TexasCHLforum.com

Mojo, I'm glad you clarified that your dog doesn't have an opposable thumb. I was a little worried for a second there.

Rex B wrote:Tam is right on all point, as usual.

My alternate license is from Pennsylavania. If you have a Texas CHL, you mail a form, a copy of the CHL and a check for $26 and you get a PA CHL.

.

Not anymore, PA changed the iaw, cannot issue a CHL by mail

I'm in a somewhat unique situation. I don't qualify for a Tx CHL until 2015 as I have a deferred adjudication felony charge. I'm able to purchase and own firearms legally, and I qualify for CHL's in most other states... so I carry in Tx using a non-resident chl from a state that shares reciprocity with Tx. I acknowledge the fact that this isn't ideal, and I could face problems from any LEO unfamiliar with CHL law ( a very likely possibility unfortunately). I did take a Tx CHL course for the sake of educating myself, and I feel any risk is outweighed by the benefit of being able to protect my life and the lives of my family. I will definitely obtain my Tx CHL once I'm eligible, and I would recommend anybody who qualifies do so regardless of added cost/hassle...

Thanks for the replies. I especially respect Mr Cotton's! (See ya at next PSC-IDPA!)
I'm encouraged to see you all think that the ideal situation is to have the Texas CHL if you're a Texas resident. I'm VERY Texas centric myself. Eighth generation; original ancestor came with Stephen F Austin! If my great-grandfather hadn't lost the last 500 acres in the Great Depression, I'd own it now. Given the choice between spending my money here or in another State, it's a no-brainer. I prefer helping MY State and it's residents.

91wm6 wrote:I'm in a somewhat unique situation. I don't qualify for a Tx CHL until 2015 as I have a deferred adjudication felony charge. I'm able to purchase and own firearms legally, and I qualify for CHL's in most other states... so I carry in Tx using a non-resident chl from a state that shares reciprocity with Tx. I acknowledge the fact that this isn't ideal, and I could face problems from any LEO unfamiliar with CHL law ( a very likely possibility unfortunately). I did take a Tx CHL course for the sake of educating myself, and I feel any risk is outweighed by the benefit of being able to protect my life and the lives of my family. I will definitely obtain my Tx CHL once I'm eligible, and I would recommend anybody who qualifies do so regardless of added cost/hassle...

Your exact scenario would provide ammunition to legislators that want to restrict Texas residents to require a Texas license. It could ultimately result in you losing the ability to carry in Texas under your out-of-state license.

Please do not publicize your situation.

mlawler wrote:Houston channel 11 tonight ran a story about a supposed 'loophole' that allows Texans to obtain an out-of-state concealed carry permit that is accepted in Texas to carry.
What's ya'lls opinion on the subject??
Some of the reasons for getting another State's permit are: less cost, paperwork & time; less restrictions on who's elligible and the addition of State's without Texas reciprocity.
Negatives are: lack of Texas specific carry limits; different understanding on use of force and lack of a proficiency test.

My opinion is it's much ado about nothing, stirred up by anti-gun nuts. If we can trust a resident of State X with a State X license to carry in Texas, then we can definitely trust a Texan with the exact same license and qualifications to carry in Texas.

On the other hand, if some in the Texas legislature don't want to recognize a license from State X, then they shouldn't recognize it for anybody. They also shouldn't allow State X cops to carry in Texas either, assuming they're decent human beings and not fascist evil minions of Satan who should be executed summarily.

Jumping Frog wrote:

91wm6 wrote:I'm in a somewhat unique situation. I don't qualify for a Tx CHL until 2015 as I have a deferred adjudication felony charge. I'm able to purchase and own firearms legally, and I qualify for CHL's in most other states... so I carry in Tx using a non-resident chl from a state that shares reciprocity with Tx. I acknowledge the fact that this isn't ideal, and I could face problems from any LEO unfamiliar with CHL law ( a very likely possibility unfortunately). I did take a Tx CHL course for the sake of educating myself, and I feel any risk is outweighed by the benefit of being able to protect my life and the lives of my family. I will definitely obtain my Tx CHL once I'm eligible, and I would recommend anybody who qualifies do so regardless of added cost/hassle...

Your exact scenario would provide ammunition to legislators that want to restrict Texas residents to require a Texas license. It could ultimately result in you losing the ability to carry in Texas under your out-of-state license.

Please do not publicize your situation.

This is a perfect example of the kind of misguided ignorance the media is trying to encourage. Please don't suggest I give up my right to bear arms, or my right to free speech just because it makes you uncomfortable. I'm carrying in a manner that is 100% legal, and I encourage any law abiding Tx resident to do so; even if it requires getting a permit from another state...

91wm6 wrote:

Jumping Frog wrote:

91wm6 wrote:I'm in a somewhat unique situation. I don't qualify for a Tx CHL until 2015 as I have a deferred adjudication felony charge. I'm able to purchase and own firearms legally, and I qualify for CHL's in most other states... so I carry in Tx using a non-resident chl from a state that shares reciprocity with Tx. I acknowledge the fact that this isn't ideal, and I could face problems from any LEO unfamiliar with CHL law ( a very likely possibility unfortunately). I did take a Tx CHL course for the sake of educating myself, and I feel any risk is outweighed by the benefit of being able to protect my life and the lives of my family. I will definitely obtain my Tx CHL once I'm eligible, and I would recommend anybody who qualifies do so regardless of added cost/hassle...

Your exact scenario would provide ammunition to legislators that want to restrict Texas residents to require a Texas license. It could ultimately result in you losing the ability to carry in Texas under your out-of-state license.

Please do not publicize your situation.

This is a perfect example of the kind of misguided ignorance the media is trying to encourage. Please don't suggest I give up my right to bear arms, or my right to free speech just because it makes you uncomfortable. I'm carrying in a manner that is 100% legal, and I encourage any law abiding Tx resident to do so; even if it requires getting a permit from another state...

Misguided ignorance?? I assure you, I understand the situation and the political realities quite thoroughly.

I never said give up your right to bear arms. I asked you to not publicize your situation as we are going into a legislative session where this very issue is going to be on the agenda and publicizing it can be misused and misconstrued by the opponents of liberty. Sure, you can huff about your "right to free speech" if it makes you happy, but just because you have the "right" doesn't mean it is a politically smart thing to do.

Misguided ignorance?? Pot, meet kettle.

Appears to me like you are a little oversensitive about your record.

91wm6 wrote:

Jumping Frog wrote:

91wm6 wrote:I'm in a somewhat unique situation. I don't qualify for a Tx CHL until 2015 as I have a deferred adjudication felony charge. I'm able to purchase and own firearms legally, and I qualify for CHL's in most other states... so I carry in Tx using a non-resident chl from a state that shares reciprocity with Tx. I acknowledge the fact that this isn't ideal, and I could face problems from any LEO unfamiliar with CHL law ( a very likely possibility unfortunately). I did take a Tx CHL course for the sake of educating myself, and I feel any risk is outweighed by the benefit of being able to protect my life and the lives of my family. I will definitely obtain my Tx CHL once I'm eligible, and I would recommend anybody who qualifies do so regardless of added cost/hassle...

Your exact scenario would provide ammunition to legislators that want to restrict Texas residents to require a Texas license. It could ultimately result in you losing the ability to carry in Texas under your out-of-state license.

Please do not publicize your situation.

This is a perfect example of the kind of misguided ignorance the media is trying to encourage. Please don't suggest I give up my right to bear arms, or my right to free speech just because it makes you uncomfortable. I'm carrying in a manner that is 100% legal, and I encourage any law abiding Tx resident to do so; even if it requires getting a permit from another state...

Knock it off. Jumping Frog is correct. Your situation hurts our position on this issue, so quit publicizing it.

Chas.

Don't ask, don't tell?

Charles L. Cotton wrote: If removing the shooting requirement wouldn't cost us reciprocity with other states, I would support doing away with it also. Removing this requirement will also help to reduce the cost of taking classes because more instructors will be able to teach without having to have access to shooting ranges. This increase in competition will drive down class fees. The student will also save the cost of the range fee and the factory ammo required for the course. Some will argue that the shooting requirement adds an element of safety, but I respectfully disagree. Everyone knows the course is so simple virtually no one fails. (I've only had 4 students not pass on the first attempt and all passed on the second.) Some will call to make the course harder, but that will be met with huge opposition, with me leading the charge. I've heard some instructors talk about elements of the proficiency portion of the class (shooting) that are not found in statute or DPS rules. Every time an instructor adds their own requirement to the shooting portion, they are doing so without any authority whatsoever. Apparently, the Texas Legislature agrees with my position, otherwise they wouldn't have removed the renewal class requirement for every other renewal beginning with the 3rd renewal.

I know many instructors aren't going to like my position on this issue, but I'm a life-long Second Amendment activist first, an NRA Board Member second, and a CHL instructor third.

The focus in 2013 needs to be on fixing Texas law, not restricting the rights of Texans.

Chas.

You know, Charles, I'm going to take this one step further:
Why not do away with the classroom instruction and just offer an online course (or for lack of computer, printed materials)? I know that's technically heresy, because it likely upends the existing business models for most instructors, but consider this:
1) The class is already highly structured and standardized (so how would it be different to have a recorded presentation vs an instructor)
2) There's no reason that other mechanisms can't be put into place for questions from students (like, say, this forum, as an example, or a phone hotline run by volunteers)
3) The most important role for an instructor is the "practical" portion of the test, which you're advocating eliminating
4) I'm not aware of a statistically significant increase in misapplication of force in states that don't require formal instruction at all (like Washington), or have instruction with no life-fire requirement (like Utah)
5) If emphasis is on certifying that the CHL holder understands Texas laws regarding firearms, concealment, and force escalation, why not simply require a notarized signature from the applicant (and submitted to state) to complete the process?

I'm just throwing all this out for folks to chew on. I mean, if you're going to take the big step to alter the CHL requirements, I think it's important to consider the full spectrum of options, ranging from Washington style (no training required at all) to Texas style (generally the "hardest" and most-expensive in the US, when all costs are factored in).

Knock it off. Jumping Frog is correct. Your situation hurts our position on this issue, so quit publicizing it.

Chas.

Charles, I had already made the decision to withdraw from the conversation and allow frog the last word. The fact that you would side with him and chastise me makes it necessary for me to defend my position. My post was an honest answer to the op's question based on my experiences with Tx CHL. I'm sorry if you feel that hurts our cause... at any rate it isn't appropriate for you or Frog to tell me to be quiet. I'm especially surprised you would do so after writing this in your initial post."Successfully completed "deferred adjudications" should not be considered a "conviction" for eligibility purposes". Some people might even say you're being a bit of a hypocrite by telling me not to "publicize my situation". I'm sure this isn't going to win me any popularity points but it needed to be said none the less. Shall not be infringed indeed...

In the Jan instructor class they said there was some long term (and he emphasized like really a long way down the road) of ~possibly~ the state having the program online. He said (and I would agree) that you lose a lot by not being in a class...the ability of asking questions and the interactions of the other students asking questions and posing scenarios.

wgoforth wrote:...you lose a lot by not being in a class...the ability of asking questions and the interactions of the other students asking questions and posing scenarios.

I really disagree. If people were all in the same level of training, I could see your point, but just in my two classes, I saw/heard this:
1) "My daddy said that if you shoot a guy on the porch, you should drag his body inside before calling the police"
2) <Long, argumentative discussion about why we can't open carry>
3) <CHL instructor telling everybody that without employing the Weaver stance, you're in danger, then proceeding to show everybody all the "variations" of the Weaver stance>
4) <Choose any law covered in the CHL class -- there's always one or two that want to try to play "I can out-lawyer the instructor">

No thank you. I'm sure some of the CHL instructors on here can share some other doozies, but classes seem to have a large share of a) the stubbornly ignorant and b) the willfully pedantic.

As a trained instructor, my experience (so far) is that most CHL instructors aren't very good, because they're good at shooting, not at teaching, and they love to talk about what they're good at. I suck at shooting, but I'm a darn good instructor (military trained, so I even know how to "correctly" erase boards )

I'll take the online course, thanks anyway. I could have easily completed the class in two hours myself with full retention of the intended objectives.

Charles, I never cease to be amazed by the way you're always thinking ahead, always planning for the next legislative session. I deeply appreciate your continued and sustained efforts on behalf of the Constitution and our rights, and I thank you from the bottom of my heart. There's a special place reserved for people like you - one that very few ever qualify for.