TexasCHLforum.com

RX8er wrote:Sitting here with TBM, she says...... "awwwwww, RottenApple isn't so rotten after all"

Yeah...Well....Wait till she gets to know me.

BTW, I took the HFS and BPI class w/ Mr. Crowe right after y'all. Did you class include HFS or was it just BPI? (Totally OT, sorry for the highjack)

EDIT: Also OT, I'm looking forward to meeting y'all at the Meet and Great on 4/6. I'll be out there with my OLD (older than dirt) man, Pawpaw.

RottenApple wrote:

RX8er wrote:Sitting here with TBM, she says...... "awwwwww, RottenApple isn't so rotten after all"

Yeah...Well....Wait till she gets to know me.

BTW, I took the HFS and BPI class w/ Mr. Crowe right after y'all. Did you class include HFS or was it just BPI? (Totally OT, sorry for the highjack)

EDIT: Also OT, I'm looking forward to meeting y'all at the Meet and Great on 4/6. I'll be out there with my OLD (older than dirt) man, Pawpaw.

Just took the BPI. I was there Thursday and Friday, couldn't do Saturday, too! HFS and Refuse to be a victim are on my to do list. Looking forward to April 6, too.
TBM

Students should come to the class proficient in the firearm they are using. There are many 'newbies' who think that they are going to learn to shoot in the CHL class. It is not designed that way. There is a need for instructors who are proficient at relaying the material to their students.

'Bout hit it on the head there...

What the student (newcomer) needs to absolutely understand is there is a lot more to learn and become more proficient at in this community, and that there is a plethra of individuals here, and elsewhere that are available to pick their brains (so to speak), for advice, direction, demonstration...

And even for folks who teach, there is always room to learn...

stevie_d_64 wrote:

Students should come to the class proficient in the firearm they are using. There are many 'newbies' who think that they are going to learn to shoot in the CHL class. It is not designed that way. There is a need for instructors who are proficient at relaying the material to their students.

'Bout hit it on the head there...

What the student (newcomer) needs to absolutely understand is there is a lot more to learn and become more proficient at in this community, and that there is a plethra of individuals here, and elsewhere that are available to pick their brains (so to speak), for advice, direction, demonstration...

And even for folks who teach, there is always room to learn...

My biggest take away for my CHL class was how much I didn't know. I was pleased with my instructor but I had already realized that it wasn't possible for me to learn all that I needed for even a 10 hour class. This is probably because I was starting with a lot less than most people on this forum

AndyC wrote:treat it like a driver's license exam. Take as little or as much training privately as you like (or zero, if you consider yourself skilled enough) - then take the written RANDOMIZED exam at any local gov't office. That way the time can be broken up however one likes or needs - yes, I can dream

Hello!!!

AndyC wrote: for a first-timer buying a firearm, why ever not? We'd have a lot fewer unhappy buyers No, my point - which is apparently being ignored - is that while we SHOULD be able to carry without anyone's permission, we're putting ourselves in mortal and legal peril if we think that we can do so without getting at least a little legal and practical knowledge.

I have to tussle with myself on this issue because I WANT freedom to carry for everybody with no restrictions - but that's not the real world, and I wonder if any father or mother here would be happy to just slap a firearm into their son or daughter's hands - "There you go, son" - without nothing further said or done. Somehow I doubt it, but we'd be happy for others to carry like that?

Assuming we can't get Constitutional carry and still HAVE to pass an exam, etc, here's my ideal scenario - treat it like a driver's license exam. Take as little or as much training privately as you like (or zero, if you consider yourself skilled enough) - then take the written RANDOMIZED exam at any local gov't office. That way the time can be broken up however one likes or needs - yes, I can dream

It seems like you're walking on both sides of the line a bit here, between Constitutional Carry and mandatory training, but I agree completely with your ideal scenario if we're obligated to pass a licensing exam.

I also agree with you that (these are my words, not Andy's -->) "only an idiot would carry a gun with no training". The question is what to do about that. Do we mandate training or do we leave folks to be responsible for themselves? While I would "strongly recommend" that everyone get training (NRA Basic Pistol or similar and a class on TX use of force law, at minimum), I'm not prepared to call for this to be mandatory.

In my personal opinion (and at the risk of weakening my argument here, I admit), requiring mandatory training to exercise an enumerated right is in the same vein as Mr. Bloomberg telling me I can't have a Big Gulp. Yes, CHL risks are greater than sugary drinks, but I'm not going to argue in favor of Constitutional Carry and then say .... if we're gonna have to take a class it should be a comprehensive class that covers X, Y and Z.

The reality is that we live in a State that has a licensing requirement for CHL and the powers that be have decided that "some" training is required. I have a "manageable" amount of heartburn about that. The current State class does a decent job of teaching the basics of relevant TX law (assuming you have a good instructor), but, as we have agreed, if I can demonstrate that I have that knowledge by passing a written test, then I should be able to skip the class.

Let's assume, just for the sake of argument, that Constitutional Carry is passed. Now, anyone who is not prohibited from owning a pistol can carry openly or concealed as they wish. It would be smart for those who want to carry to take additional training. Even those who have training should probably go through a refresher course every so often. But what do we do about those folks who choose to carry without getting any training in the safety & legal use of firearms? IMHO, we should hold them accountable for their actions should they do something wrong.

Yes, it makes me slightly nervous that there are people out there who carry a firearm and have no training whatsoever or minimal training at best. But what makes me even more nervous is allowing government to dictate and license our basic rights.

Exactly

For sake of discussion....... So why is it that just because I want to conceal a weapon that I am now required to go get all this training? I can walk around with my long gun all day and I don't have to have any training?

The current laws aside, what makes concealing so different that I have to be trained to be trusted?

stevie_d_64 wrote:

Students should come to the class proficient in the firearm they are using. There are many 'newbies' who think that they are going to learn to shoot in the CHL class. It is not designed that way. There is a need for instructors who are proficient at relaying the material to their students.

'Bout hit it on the head there...

What the student (newcomer) needs to absolutely understand is there is a lot more to learn and become more proficient at in this community, and that there is a plethra of individuals here, and elsewhere that are available to pick their brains (so to speak), for advice, direction, demonstration...

And even for folks who teach, there is always room to learn...

If someone shows up to a CHL class with the misunderstanding that they are attending a 'learn to shoot' class, that's on the instructor or staff during the sign up. It was made explicitly clear on my instructor's website & by the person making my reservation that the CHL class was not an intro to shooting and that a required part of the class would be a demonstration of my proficiency. Of course I was also given info about further training that's available from my instructor....

You can require all of the firearms/self defense law training you want but the idiots are still going to be carrying.

You can require all of the driving training you want but the idiots are still going to drive.

You can require all of the education you want including college but the idiots still are not going to work and hold down a job.

CHLs are permission slips for law abiding citizens and are a form of infringement.

Anygunanywhere

It takes all kinds to make the world go round.

I often get called out because I go off the letter of the law, and do not, generally, use the phrase "in the real world". But in the real world, gun rights have been legislated. Most of this legislation started before I was even born, and what didn't start before I was born came into being before I could vote. Even a bill to allow open or constitutional carry is a legislation. Everything in this world has some form of order/rules/guidelines. That is human nature. And I go back to what I said before - kids growing up with access to firearms isn't near as prevalent now as when you and I were coming of age. Can't change that fact, so what do you do? Arm people with knowledge in addition to their firearms. The most practical way to do that with respect to CHL is the instruction candidates receive in order to get their licenses to conceal carry. You're right, it is a permission slip. A permission slip for more than just carrying long guns or open carrying on your property. But this is the real world and we have to work within the law. Once (read:if) the law is changed, then we work within the new law. We should all be working toward getting the law changed. But until that happens, training will be mandated. Let's make that training efficient, and delivered by instructors who are proficient in the material.

TBM

Additionally, we have the obligation (I'm thinking moral, not legal) to offer options for additional training and to point out the benefits of that training. IMHO, a CHL instructor who doesn't offer training options (Basic Pistol classes, FIRST Step classes, etc) is doing a disservice to their students. It doesn't even have to be the CHL instructor who teaches (although that is a way for an instructor to increase their client base & revenue stream). Just explain the benefits of additional firearm training and have a list of qualified instructors on hand and/or point students to the NRA Instructor website.

And finally, we absolutely should be teaching our own kids about firearms. "Train up a child in the way he should go, and even when he is old, he will not depart from it." - Proverbs 22:6. If our kids are involved in BSA or GSA, we should get involved there as well. If you are a certified instructor or know one, you could offer to teach classes with your kid's troop.

WOW! This is what I love about this forum. There is alot of experience and wisdom here, but as we are all individuals, there is alot of difference of opinion too. I see that most of the posters on this thread are senior members and are well versed in the subject. If I may, I would like to interject some opinions from a relative newbie. I, like most of you was brought up around guns and have been shooting for over 40 years. But, I am new to the CHL community (haven't even got my plastic in yet). I have read (several times) the CHL Statutes, and like to think I have a good understanding of the law. I mostly agree with AndyC's opinions posted here.

I saw several people in my CHL class that acted like they were there for the fun of it. They did not take things seriously (in my opinion), and scared me at the range. But they passed and are carrying among us.

There have been many valid pros and cons stated for shortening the CHL class, but one thing I have not read yet is this. In my opinion shortening the training time would be a Godsend the gun grabbers. One thing we always point out in debates with these fools is that CHL holders are a cut above the average joe carrying a gun. We take pride that we are law abiding and well trained. If the instruction time was reduced, and a CHL holder, God forbid, made a bad decision and used his/her gun unlawfully, the TV reporters and gun grabbers would have a field day. This would only provide more reason for them to push their anti 2A agenda.