TexasCHLforum.com

Senate Bill 864 passed today reducing classroom hours from minium 10-15 to minium 4-6. This bill will also allow online courses for renewals. Its companion in the House is HB 47 out of committee with a full vote still pending.

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/ ... navpanes=0

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/ ... navpanes=0

4 hour classes will really increase quantity of applicants, but could seriously compromise the quality of applicants.

Given what I cover now I'm trying to figure what parts do I cut out? Take 9+ hours of class and condense to 3+?

The House bill is 6 hours if you didn't want to read it

My first instructor did a great job of covering all the legal aspects that a person could possibly absorb in one sitting and did it in about 3 hours. The rest of the class was videos, slide shows, and war stories all of which he apologized for numerous times.
My renewal class should have been done in about 2 hours. Of course I knew more about the law than he did but that's due to the hours spent on this forum.
Nothing would please me more than doing a renewal class in my PJs sitting in front of my computer.

HB 47 will probably be dropped in favor of SB 864 since it's farther along in the process.

conn6554 wrote:Given what I cover now I'm trying to figure what parts do I cut out? Take 9+ hours of class and condense to 3+?

The House bill is 6 hours if you didn't want to read it

What do you cut out for your renewal students now?

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

conn6554 wrote:Given what I cover now I'm trying to figure what parts do I cut out? Take 9+ hours of class and condense to 3+?

The House bill is 6 hours if you didn't want to read it

What do you cut out for your renewal students now?

Chas.

Law school is three years but Continuing Legal Education in Texas is only 15 hours in each MCLE year. They obviously cut something out. Unless I can sit through a 15 hour CLE cram session and be eligible to take the bar exam, it looks like there may be a good reason, or at least ample precedent, to have different training standards for new and renewals.

Hey. Even better! Should I be able to take the online renewal test for CHL Instructors and if I pass that's enough to become a new instructor and a new licensee with no class?

IANAL wrote:Law school is three years but Continuing Legal Education in Texas is only 15 hours in each MCLE year. They obviously cut something out. Unless I can sit through a 15 hour CLE cram session and be eligible to take the bar exam, it looks like there may be a good reason, or at least ample precedent, to have different training standards for new and renewals.

Hey. Even better! Should I be able to take the online renewal test for CHL Instructors and if I pass that's enough to become a new instructor and a new licensee with no class?

It looks like this bill provides for renewals to happen completely online like many other states, in addition to reducing the initial class contact by more than half. There doesn't seem to be any problems with CHL renewals sans class in other states. We also have online DL renewals in Texas already without a test and it's past due for CHL to follow suit.

But remember who is Speaker of the House before we count our chickens.

IANAL wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

conn6554 wrote:Given what I cover now I'm trying to figure what parts do I cut out? Take 9+ hours of class and condense to 3+?

The House bill is 6 hours if you didn't want to read it

What do you cut out for your renewal students now?

Chas.

Law school is three years but Continuing Legal Education in Texas is only 15 hours in each MCLE year. They obviously cut something out. Unless I can sit through a 15 hour CLE cram session and be eligible to take the bar exam, it looks like there may be a good reason, or at least ample precedent, to have different training standards for new and renewals.

Hey. Even better! Should I be able to take the online renewal test for CHL Instructors and if I pass that's enough to become a new instructor and a new licensee with no class?

You don't have to take the bar exam every year either. In fact, CLE courses don't have any test at all, so this is a very poor analogy.

Renewal CHL students have to take the same test as initial students, so every instructor must cover the material in 4 hours now, and this includes range time.

Surely, you don't think students remember anything from a class five years earlier.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Surely, you don't think students remember anything from a class five years earlier.

Are you really saying the majority of people who got their CHL in 2009 don't remember that bars and courthouses are off limits, wouldn't recognize a 30.06 sign, and totally have no clue about Texas deadly force laws? If so, that's not just scary, it's also serious ammunition for the likes of Burnam and Straus.

Ameer wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Surely, you don't think students remember anything from a class five years earlier.

Are you really saying the majority of people who got their CHL in 2009 don't remember that bars and courthouses are off limits, wouldn't recognize a 30.06 sign, and totally have no clue about Texas deadly force laws? If so, that's not just scary, it's also serious ammunition for the likes of Burnam and Straus.

Are you saying it takes 10 hours to teach people not to carry in bar, courthouses or past 30.06 signs? My comprehensive coverage of every bit of the use of force takes 2.5 hrs.

Are you a CHL instructor?

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Ameer wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Surely, you don't think students remember anything from a class five years earlier.

Are you really saying the majority of people who got their CHL in 2009 don't remember that bars and courthouses are off limits, wouldn't recognize a 30.06 sign, and totally have no clue about Texas deadly force laws? If so, that's not just scary, it's also serious ammunition for the likes of Burnam and Straus.

Are you saying it takes 10 hours to teach people not to carry in bar, courthouses or 30.06 signs?

I think it's pretty clear I didn't say that but I also think most people with a CHL remember most of the major off limits places.

Ameer wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Ameer wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Surely, you don't think students remember anything from a class five years earlier.

Are you really saying the majority of people who got their CHL in 2009 don't remember that bars and courthouses are off limits, wouldn't recognize a 30.06 sign, and totally have no clue about Texas deadly force laws? If so, that's not just scary, it's also serious ammunition for the likes of Burnam and Straus.

Are you saying it takes 10 hours to teach people not to carry in bar, courthouses or 30.06 signs?

I think it's pretty clear I didn't say that but I also think most people with a CHL remember most of the major off limits places.

Your post was most clear, and they are getting old.

Chas.

I'd like to chime in with my new perspective. I just completed presenting my first class and it was a learning experience for all of us. I have some experience in adult education in a corporate setting so I'm not completely green on the subject. I was against the reduction in classroom hrs., but now I'm a supporter. Even with generous breaks and lunch, the fatigue shown by the students was obvious. I'll have no problem in more than adequately covering the 4 food groups and administering the test in 4-6 hrs. When we got to the range, everyone had caught their second wind and was ready to go. We spent some additional time on safe gun handling with the new shooters, which was well received. Everyone passed both portions easily.

So count me a convert. As a new instructor, I focused on the real "need to know" requirements and making sure the basics were fully understood. The war stories and filler videos were saved until last. Just don't make me include the range time in the 4-6 hrs and I'm fully on board.

2firfun50 wrote:I'd like to chime in with my new perspective. I just completed presenting my first class and it was a learning experience for all of us. I have some experience in adult education in a corporate setting so I'm not completely green on the subject. I was against the reduction in classroom hrs., but now I'm a supporter. Even with generous breaks and lunch, the fatigue shown by the students was obvious. I'll have no problem in more than adequately covering the 4 food groups and administering the test in 4-6 hrs. When we got to the range, everyone had caught their second wind and was ready to go. We spent some additional time on safe gun handling with the new shooters, which was well received. Everyone passed both portions easily.

So count me a convert. As a new instructor, I focused on the real "need to know" requirements and making sure the basics were fully understood. The war stories and filler videos were saved until last. Just don't make me include the range time in the 4-6 hrs and I'm fully on board.

The 4-6 hours would not include range time.

tacticool wrote:

IANAL wrote:Law school is three years but Continuing Legal Education in Texas is only 15 hours in each MCLE year. They obviously cut something out. Unless I can sit through a 15 hour CLE cram session and be eligible to take the bar exam, it looks like there may be a good reason, or at least ample precedent, to have different training standards for new and renewals.

Hey. Even better! Should I be able to take the online renewal test for CHL Instructors and if I pass that's enough to become a new instructor and a new licensee with no class?

It looks like this bill provides for renewals to happen completely online like many other states, in addition to reducing the initial class contact by more than half. There doesn't seem to be any problems with CHL renewals sans class in other states. We also have online DL renewals in Texas already without a test and it's past due for CHL to follow suit.

But remember who is Speaker of the House before we count our chickens.

The possibility of online renewal was discussed in our class at the first of this month. The tone of the response and comments by the two instructors seemed to me to indicate that online renewal will not happen. The wording of the bill allows it to happen, but does not mandate it.

"(j) For license holders seeking to renew their licenses, the
[The] department may offer online, or allow a qualified handgun
instructor to offer online, the classroom instruction part of the
handgun proficiency [continuing education instruction] course and
the written section of the proficiency examination [required to
renew a license]."

The pertinent word being "may". The current law already allows for it....but it is not allowed.

e.
(j)
The department may offer online, or allow a qualified handgun instructor to offer online, the continuing education instruction course and
written section of the proficiency examination required to renew a license.



Bill