Corrected vision and your CHL

robert_de_niro · Post by **robert_de_niro** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 11:25 am

I have searched high and low but I haven't found anything reguarding contacts/glasses, but I would think that someone in Austin would care...

Is there any law that requires you to wear your contacts/glasses while carrying? I would think if your DL does, the CHL would make sense too... It would be unfortunate to have an innocent shot because the shooter couldn't see 5 feet in front of him/her...

txinvestigator · Post by **txinvestigator** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 11:54 am

robert_de_niro wrote:I have searched high and low but I haven't found anything reguarding contacts/glasses, but I would think that someone in Austin would care...

Is there any law that requires you to wear your contacts/glasses while carrying? I would think if your DL does, the CHL would make sense too... It would be unfortunate to have an innocent shot because the shooter couldn't see 5 feet in front of him/her...

There are no vision provisions in the CHL laws.

Rex B · Post by **Rex B** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 1:03 pm

"Just shoot towards that fuzzy thing that's making all the noise"

Houston1944 · Post by **Houston1944** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 2:05 pm

Not to be argumentative but based on what I have seen during my three CHL classes I think for a lot of shooters vision is the least controlling factor in the ability to hit a target. During my last renewal my target had a â€œvisiting holeâ€? that appeared while we were shooting from 7 yards. Vision was not the issue. The shooter next to me would have shot a bystander by mistake from a distance of 7 yards.
This is a subject that I have mixed emotions about. I believe every law abiding citizen should have the right to carry without any CHL laws. I certainly am not a competition level shooter and donâ€™t believe that you should be required to be one for CHL. However when I see the accuracy of several shooters during CHL class it makes me very nervous about what would happen if certain ones ever got into a situation where they needed to fire. Part of me wants the accuracy requirements to be increased and part of me wants to leave it alone. I would like to think that after receiving a CHL most would be responsible and continue their â€œshooting educationâ€? but I doubt that it happens.

seamusTX · Post by **seamusTX** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 2:12 pm

I have the same mixed feelings. I'm afraid that it would get like driving: everyone has to take driver ed, but look what they do when they get on the road.

At the range today, one of the guys who runs it pointed out the bullet holes in the walls from people who took loaded guns out of their cars and discharged them.

- Jim

j1132s · Post by **j1132s** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 3:02 pm

If you are nearsighted, wouldn't it be better to shoot w/o your glasses. I mean, you'll be forced to focus on the front sight :)

barres · Post by **barres** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 3:40 pm

I am near sighted, but I wouldn't even be able to see the rear sight of my pistol without corrective lenses!

My vision is somewhere in the 20/850 range. I have to wear glasses or contacts to read, because normal reading distance is too far away!

All that said, I think we're covered in this regard by PC Â§9.05. RECKLESS INJURY OF INNOCENT THIRD PERSON: Even though an actor is justified under this chapter in threatening or using force or deadly force against another, if in doing so he also recklessly injures or kills an innocent third person, the justification afforded by this chapter is unavailable in a prosecution for the reckless injury or killing of the innocent third person.

If you can't see well enough to identify your target, for whatever reason, you're shooting recklessly. Just my opinion, of course.

Diode · Post by **Diode** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 3:43 pm

I have learned to shoot fuzzy, I am far sighted and I wear Progressive Lens bi-focals. I can lean my head back and get the sights in focus but the target is blurry. I miss my old eyes :(

nitrogen · Post by **nitrogen** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 4:05 pm

As long as you can identify your target and what's beyond it, that seems fine by be, even if it's by echolocation. :rock:

kw5kw · Post by **kw5kw** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 4:21 pm

j1132s wrote:If you are nearsighted, wouldn't it be better to shoot w/o your glasses. I mean, you'll be forced to focus on the front sight :)

I was just fixin' to type:

You're supposed to have front sight vision, everything else is supposed to be fuzzy. Near sighted people have an advantage... LOL

Russ

ElGato · Post by **ElGato** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 7:46 pm

Back when I thought I was a shooter I had 17 over 17

, now it's bi's, tri's, and corrected distance

.
do what you can with what you've got.

Liberty · Post by **Liberty** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 8:36 pm

I Took my CHL Class this summer In Galveston County. Of course it was like every other day this time oif year. Very hot very humid. I was wearing shooting glasses over my bifocals. Although I can see reasonably enough to shoot at the range and size target without the bifocals. After the 3 yard shooting my glasses started foggig up terribbly. but I could still see the shapes well enough to draw a bead and not not miss. My thoughts were this is "realism". Although I didn't shoot as well as I would have clear sighted, all my shots scored.

G36Packer · Post by **G36Packer** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 3:11 am

That's why I got a laser. I shot my renewal test not being able to focus on the sights with corrective lenses. Still shot 247 of 250 but that was shooting a paper target in a controlled environment.

I hadn't noticed the problem when shooting outdoors in previous weeks. Flourescent lighting at the indoor range may have been a factor. It did show me that there was a problem. I can always see the target so the laser should help in those situations.

TexasCHLforum.com

Corrected vision and your CHL

Corrected vision and your CHL

Re: Corrected vision and your CHL

so then it's ....