TexasCHLforum.com

juno106 wrote:

A second would require license holders to be trained in how to retain their gun if it were grabbed by an attacker.

I hate this. Who decides what this training will be? DPS? Cause I know how much they supported this bill... How long will the training be? If I already have a CHL, will I have to go to a class and pay for it?

I heard nothing in the language that stipulated a period of time for training. Open carry can be covered in 10 minutes.

If they will require additional training, then there should be carve outs for Veterans, Police Officers, and such, similar to other current CHL.

I watched the entire thing, it was very interesting.

Not to change the subject
I would like to see a bill submitted regarding reciprocity and unilateral. If TX allows a state a Unilateral agreement, there should be a time frame to implement a unilateral agreement. It bothers me that typical anti gun states like HI, CA, NY, etc. can carry in TX yet have no intention of ever implementing similar privileges for Texans.

Chas. what is your take on the chances of this going on to passage through the House?

Can somebody tell me what the logic was that allowed this to be put off until next January?

After reading the play-by-play from today's session, I feel much better about opting to go to the range instead of watching the proceedings online. Much obliged to those of you who did watch & contributed commentary.

Winchster wrote:Can somebody tell me what the logic was that allowed this to be put off until next January?

Estes approved it because DPS requested him to move the date to give them more time to prepare.

TVGuy wrote:

Winchster wrote:Can somebody tell me what the logic was that allowed this to be put off until next January?

Estes approved it because DPS requested him to move the date to give them more time to prepare.

Prepare for what?

mojo84 wrote:

TVGuy wrote:

Winchster wrote:Can somebody tell me what the logic was that allowed this to be put off until next January?

Estes approved it because DPS requested him to move the date to give them more time to prepare.

Prepare for what?

Armageddon.

mojo84 wrote:

TVGuy wrote:

Winchster wrote:Can somebody tell me what the logic was that allowed this to be put off until next January?

Estes approved it because DPS requested him to move the date to give them more time to prepare.

Prepare for what?

Training of departments I believe, but I'm not 100%. If I recall the bill's author himself filed the amendment, so there must have been ample reason.

I don't see four months as that big of a deal.

well, if you think about it, you know how many cops and instructors don't know the current chl law, I'm guessing they just want some time to make sure they are able to instruct LEOs on whatever changes occur during this leg.

SewTexas wrote:well, if you think about it, you know how many cops and instructors don't know the current chl law, I'm guessing they just want some time to make sure they are able to instruct LEOs on whatever changes occur during this leg.

What is there to train for? Same people carrying guns that carry them now. Now they will be able to see them. A few months should be ample time to prepare and train. On the flip side, how much more training will they be able to do with the additional three months?

gdanaher wrote:I heard nothing in the language that stipulated a period of time for training. Open carry can be covered in 10 minutes.

Correct and nothing changes the current class limitations of a minimum 4 hours. It won't take any time at all to "teach/cover" the issue. Sen. Estes made it clear that the amendment did not require demonstration of weapon retention techniques.

Chas.

tlt wrote:If they will require additional training, then there should be carve outs for Veterans, Police Officers, and such, similar to other current CHL.

I watched the entire thing, it was very interesting.

Not to change the subject
I would like to see a bill submitted regarding reciprocity and unilateral. If TX allows a state a Unilateral agreement, there should be a time frame to implement a unilateral agreement. It bothers me that typical anti gun states like HI, CA, NY, etc. can carry in TX yet have no intention of ever implementing similar privileges for Texans.

Chas. what is your take on the chances of this going on to passage through the House?

If you mean open-carry, I have concerns about the Calendars Committee.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

gdanaher wrote:I heard nothing in the language that stipulated a period of time for training. Open carry can be covered in 10 minutes.

Correct and nothing changes the current class limitations of a minimum 4 hours. It won't take any time at all to "teach/cover" the issue. Sen. Estes made it clear that the amendment did not require demonstration of weapon retention techniques.

Chas.

Will current CHLs be grandfathered into the additional training requirement or will we need to get updated/refreshed training that includes whatever oc topics would be required?

mojo84 wrote:

TVGuy wrote:

Winchster wrote:Can somebody tell me what the logic was that allowed this to be put off until next January?

Estes approved it because DPS requested him to move the date to give them more time to prepare.

Prepare for what?

Renewal classes for Texas CHL instructors. We can't renew until after the legislative session is over so an effective date of 9/1/15 would mean instructors would be teaching CHL classes without the information about open-carry.

Chas.