either. So, using your argument, is it OK for a 5-year old child to "bear arms"?


Reducto ad absurdum argument. Heard it all before. :tiphat:


But, you didn't answer my question.

User avatar

parabelum
Senior Member
Posts: 1638
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2015 12:22 pm

Re: KHOU Houston - Texas police chiefs fighting 'unlicensed carry'

Postby parabelum » Fri May 05, 2017 8:56 pm

Because you posed a question based upon a reducto ad absurdum argument. Thanks for the invite, but I will not follow you into rabbit hole, respectfully of course.


Caliber
Junior Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 3:44 pm

Re: KHOU Houston - Texas police chiefs fighting 'unlicensed carry'

Postby Caliber » Fri May 05, 2017 9:00 pm

No problem, just a friendly debate, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.


Return to “General Texas CHL Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests