TexasCHLforum.com

Greybeard wrote:Well, I guess some are gonna have to color me in with a differing opinion on some of this one ...
After allowing reloads for CHL qualifications for close to 10 years, I changed that policy at our range a couple of years back. The primary reason was that the guys who seemed to brag the most about their reloads were the same ones who often caused everyone else delays when their guns either stopped up or blew up. Then we got to listen to excuses - when we needed to be shooting. I just got tired of the time it cost me and everyone else compared to what little more $ it costs for a reloader to buy a box of factory ammo once every 4 or 5 years.

I absolutely concur with this view and absolutely understand implementing this policy at your range.

Regards,
James

Yep James, I'm sure you have good reason for "comprendo".

Quote/Question: "Do not they have written standards for the course to which instructors can refer?"

The "written standards" are predominantly spelled out for everyone in the law booklet. Nothing in there either way about lasers.

Regarding the use of lasers . . . if they are not EXPLICITLY PROHIBITED BY LAW, why is this even a subject for debate?

I always thought that if something wasn't explicitly prohibited, it was OK . . . has our society become one in which everything that's not explicitly permitted is automatically prohibited?

Sad, if true . . .

Greybeard wrote:Yep James, I'm sure you have good reason for "comprendo".

Quote/Question: "Do not they have written standards for the course to which instructors can refer?"

The "written standards" are predominantly spelled out for everyone in the law booklet. Nothing in there either way about lasers.

Which comes back to my original question that still has not been directly answered by any of the instructors here. How much latitude does the instructor have to impose restrictions that go beyond those imposed by statute or regulation? For example, can he require a minimum caliber .38 instead of .32? Can he require everyone to shoot with a one-hand hold? Can he require that only open sights be used? What are the abilities and limitations of the instructor to change the course from statutory requirements? Can he do anything he wants as long as the course meets minimum requirements? Clearly, from what we have read here, some instructors are imposing their own requirements so there must be some statute or regulation which justifies this behavior, but I have not been able to locate it in my reading so I am appealing to the more learned here to enlighten me. Will someone knowledgeable please answer the question directly?

DPS does have a rule against using reloads.

gregthehand wrote:DPS does have a rule against using reloads.

Is this documented some place?

dave_in_austin wrote:Which comes back to my original question that still has not been directly answered by any of the instructors here. How much latitude does the instructor have to impose restrictions that go beyond those imposed by statute or regulation? Will someone knowledgeable please answer the question directly?

I am not an instructor, but I think I am knowledgeable. The DPS sets the rules for the CHL classes. These are the minimum requirements to make the course legal for the instructor to sign off your forms. The law sets a minimum length of ten hours for the course, but I don't believe there is a maximum.

A CHL instructor can make the course more difficult. They could require that you pass a basic handgun safety class prior to taking the CHL class or show that you know how to clean your gun. They could make a rule that says you have to load your magazines and be able to clear a malfunction.

That said, you have your choice of instructors. Those who teach the class have to be in line with other instructors or they will lose business to their competition. For example, the DPS doesn't set the prices for the classes, but most of the prices that I have seen are usually pretty close.

WildBill wrote:

dave_in_austin wrote:Which comes back to my original question that still has not been directly answered by any of the instructors here. How much latitude does the instructor have to impose restrictions that go beyond those imposed by statute or regulation? Will someone knowledgeable please answer the question directly?

I am not an instructor, but I think I am knowledgeable. The DPS sets the rules for the CHL classes. These are the minimum requirements to make the course legal for the instructor to sign off your forms.

Correct DPS sets the standards that must be met to show proficiency, but they are not minimums in the way you are describing them. If you read the statutes you have to spend 10 hrs in class with a curriculum that gives you the information needed to pass the exam. Also you are given a proficiency test in shooting (i.e. does the applicant meet the minimum standards).

WildBill wrote:A CHL instructor can make the course more difficult. They could require that you pass a basic handgun safety class prior to taking the CHL class or show that you know how to clean your gun. They could make a rule that says you have to load your magazines and be able to clear a malfunction.

Not necessarily. The instructors could teach other subjects during the classroom portion but the DPS written proficiency test given at the end of the class is the measuring stick. That is if you pass the written test, and have participated in the 10 hours of instruction that go along with it you are done.

dave_in_austin wrote:

Greybeard wrote:Yep James, I'm sure you have good reason for "comprendo".

Quote/Question: "Do not they have written standards for the course to which instructors can refer?"

The "written standards" are predominantly spelled out for everyone in the law booklet. Nothing in there either way about lasers.

Which comes back to my original question that still has not been directly answered by any of the instructors here. How much latitude does the instructor have to impose restrictions that go beyond those imposed by statute or regulation? For example, can he require a minimum caliber .38 instead of .32? Can he require everyone to shoot with a one-hand hold? Can he require that only open sights be used? What are the abilities and limitations of the instructor to change the course from statutory requirements? Can he do anything he wants as long as the course meets minimum requirements? Clearly, from what we have read here, some instructors are imposing their own requirements so there must be some statute or regulation which justifies this behavior, but I have not been able to locate it in my reading so I am appealing to the more learned here to enlighten me. Will someone knowledgeable please answer the question directly?

The answers to your questions are:

None, No latitude to impose restrictions that go beyond those imposed by statue or regulation. BUT Range Owners can impose ammo restrictions.
No, minimum caliber is set by legislature
No, there is nothing in the proficiency requirements regarding this
No, there is nothing in the proficiency requirements regarding this
NO, HE CANNOT CHANGE THE COURSE OF FIRE, it is set by the legislature, see link below.
No, there is a minimum set of course requirements to be taught and covered.

The CHL qualification requirements are only available and documented for instructors, but they can be easily found on the web.

http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/rea ... ch=6&rl=11

Also, have you read your booklet that comes with your packet when you apply?

Regards,
James

KaiserB wrote:Not necessarily. The instructors could teach other subjects during the classroom portion but the DPS written proficiency test given at the end of the class is the measuring stick. That is if you pass the written test, and have participated in the 10 hours of instruction that go along with it you are done.

Let me be more clear. The instructor can set his class to be 15 hours if he wants. During the additional 5 hours he can teach anything he wants, such as handgun maintenance or safety. In addition to the DPS test, he could make up one of his own. That still meets the DPS requirements.

extremist wrote:
The answers to your questions are:

None, No latitude to impose restrictions that go beyond those imposed by statue or regulation. BUT Range Owners can impose ammo restrictions.
No, minimum caliber is set by legislature
No, there is nothing in the proficiency requirements regarding this
No, there is nothing in the proficiency requirements regarding this
NO, HE CANNOT CHANGE THE COURSE OF FIRE, it is set by the legislature, see link below.
No, there is a minimum set of course requirements to be taught and covered.

The CHL qualification requirements are only available and documented for instructors, but they can be easily found on the web.

http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/rea ... ch=6&rl=11

Also, have you read your booklet that comes with your packet when you apply?

Regards,
James

Yes, I have thoroughly read it each time I have taken the class as well as read the published updates in between renewals. In all of this reading, I was able to find nothing that I could see would give the instructors the latitude to change the course requirements or scope. This seemed to conflict with what instructors were saying on this board as to what their practices were. Additionally, some students on the board were also reporting variances from the published standards so I was trying to get some further exposition on the ability of the instructors to change the course subject to personal whim. A good example is the use of laser sights.

WildBill wrote:

KaiserB wrote:Not necessarily. The instructors could teach other subjects during the classroom portion but the DPS written proficiency test given at the end of the class is the measuring stick. That is if you pass the written test, and have participated in the 10 hours of instruction that go along with it you are done.

Let me be more clear. The instructor can set his class to be 15 hours if he wants. During the additional 5 hours he can teach anything he wants, such as handgun maintenance or safety. In addition to the DPS test, he could make up one of his own. That still meets the DPS requirements.

If the student failed the material presented in this additional 5 hours, would that be a basis for saying the student failed to complete the course and thus deny the certificate?

dave_in_austin wrote:If the student failed the material presented in this additional 5 hours, would that be a basis for saying the student failed to complete the course and thus deny the certificate?

I may be way off base here. Since I am not an instructor, I don't have a copy of all of the rules that extremist has, but I have been told by a few instructors that they have discretion whether or not to issue the certificate. IMO, any ethical instructor would issue the certificate. I don't know if DPS measures or monitors CHL instructors' compliance to the classroom and qualification regulations.

WildBill wrote:

dave_in_austin wrote:If the student failed the material presented in this additional 5 hours, would that be a basis for saying the student failed to complete the course and thus deny the certificate?

Since I am not an instructor, I don't have a copy of all of the rules that extremist has, but I have been told a couple of instructors that they have discretion whether or not to issue the certificate. IMO, any ethical instructor would issue the certificate.

I find that concept somewhat disturbing. The Texas CHL is described as a "shall issue" license which is supposed to remove the personal discretion of who gets a CHL from the process. All who meet the statutory requirements are to be issued the license. If the instructor has discretion to make a decision that keeps a fully-qualified individual from obtaining the license, then it is effectively not a shall-issue license. The decision about who passes the course should be based on uniform objective criteria and I believe that that is what the legislature intended when they created the system.

dave_in_austin wrote:I find that concept somewhat disturbing. The Texas CHL is described as a "shall issue" license which is supposed to remove the personal discretion of who gets a CHL from the process. All who meet the statutory requirements are to be issued the license. If the instructor has discretion to make a decision that keeps a fully-qualified individual from obtaining the license, then it is effectively not a shall-issue license. The decision about who passes the course should be based on uniform objective criteria and I believe that that is what the legislature intended when they created the system.

I think Ike has taken a toll on my brain. I am getting in way over my head on this topic and will defer to a qualified CHL instructor.