Failing the shooting portion of the CHL Class
- Thread starter navyguy
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
187 score ??
The law says you must make 70% of possible 250 = 175..
13 less and you would have failed!!
I let no one thru till they make 220.
Dont want CHL holders in Texas on the street that have been in my class that cant hit close to center mass. 9 feet 20 should be100; 21feet 20 should be 80; 45 feet 10 should be 40 - 220
under real stress in a street situation what would your score have been?? How many times did you miss the target completely?? You would have received one on one instruction from me till you got there.
Sorry bout that
The law says you must make 70% of possible 250 = 175..
13 less and you would have failed!!
I let no one thru till they make 220.
Dont want CHL holders in Texas on the street that have been in my class that cant hit close to center mass. 9 feet 20 should be100; 21feet 20 should be 80; 45 feet 10 should be 40 - 220
under real stress in a street situation what would your score have been?? How many times did you miss the target completely?? You would have received one on one instruction from me till you got there.
Sorry bout that
DoubleActionCHL
Well-Known
I didn't want to be the one to ask that...
Waiting on the response on that one. Sounds like he gives extra training - just like a good NCO would give a Soldier if the Soldier barely passed a qualification. Too many CHL "mills" and Soldiers let people through their stations earning the minimum - on the most important and dangerous test of their lives.
Before I deployed to Iraq last year I attended a 9mm range on FT Hood. A guy three stations down from me had never fired a 9mm (you could tell) but he was told to qualifiy and almost shot his finger off (he held the 92F with his free hand holding up the barrel - like an M16). The range NCO let him go since the range NCO was not qualified and didn't have the backbpone to correct a fellow non-com....grow up and keep 'em on the ranges until we can achieve success! (BTW- I called cease fire and gave some lessons - but that should have been done off-range)....
Before I deployed to Iraq last year I attended a 9mm range on FT Hood. A guy three stations down from me had never fired a 9mm (you could tell) but he was told to qualifiy and almost shot his finger off (he held the 92F with his free hand holding up the barrel - like an M16). The range NCO let him go since the range NCO was not qualified and didn't have the backbpone to correct a fellow non-com....grow up and keep 'em on the ranges until we can achieve success! (BTW- I called cease fire and gave some lessons - but that should have been done off-range)....
As much as I think the shooting requirements are lacking, they are what they are, and should be adhered too, and I don't think instructors should enforce their own requirements. My thought in posting this question was how many people actually could not pass the very simple shooting requirement. I'm no ace shooter, but I think, weak hand for all shots, eyes closed at 3 yards I could score easily enough to qualify.
DoubleActionCHL
Well-Known
Extra training is one thing; I'm all for that. Making up your own baseline for qualification? Not so much.
The state says the student must meet certain requirements. If they do, they pass. That simple. If, however, I feel that student isn't up to the task mentally or physically, I can submit a letter to DPS explaining my misgivings and they will consider this when issue the students CHL. I can't simply fail them because they scored a 199 and I think the minimum should be 220.
To the Questioners on 220 Score!!
I explained why I do it (People on the street who cant shoot) let them go till they make 220..
I have a reponseability to the person who has paid me 125 bucks, more than just make sure they understand the law..
I have had no failures on the written, lowest score there was a 78 and let them take again and made a 92, (language problem, then took in spanish), Had another guy at the beginning of written test tell me he couldnt read, so after all had left read him the questions and he gave answers , 98.
Failed one old lady who had arthiritis so bad she couldnt pull the trigger on any double action and couldnt rack any slide on any semi..
after talking with her found out she was only there for home and travel protection Helped her find a 410 pump with short barrel and took her to the range and she shot until she blew my plywood down, and a cell phone and tried to return her money,, she said keep it.
I have responsibility more than filling out paperwork and collecting the money... Naysayers can bite me.
I explained why I do it (People on the street who cant shoot) let them go till they make 220..
I have a reponseability to the person who has paid me 125 bucks, more than just make sure they understand the law..
I have had no failures on the written, lowest score there was a 78 and let them take again and made a 92, (language problem, then took in spanish), Had another guy at the beginning of written test tell me he couldnt read, so after all had left read him the questions and he gave answers , 98.
Failed one old lady who had arthiritis so bad she couldnt pull the trigger on any double action and couldnt rack any slide on any semi..
after talking with her found out she was only there for home and travel protection Helped her find a 410 pump with short barrel and took her to the range and she shot until she blew my plywood down, and a cell phone and tried to return her money,, she said keep it.
I have responsibility more than filling out paperwork and collecting the money... Naysayers can bite me.
I saw a little of both in my class yesterday. The guy in the lane next to me was putting 'em all over the place at first - I don't think any of his first five were within 6" of each other - and this was at 9 feet. Then there was an older guy there with his daughter, and his target had a 4" hole where COM used to be.
And yes, I gotta brag - I was one of the three 250's.
And yes, I gotta brag - I was one of the three 250's.
DoubleActionCHL
Well-Known
You'll have to forgive me, because I'm at a disadvantage here because of the medium. Your tone sounds as though you believe an instructor that uses the DPS minimums for passing is doing his/her student and society a disservice.
You presented (or I perceived) your position as one where you will not pass someone who cannot score 220 or better in the shooting proficiency test. I'm sorry, but that's simply not our prerogative.
On the other hand, I applaud you for working with your students to improve their shooting skills. I guess the test for me would be how you handle a student who, after three attempts, still cannot reach your goal of 220. Let's say his best score was 205. He's exhausted his three chances, yet he's met the state requirements. Would you still fail him?
I'm sure there are some instructors out there who do bare minimum. I personally feel that we do anything BUT bare minimum. And maybe our disagreement here is simply a matter of semantics.
Tag... you're it.
Border Bandit,
I agree that if you extend some extra training and they accept it, that is great and I'm all for people shooting more proficiently. We all know there are too many out there who take the CHL and don't shoot again until they renew.
Question, are you allowed to (by DPS rules) fail a student for not making 220, if DPS only requires 175 on the shooting test? And do you inform students prior to the class that you would want them to have the extra training if they do not make 220?
again I think its great that you offer the extra training and applaud your efforts to help them improve, but your original post makes it sound like they either have to take your training until 220 or not pass
I agree that if you extend some extra training and they accept it, that is great and I'm all for people shooting more proficiently. We all know there are too many out there who take the CHL and don't shoot again until they renew.
Question, are you allowed to (by DPS rules) fail a student for not making 220, if DPS only requires 175 on the shooting test? And do you inform students prior to the class that you would want them to have the extra training if they do not make 220?
again I think its great that you offer the extra training and applaud your efforts to help them improve, but your original post makes it sound like they either have to take your training until 220 or not pass
Banger, Dirtyd, Doubleactio,Texemtp69
Innocent bystanders are important to remember.. If they have shot in the #s I was talking about we have a discussion and will convince them that they need some extra HELP and that it is free. I dont think I would refuse to give them there certificate if they made a 187 and they knew it was passing, but would also send a letter to the CHL headquarters explaining that they were very erratic in their proficiency test.. I explain this to the student, before we start the 2nd proficiency..
One of the many reasons some of the students shoot badly in the beginning is because they have never shot while standing in line with 4 other people, and some start shaking like a dog S#%ing peach seeds.
Watch their hands and look at the veins in the neck bulging.
Next time I am at the recert school I will ask the Top dog what he/she would do.. and if I have the option of doing this. I been doing this a lot longer than starting in 1995.
Innocent bystanders are important to remember.. If they have shot in the #s I was talking about we have a discussion and will convince them that they need some extra HELP and that it is free. I dont think I would refuse to give them there certificate if they made a 187 and they knew it was passing, but would also send a letter to the CHL headquarters explaining that they were very erratic in their proficiency test.. I explain this to the student, before we start the 2nd proficiency..
One of the many reasons some of the students shoot badly in the beginning is because they have never shot while standing in line with 4 other people, and some start shaking like a dog S#%ing peach seeds.
Watch their hands and look at the veins in the neck bulging.
Next time I am at the recert school I will ask the Top dog what he/she would do.. and if I have the option of doing this. I been doing this a lot longer than starting in 1995.
DoubleActionCHL
Well-Known
I agree with you. While the shooting proficiency test doesn't tell us much, I do work with the students with obvious problems. My problem with your original comment was it sounded like you were making up your own rules. I'm glad to see you're not, and I apologize if I sounded critical.
I handle it a little differently, but I believe we're on the same page. I'm pretty insistent on a private lesson if a student shoots poorly; I've made them take a lesson during the lunch break. If the instructor tells me they did well, we go ahead and take their passing score. If they're content with their 176 and refuse to do anything to improve the score, I've been known to send a letter. I've never gotten a response from DPS and have no idea what effect this has, but I feel like I've done what I can do within the parameters of the administrative code.
When I got my original CHL, I was disappointed in the content of the class. At the time, I, like most students, mistakenly believed that this class teaches you to shoot and prepares you for a defensive shooting situation. I tell the students up front that this class does NOT teach you to shoot and there's very little I can tell them that will be useful in a defensive shooting. I push for more training; basic handgun AND tactical training. Even though they can pass the test, most of my students' weapon handling is abysmal. I beat into them the fact that their ability to think rationally will escape them when confronted with a VCA (violent criminal attacker). They won't pull mad ninja skills out of their ass. They'll simply default to their level of training. They'll 'remember' what they've done repeatedly, not what they've been told in a classroom.
Sadly, only about 10% of CHL holders pursue additional training. This is an embarrassing statistic. I tell my students this and urge them to be the exception. And not to pat myself on the back, but I've seen many of my students taking advantage of Shiloh's tactical training. This makes me proud!
Border bandit,
I'll have to disagree with your logic on this one. You are basically going to either fail someone or send a litter to DPS not recommending them for a CHL for not meeting standards you have personally set.
I agree that you can stand up there and say "anyone here who can't make a 220 should work to a point where they can shoot a 220. heck, you are an idiot if you don't."
The test isn't an accuracy test. It is a basic firearms proficiency test. It tells nothing as to how you will react or fire when someone is threatening your life.
We do not have any means of testing that. I'm not a veteran, but I'll venture that intensive military training can help, but that isn't the same thing as a person trying to kill you.
Yes, it is important to train to try and be as proficient with a gun as possible, especially if you plan on carrying, but you don't have the right to arbitrarily decide.
I'll have to disagree with your logic on this one. You are basically going to either fail someone or send a litter to DPS not recommending them for a CHL for not meeting standards you have personally set.
I agree that you can stand up there and say "anyone here who can't make a 220 should work to a point where they can shoot a 220. heck, you are an idiot if you don't."
The test isn't an accuracy test. It is a basic firearms proficiency test. It tells nothing as to how you will react or fire when someone is threatening your life.
We do not have any means of testing that. I'm not a veteran, but I'll venture that intensive military training can help, but that isn't the same thing as a person trying to kill you.
Yes, it is important to train to try and be as proficient with a gun as possible, especially if you plan on carrying, but you don't have the right to arbitrarily decide.
I appreciate the kind words and those that arent, i will listen to anyone if they have a point of View that is different than mine.
I try to make the attendees aware that they must practice frequentley and by practising the same way every time the chance of you reacting
to a deadly threat in that way.. without thought instinctivley.
I taught judo and the hand gun @ the MP School @ Ft gordon a long time ago, and the 1st time I was in a violent confrontation as an MP It went down exactly as I had done 100's of time in the pit.. and after it was over I was puzzled that I had done it as trained..
without any thought or fear it was to quick. That training served me well later in law enforcement
I try to make the attendees aware that they must practice frequentley and by practising the same way every time the chance of you reacting
to a deadly threat in that way.. without thought instinctivley.
I taught judo and the hand gun @ the MP School @ Ft gordon a long time ago, and the 1st time I was in a violent confrontation as an MP It went down exactly as I had done 100's of time in the pit.. and after it was over I was puzzled that I had done it as trained..
without any thought or fear it was to quick. That training served me well later in law enforcement
I am also concerned that there may be a large number of licensed individuals out there that can't (or can just barely) handle their weapon properly.
I think that a re-certification of basic pistol skills should be required once every year. If you don't qualify (two attempts), your instructor is authorized to confiscate your license until such time that you can re-qualify. Once confiscated, the licensee (using as many attempts as he needs - or can afford - in that two-week time frame) can attempt to re-qualify. If he can't re-certify within 30 days beyond of his yearly license anniversary, his license can then be revoked.
I'll be taking my CHL class this weekend, and I honestly hope that the instructor asks each student to at least identify all of the safety mechanisms on their chosen pistol. Even better would be an additional brief discussion about why they chose the pistol they brought to class, as well as the basic features of their chosen pistol. A person should also be required to demonstrate how to field strip/reassemble their pistol and perform proper maintenance by showing oiling points, as well as identify the various parts of the stripped pistol.
The only way you can properly use a pistol is if you have a reasonable understanding of it AND its functionality.
DoubleActionCHL
Well-Known
There you go, giving up your basic human right of self-defense in the name of security.
Now, I don't necessarily disagree with you on the fact that everyone who opts to own and/or carry a firearm should take the initiative to master the skills you mentioned, plus so much more. Unfortunately, after scanning that pesky 2nd Amendment, I don't see any of these requirements mentioned.
Your restrictions would prevent some of my students from qualifying; namely, the 79 year old woman who has complete control of her faculties, can shoot just fine, but has difficulty loading and manipulating the weapon. You would also disqualify the gentleman with only one functional arm. Could they eventually learn to pass your test? Most likely, but what if they couldn't? We strip them of their right to protect themselves with a handgun?
At some point, we must default to personal responsibility. When a society allows citizens to take responsibility for their own protection by arming themselves (and it should!), we must accept the bad with the good.
