Lever-action pistol

A meeting place for CHL instructors

Moderators: carlson1, Crossfire


mrvmax
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1654
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:16 pm
Location: Friendswood
Contact:

Re: Lever-action pistol

#31

Post by mrvmax » Thu Apr 05, 2018 4:42 am

philbo wrote:
skeathley wrote:In reality, that gun is an SBR.
No, it isn't (at least not until ATF redefines it as such... :roll: ). Whether you allow it to be used in your class is your call and your prerogative, but don't try it justify it as anything other than your personal preference.
I agree, the ATF definition is clear (which BTW is the standard the firearms industry holds to) and this is not an SBR and is clearly designated as a pistol. What I, you or anyone but the ATF (or courts) think this is makes no difference. I personally may think it’s illegal or should be but that doesn’t change the ATF’s definition/classification of it.

User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 7
Posts: 24087
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Lever-action pistol

#32

Post by The Annoyed Man » Thu Apr 05, 2018 3:40 pm

BBYC wrote:
The Annoyed Man wrote:
Jusme wrote:There are no regulations, in the LTC firearms proficiency test, that require any gun be fired with only one hand. To require that, of someone, with a non-traditional "pistol" seems unfair. JMHO
Might be justifiable for safety reasons.
Do they hold all students to the same standards?
I’m sure it’s possible they don’t.....which is why I included the qualifier “might”.

FWIW, I’d consider someone who showed up to take a LTC qualification with that particular gun to be a bit frivolous. No, I do not think it should be illegal, or anything like that. Whatever floats his boat is fine with me. But I still think it is frivolous, and more about style than substance.
Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself.—Hookalakah Meshobbab
I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes.—The Annoyed Boy


WildRose
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 409
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2018 1:30 am

Re: Lever-action pistol

#33

Post by WildRose » Thu Apr 12, 2018 7:47 pm

The Annoyed Man wrote:
Jusme wrote:There are no regulations, in the LTC firearms proficiency test, that require any gun be fired with only one hand. To require that, of someone, with a non-traditional "pistol" seems unfair. JMHO
Might be justifiable for safety reasons.
There is no "one hand" requirement for qualification.
NRA Certified Instructor, RSO, CRSO,
TX LTC Instructor, Personal/Family Protection and Self Defense Instructor.
Without The First and Second Amendments the rest are meaningless.

User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 7
Posts: 24087
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Lever-action pistol

#34

Post by The Annoyed Man » Thu Apr 12, 2018 7:50 pm

WildRose wrote:
The Annoyed Man wrote:
Jusme wrote:There are no regulations, in the LTC firearms proficiency test, that require any gun be fired with only one hand. To require that, of someone, with a non-traditional "pistol" seems unfair. JMHO
Might be justifiable for safety reasons.
There is no "one hand" requirement for qualification.
See my post immediately above yours.
Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself.—Hookalakah Meshobbab
I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes.—The Annoyed Boy


WildRose
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 409
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2018 1:30 am

Re: Lever-action pistol

#35

Post by WildRose » Fri Apr 13, 2018 1:38 am

The Annoyed Man wrote:
WildRose wrote:
The Annoyed Man wrote:
Jusme wrote:There are no regulations, in the LTC firearms proficiency test, that require any gun be fired with only one hand. To require that, of someone, with a non-traditional "pistol" seems unfair. JMHO
Might be justifiable for safety reasons.
There is no "one hand" requirement for qualification.
See my post immediately above yours.
I did and no such one hand firing requirement exists in Texas.
NRA Certified Instructor, RSO, CRSO,
TX LTC Instructor, Personal/Family Protection and Self Defense Instructor.
Without The First and Second Amendments the rest are meaningless.

User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 7
Posts: 24087
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Lever-action pistol

#36

Post by The Annoyed Man » Fri Apr 13, 2018 9:13 am

WildRose wrote:
The Annoyed Man wrote:
WildRose wrote:
The Annoyed Man wrote:
Jusme wrote:There are no regulations, in the LTC firearms proficiency test, that require any gun be fired with only one hand. To require that, of someone, with a non-traditional "pistol" seems unfair. JMHO
Might be justifiable for safety reasons.
There is no "one hand" requirement for qualification.
See my post immediately above yours.
I did and no such one hand firing requirement exists in Texas.
For some reason, your reply is rubbing me the wrong way - intentionally or not. You joined the forum on Wed Jan 31, 2018 at 12:30 am, and have 34 posts. I joined the forum on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 10:59 am, and I have 23,389 posts. I think by now that I understand a little bit about what is required in qualification and what is not. I don't really need to explain myself to you, but I will.......

I completely understand that there is no such requirement. I also completely realize the fact of the matter that some individual instructors sometimes take upon themselves the authority to apply arbitrary standards during qualifications. If you think this is not happening, you're fooling yourself. They may (see dictionary definition of MIGHT/MAY below) do so for any number of reasons, but it usually has to do with questions of accommodating handicapped, elderly, or inexperienced shooters.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/might
Definition of might

past tense of MAY

1 —used to express permission, liberty, probability, or possibility in the past • The president might do nothing without the board's consent.
2 —used to say that something is possible • We might get there before it rains. I might go, but then again, I might not.
3 —used to express a present condition contrary to fact • If you were older you might understand.
4 a —used as a polite alternative to may • Might I ask who is calling?
4 b —used as a polite alternative to ought or should • You might at least apologize. I might have known she'd be late.
I used the word "might" in the context of definition #2. I could have alternatively said "possibly be justifiable for safety reasons", or "maybe justifiable for safety reasons".

If you spend enough time both studying CHL/LTC law and it's occasional imprecision (this forum is chock full over the past 10 years of examples) people have questions because there are vagaries in the common use of language which can cause some imprecision. Often, these vagaries are due exactly to use of language issues like the example defined above. There might (could/maybe/possibly) be multiple definitions for a single word in common use, and that affects how people understand (A) the law, and (B) what people say about the law.

An important principle in the law is that it does not MAKE a thing legal, it only makes things illegal. By default, all things are legal. LTC law is a perfect example.... at one time, it was completely lawful to openly carry a handgun without permission. Then a law was passed making it illegal. Then another law was passed making an exception to the first law if the bearer held a gov't permission slip, but it still remained illegal for anyone else. Under that standard, just because there is no requirement in the law for two handed use of a firearm, there is neither any requirement that enforces either a one-handed or two-handed standard during qualification. The Instructor/RSO is tasked with enforcing range safety, AND with trying to get his/her students to pass the qualification. If a student showed up with an Austrian Pfeifer-Zeliska revolver chambered in .600 Nitro Express Magnum (see image below), that gun would be permitted for qualification because it is a handgun. But let us also stipulate in this example that the student had never fired a handgun before, and the Pfeifer-Zeliska was loaned to him by his evil twin Skippy, who thought it would be a hilarious practical joke on the poor student. You'd have to forgive the instructor if he/she wanted to make sure that the situation was safe, and so he/she might (maybe/possibly) justify to themselves the necessity of imposing a stricter safety standard than that imposed on the student who shows up with a Glock 19.

Image

In fact, in the 8th post on page 1 of this thread, the OP who had asked the question in the first place said:
skeathley wrote:I decided to disallow this gun for the Proficiency. It violates the spirit of the law, if not the letter.

:rules:
If you want to argue about one-handed requirements, go ahead; but you'll have to find someone else to do it with. I'm out.
Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself.—Hookalakah Meshobbab
I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes.—The Annoyed Boy

User avatar

puma guy
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 5791
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 2:23 pm
Location: Near San Jacinto

Re: Lever-action pistol

#37

Post by puma guy » Fri Apr 13, 2018 10:23 am

The Annoyed Man wrote:
WildRose wrote:
The Annoyed Man wrote:
WildRose wrote:
The Annoyed Man wrote:
Jusme wrote:There are no regulations, in the LTC firearms proficiency test, that require any gun be fired with only one hand. To require that, of someone, with a non-traditional "pistol" seems unfair. JMHO
Might be justifiable for safety reasons.
There is no "one hand" requirement for qualification.
See my post immediately above yours.
I did and no such one hand firing requirement exists in Texas.
For some reason, your reply is rubbing me the wrong way - intentionally or not. You joined the forum on Wed Jan 31, 2018 at 12:30 am, and have 34 posts. I joined the forum on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 10:59 am, and I have 23,389 posts. I think by now that I understand a little bit about what is required in qualification and what is not. I don't really need to explain myself to you, but I will.......

I completely understand that there is no such requirement. I also completely realize the fact of the matter that some individual instructors sometimes take upon themselves the authority to apply arbitrary standards during qualifications. If you think this is not happening, you're fooling yourself. They may (see dictionary definition of MIGHT/MAY below) do so for any number of reasons, but it usually has to do with questions of accommodating handicapped, elderly, or inexperienced shooters.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/might
Definition of might

past tense of MAY

1 —used to express permission, liberty, probability, or possibility in the past • The president might do nothing without the board's consent.
2 —used to say that something is possible • We might get there before it rains. I might go, but then again, I might not.
3 —used to express a present condition contrary to fact • If you were older you might understand.
4 a —used as a polite alternative to may • Might I ask who is calling?
4 b —used as a polite alternative to ought or should • You might at least apologize. I might have known she'd be late.
I used the word "might" in the context of definition #2. I could have alternatively said "possibly be justifiable for safety reasons", or "maybe justifiable for safety reasons".

If you spend enough time both studying CHL/LTC law and it's occasional imprecision (this forum is chock full over the past 10 years of examples) people have questions because there are vagaries in the common use of language which can cause some imprecision. Often, these vagaries are due exactly to use of language issues like the example defined above. There might (could/maybe/possibly) be multiple definitions for a single word in common use, and that affects how people understand (A) the law, and (B) what people say about the law.

An important principle in the law is that it does not MAKE a thing legal, it only makes things illegal. By default, all things are legal. LTC law is a perfect example.... at one time, it was completely lawful to openly carry a handgun without permission. Then a law was passed making it illegal. Then another law was passed making an exception to the first law if the bearer held a gov't permission slip, but it still remained illegal for anyone else. Under that standard, just because there is no requirement in the law for two handed use of a firearm, there is neither any requirement that enforces either a one-handed or two-handed standard during qualification. The Instructor/RSO is tasked with enforcing range safety, AND with trying to get his/her students to pass the qualification. If a student showed up with an Austrian Pfeifer-Zeliska revolver chambered in .600 Nitro Express Magnum (see image below), that gun would be permitted for qualification because it is a handgun. But let us also stipulate in this example that the student had never fired a handgun before, and the Pfeifer-Zeliska was loaned to him by his evil twin Skippy, who thought it would be a hilarious practical joke on the poor student. You'd have to forgive the instructor if he/she wanted to make sure that the situation was safe, and so he/she might (maybe/possibly) justify to themselves the necessity of imposing a stricter safety standard than that imposed on the student who shows up with a Glock 19.

Image




In fact, in the 8th post on page 1 of this thread, the OP who had asked the question in the first place said:
skeathley wrote:I decided to disallow this gun for the Proficiency. It violates the spirit of the law, if not the letter.

:rules:
If you want to argue about one-handed requirements, go ahead; but you'll have to find someone else to do it with. I'm out.
TAM, I always enjoy reading your posts, especially when you are The Annoyed Man! :lol:
KAHR PM40/Hoffner IWB and S&W Mod 60/ Galco IWB
NRA Endowment Member, TSRA Life Member,100 Club Life Member,TFC Member
My Faith, My Gun and My Constitution: I cling to all three!
Image


Soccerdad1995
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 3603
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:03 pm

Re: Lever-action pistol

#38

Post by Soccerdad1995 » Fri Apr 13, 2018 10:41 am

The Annoyed Man wrote:
WildRose wrote:
The Annoyed Man wrote:
WildRose wrote:
The Annoyed Man wrote:
Jusme wrote:There are no regulations, in the LTC firearms proficiency test, that require any gun be fired with only one hand. To require that, of someone, with a non-traditional "pistol" seems unfair. JMHO
Might be justifiable for safety reasons.
There is no "one hand" requirement for qualification.
See my post immediately above yours.
I did and no such one hand firing requirement exists in Texas.
For some reason, your reply is rubbing me the wrong way - intentionally or not. You joined the forum on Wed Jan 31, 2018 at 12:30 am, and have 34 posts. I joined the forum on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 10:59 am, and I have 23,389 posts. I think by now that I understand a little bit about what is required in qualification and what is not. I don't really need to explain myself to you, but I will.......

I completely understand that there is no such requirement. I also completely realize the fact of the matter that some individual instructors sometimes take upon themselves the authority to apply arbitrary standards during qualifications. If you think this is not happening, you're fooling yourself. They may (see dictionary definition of MIGHT/MAY below) do so for any number of reasons, but it usually has to do with questions of accommodating handicapped, elderly, or inexperienced shooters.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/might
Definition of might

past tense of MAY

1 —used to express permission, liberty, probability, or possibility in the past • The president might do nothing without the board's consent.
2 —used to say that something is possible • We might get there before it rains. I might go, but then again, I might not.
3 —used to express a present condition contrary to fact • If you were older you might understand.
4 a —used as a polite alternative to may • Might I ask who is calling?
4 b —used as a polite alternative to ought or should • You might at least apologize. I might have known she'd be late.
I used the word "might" in the context of definition #2. I could have alternatively said "possibly be justifiable for safety reasons", or "maybe justifiable for safety reasons".

If you spend enough time both studying CHL/LTC law and it's occasional imprecision (this forum is chock full over the past 10 years of examples) people have questions because there are vagaries in the common use of language which can cause some imprecision. Often, these vagaries are due exactly to use of language issues like the example defined above. There might (could/maybe/possibly) be multiple definitions for a single word in common use, and that affects how people understand (A) the law, and (B) what people say about the law.

An important principle in the law is that it does not MAKE a thing legal, it only makes things illegal. By default, all things are legal. LTC law is a perfect example.... at one time, it was completely lawful to openly carry a handgun without permission. Then a law was passed making it illegal. Then another law was passed making an exception to the first law if the bearer held a gov't permission slip, but it still remained illegal for anyone else. Under that standard, just because there is no requirement in the law for two handed use of a firearm, there is neither any requirement that enforces either a one-handed or two-handed standard during qualification. The Instructor/RSO is tasked with enforcing range safety, AND with trying to get his/her students to pass the qualification. If a student showed up with an Austrian Pfeifer-Zeliska revolver chambered in .600 Nitro Express Magnum (see image below), that gun would be permitted for qualification because it is a handgun. But let us also stipulate in this example that the student had never fired a handgun before, and the Pfeifer-Zeliska was loaned to him by his evil twin Skippy, who thought it would be a hilarious practical joke on the poor student. You'd have to forgive the instructor if he/she wanted to make sure that the situation was safe, and so he/she might (maybe/possibly) justify to themselves the necessity of imposing a stricter safety standard than that imposed on the student who shows up with a Glock 19.

Image

In fact, in the 8th post on page 1 of this thread, the OP who had asked the question in the first place said:
skeathley wrote:I decided to disallow this gun for the Proficiency. It violates the spirit of the law, if not the letter.

:rules:
If you want to argue about one-handed requirements, go ahead; but you'll have to find someone else to do it with. I'm out.
Everything you say makes sense, except that I can't imagine the situation where requiring one handed firing would make things safer. I think this would almost always make things less safe. Similar to imposing an arbitrary requirement that students must qualify while blindfolded. Apparently within the instructor's discretion, but generally would result in a less safe situation for all involved.

This is the opposite of the situation you cited where a student is using a gun they might not be able to handle, where reasonable additional restrictions may likely make sense for safety reasons (like requiring them to qualify separately so you can focus on just that one student).
Ding dong, the witch is dead


Abraham
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 8399
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:43 am

Re: Lever-action pistol

#39

Post by Abraham » Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:30 pm

Is it just me, or do so-called lever action pistols look simply like impractical cut down lever action rifles?

Maybe, I'm missing something that would provide me a "I shouldn't ordered V-8 moment" but I see them as gun frankenstein-ian.

So, what is it about them that those who like them...heck, appeal to them, novelty or some practicality I'm overlooking?


BBYC
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 649
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:32 pm

Re: Lever-action pistol

#40

Post by BBYC » Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:44 pm

The Annoyed Man wrote:
WildRose wrote:
The Annoyed Man wrote:
WildRose wrote:
The Annoyed Man wrote:
Jusme wrote:There are no regulations, in the LTC firearms proficiency test, that require any gun be fired with only one hand. To require that, of someone, with a non-traditional "pistol" seems unfair. JMHO
Might be justifiable for safety reasons.
There is no "one hand" requirement for qualification.
See my post immediately above yours.
I did and no such one hand firing requirement exists in Texas.
For some reason, your reply is rubbing me the wrong way - intentionally or not.
Your feelings don't mean he's wrong about the law.
The Annoyed Man wrote:You joined the forum on Wed Jan 31, 2018 at 12:30 am, and have 34 posts. I joined the forum on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 10:59 am, and I have 23,389 posts.
That's a beautiful example of ad hominem. Attacking the individual rather than the argument doesn't mean he's wrong about the law. Maybe it suggests the opposite?
God, grant me serenity to accept the things I can't change
Courage to change the things I can
And the firepower to make a difference.


montgomery
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 255
Joined: Sun May 31, 2015 8:13 am
Location: Montgomery, Texas

Re: Lever-action pistol

#41

Post by montgomery » Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:58 pm

Jusme wrote:
warnmar10 wrote:IANAI but:
CHAPTER 46. WEAPONS
Sec. 46.01. DEFINITIONS.
(5) "Handgun" means any firearm that is designed, made, or adapted to be fired with one hand.
:iagree:

Regardless of what the shooting proficiency course of fire is, a handgun is a handgun and per Texas law, it has to be operated with one hand. Nowhere does it say the proficiency shoot has to be one or two hands, strong hand or weak hand.


Soccerdad1995
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 3603
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:03 pm

Re: Lever-action pistol

#42

Post by Soccerdad1995 » Fri Apr 13, 2018 1:37 pm

I think we have beaten this horse pretty much to death.

The consensus answer seems to be that any pistol can be used for the LTC qualification, including a lever action pistol, AR pistol, etc. And the consensus also seems to be that an instructor is free to add any other requirements they choose to the LTC qualification including requiring students to shoot one handed, fire over their shoulder, stand on their head, or fire blindfolded.

The takeaway seems to be that if in doubt, ask your prospective instructor about any specific requirements they are adding over and above the state mandated requirements. If those requirements are a problem for you, then choose a different instructor.
Ding dong, the witch is dead

User avatar

warnmar10
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 525
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 11:57 am

Re: Lever-action pistol

#43

Post by warnmar10 » Fri Apr 13, 2018 5:19 pm

Soccerdad1995 wrote:I think we have beaten this horse pretty much to death.

...
You're not from around here are you.

Image
Last edited by warnmar10 on Fri Apr 13, 2018 5:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.


Soccerdad1995
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 3603
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:03 pm

Re: Lever-action pistol

#44

Post by Soccerdad1995 » Fri Apr 13, 2018 5:22 pm

warnmar10 wrote:
Soccerdad1995 wrote:I think we have beaten this horse pretty much to death.

...
You're not from around here are you.
:lol::
Ding dong, the witch is dead


twomillenium
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1540
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:42 pm
Location: houston area

Re: Lever-action pistol

#45

Post by twomillenium » Fri Apr 13, 2018 6:32 pm

Soccerdad1995 wrote:
warnmar10 wrote:
Soccerdad1995 wrote:I think we have beaten this horse pretty much to death.

...
You're not from around here are you.
:lol::
Yes, we have, but to continue does make the meat tender.
As an instructor I am willing to allow any firearm that the ATF has qualified as a handgun. The state of Texas defines a handgun as
CHAPTER 46. WEAPONS
Sec. 46.01. DEFINITIONS.
(5) "Handgun" means any firearm that is designed, made, or adapted to be fired with one hand.
It does not say it must be fired multiple times with one hand, so if the ATF says it is a handgun then it is a handgun and I will allow it. As with all firearms the student must show the safe operation of the handgun. Over the years, I have only made 3 students shoot one handed, but that is because they only had one hand.(they did very well) If someone showed up with three hands I would not make them use all three, but then again I would not stop them. :tiphat:
Texas LTC Instructor, NRA pistol instructor, RSO, NRA Endowment Life , TSRA, Glock enthusiast (tho I have others)
Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit, wisdom is knowing not to add it to a fruit salad.

You will never know another me, this could be good or not so good, but it is still true.

Post Reply

Return to “Instructors' Corner”