TexasCHLforum.com

This training sounds very worthwhile.

locke_n_load wrote:Charles, I have copied and pasted this message, unedited, onto my facebook business page (LTC/Firearms training), and given citation that it is from published from texasfirearmscoalition.com. Is that acceptable?

Absolutely! Thanks for publishing it. We need to get people behind this concept so we can get it done. It took four legislative sessions (8 yrs.) to pass campus-carry, thee sessions to exempt volunteer church security from the Private Security Act and I could go on. We cannot afford to make this a multi-session battle.

Chas.

oljames3 wrote:From KR Training's course description (There is a typo in the description. The Shooting Under Duress shooting exercise developed by DPS is 120 rounds, not 50 rounds.)

That addresses the round count, but not deviating from the required course. I've heard a lot of good things about Karl and this course is probably excellent, but if it violates the DPS instructions not to deviate from the specified course, then there may be a problem.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

oljames3 wrote:From KR Training's course description (There is a typo in the description. The Shooting Under Duress shooting exercise developed by DPS is 120 rounds, not 50 rounds.)

That addresses the round count, but not deviating from the required course. I've heard a lot of good things about Karl and this course is probably excellent, but if it violates the DPS instructions not to deviate from the specified course, then there may be a problem.

Chas.

To be clear, Karl assured me that all was done as specified by DPS. Just as in an LTC class, there was time for additional material, exercises, and instruction. I apologize for not counting rounds for each course of fire.

Interesting development in Colorado.
https://nypost.com/2016/12/15/colorado- ... arry-guns/

oljames3 wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

oljames3 wrote:From KR Training's course description (There is a typo in the description. The Shooting Under Duress shooting exercise developed by DPS is 120 rounds, not 50 rounds.)

That addresses the round count, but not deviating from the required course. I've heard a lot of good things about Karl and this course is probably excellent, but if it violates the DPS instructions not to deviate from the specified course, then there may be a problem.

Chas.

To be clear, Karl assured me that all was done as specified by DPS. Just as in an LTC class, there was time for additional material, exercises, and instruction. I apologize for not counting rounds for each course of fire.

"Not counting rounds . . .[?]" My comments were not based upon your description of the class, but upon the express language in the course description. I understand there was a typo in the number of rounds required for the shooting under duress segment. Typos can happen to anyone. However, the class is listed as 15 hrs (the statutory minimum) and the description includes shooting drills other than what DPS requires and allows. If the class is the minimum required 15 hrs, then there isn't any extra time for additional drills. I'm not trying to nit-pick. When a State authorized Certificate is being issued, then all course requirements must be met.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

locke_n_load wrote:Charles, I have copied and pasted this message, unedited, onto my facebook business page (LTC/Firearms training), and given citation that it is from published from texasfirearmscoalition.com. Is that acceptable?

Absolutely! Thanks for publishing it. We need to get people behind this concept so we can get it done. It took four legislative sessions (8 yrs.) to pass campus-carry, thee sessions to exempt volunteer church security from the Private Security Act and I could go on. We cannot afford to make this a multi-session battle.

Chas.

No problem. When it comes time for a lot of publicity on these items, please post them to the Texas Firearms Coalition facebook page for easy sharing! Very easy to just punch that share button!

There's an interesting article on CNN that supports the idea of protecting schools with armed guards —

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/18/opinions ... index.html

Visit a jewelry store, a casino, even regular shopping malls and you'll find armed security everywhere. Why? Because evil walks our streets, even if we would rather live in blissful denial.

Looks like Florida law would need some tweaking also for similar.
https://www.thegunwriter.com/23918/brea ... y-program/

Pawpaw wrote:

Seems pretty clear doesn't it? Me likey your post!

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

locke_n_load wrote:Charles, I have copied and pasted this message, unedited, onto my facebook business page (LTC/Firearms training), and given citation that it is from published from texasfirearmscoalition.com. Is that acceptable?

Absolutely! Thanks for publishing it. We need to get people behind this concept so we can get it done. It took four legislative sessions (8 yrs.) to pass campus-carry, thee sessions to exempt volunteer church security from the Private Security Act and I could go on. We cannot afford to make this a multi-session battle.

Chas.

Long time reader and first time poster. Please include private schools in this bill and do not give them the option to opt out. All of our children are too important, and it would let people know that ALL schools in Texas are protected. Otherwise it could turn into “mass shooter pick a school” like the Colorado movie theater shooter.

You’re absolutely correct that the hardest part will be convincing enough members of the legislature to vote for this. There’s going to be a lot of hysterics and misinformation spewed: from teachers, some law enforcement and others.

Thanks so much for all you do!

Thanks Chas

Its simple we as a state in Texas just harden the target.
Be it church ,school , Please talk it up and maybe we can get some action.
Most of our Police and Fire could do the trick. Most firemen are fearless and some are are already trained.
The list of Volunteers goes on and on.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

rotor wrote:

clarionite wrote:

rotor wrote:FYI, although I had 8 years of active duty in the USAF I never once had any training in firearms or ever touched a military weapon. The closest I came to weapon training was watching an AR-15 shot at a watermelon. All firearm use that I had was on my own. The concept that military service and firearm training go hand in hand is not correct. Otherwise your project sounds great.

How did you go through Basic and not fire a military weapon? I went through Army basic and fired Rifles, threw grenades and fired AT4 trainers.
I have two kids in the USAF currently, and they both qualified with rifles. My daughter was excited to have made expert, told me I trained her well. She was the only one in her group that did. I told her she was probably the only one in her group that owned her own, so it was to be expected. Although hers has very non standard issue Pink furniture. ;)

Spent 2 weeks at Sheppard. They let us observe an enlisted man hold an AR-15 to his chin, shoot a watermelon which exploded, and that one single round was my total experience with firearms in the service. I had my own firearms of course. The point is that just because you are a veteran does not mean you know anything about firearms. I am also an experienced pilot with multiple ratings but never once went up in a military plane. I wish that i could have played with all of the toys but never did.

Maybe we should limit the "veteran" part to just Army and Marines and not necessarily include other non-combat branches. FWIW, my brother told me that he never fired a weapon of any kind during his time in Navy basic training, either.

Both the AF and Navy have quite a few MOS's that require extensive firearms training.

It's more than just the firearms experience of veterans that is considered a benefit though, it's also the sense of dedication and discipline honorably discharged/retired vets come out with that makes them assets.

Teaching the skills, tactics, methods, and techniques necessary isn't at all difficult with civilians and far less so for any veteran meeting that critera.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:... I presume also the Marines.

Every Marine is a rifleman... and every one I ever competed against was an exceptional rifleman.