Original CHL Holders Thread

[kenboyles72]

oh no's, another CC vs LTC debate. look, it dont make a darn whether one has a LTC or not and a LTC does not make one better than one without. Oh, it's the training you say? Well, I can tell you right know, there are a lot of individuals that have a LTC and are idiots. While there are a lot that benefit and learn from a class, doesn't mean all do. Same with those that have an education. The whole "have to have formal training" mindset, is all the years of brainwashing the Gov has fed you in the name of "public safety", which has nothing to do with safety. It is just another way of convincing you of denying your rights and complying.

 

[TexasRedneck]

I have and always will believe that anyone carrying a gun, legally, should have to prove proficiency especially after what I saw some do during their CHL qualifications!!

Not busting on you directly, but tell me....what has the criminal done to prove HIS proficiency? Someone who arms themselves for protection without practicing the basics, and studying the law is a fool imo - but that is their choice to make.

 

[BBL]

The class that I had to take definitely gave me some basic understanding of the laws pertaining to being armed with a firearm, signage etc. I then continued the education on my own to know what I can and cannot do lawfully. Shouldn't anybody carrying a firearm know the legalities?

And don't get me started on the practical skill aspect. I've watched numerous applicants fail before they even pulled the trigger. Loading 9mm ammo into a .45 magazine, putting bullets in backwards, flagging other applicants with a loaded weapon and finger on the trigger, you name it.

So if we don't want to impose any mandatory education on permitless carriers, what CAN be done to educate people who want carry firearms?

 

[bigtex10mm]

The class that I had to take definitely gave me some basic understanding of the laws pertaining to being armed with a firearm, signage etc. I then continued the education on my own to know what I can and cannot do lawfully. Shouldn't anybody carrying a firearm know the legalities?

And don't get me started on the practical skill aspect. I've watched numerous applicants fail before they even pulled the trigger. Loading 9mm ammo into a .45 magazine, putting bullets in backwards, flagging other applicants with a loaded weapon and finger on the trigger, you name it.

So if we don't want to impose any mandatory education on permitless carriers, what CAN be done to educate people who want carry firearms?

I agree with you....working as my buddies Range Master for the CHL qualification, I was amazed that the things that happened.

TexasRedneck,
"Someone who arms themselves for protection without practicing the basics, and studying the law is a fool imo - but that is their choice to make." Ill have to disagree with you on the second part.
That would be akin to saying that anyone who wants to drive a car on the streets without Drivers Education and Driver Training as a part of that education "is their choice to make". Not according to the DPS. You won't get a drivers license without passing both the written and driving test. I believe that getting a gun license should be treated the same way. Now that pretty much anyone can carry with the permitless carry laws, I am a little worried about those that will do so.

That's just my humble opinion, from my 4 decades of experience with firearms.

 

[DoubleDuty]

Well let's see 21 states have passed Constitutional Carry and the history so far is life has gone on unchanged. Criminals are still criminals carrying guns illegally no training involved except when they are pointing their guns on YouTube or shooting people.

 

[Axxe55]

I agree with you....working as my buddies Range Master for the CHL qualification, I was amazed that the things that happened.

TexasRedneck,
"Someone who arms themselves for protection without practicing the basics, and studying the law is a fool imo - but that is their choice to make." Ill have to disagree with you on the second part.
That would be akin to saying that anyone who wants to drive a car on the streets without Drivers Education and Driver Training as a part of that education "is their choice to make". Not according to the DPS. You won't get a drivers license without passing both the written and driving test. I believe that getting a gun license should be treated the same way. Now that pretty much anyone can carry with the permitless carry laws, I am a little worried about those that will do so.

That's just my humble opinion, from my 4 decades of experience with firearms.

And yet we see every day, idiots that have a DL that drive like idiots.

IMO neither a CHL or a DL prove proficiency with a gun or a car. They only prove that the minimum requirements were attained to be granted a permit for using them.

Also IMO, going through a class to get a permit is largely dependent upon the person giving the class. Idiots teach the courses as well as those knowledgeable of the subject matter.

 

[V-Tach]

Idiots teach the courses as well as those knowledgeable of the subject matter.

Truth............and it is unfortunate....

 

[F350-6]

Is it me, or is it impossible to impart 12 hours of learning into none. If you know the rules then awesome. If you don’t, then it is your responsibility to know then.

Sorry, there is “I didn’t know that “ defense….is not acceptable.

A lawyer would argue that 12 hours isn't near enough time to impart the knowledge necessary to fully understand the laws either.

I think I would agree. I've learned more since I took my original CHL class then I did taking the class.

 

[billtool]

I took the 12 hr course at Carters Country in Humble in 94- I think. My original permit was only good for two years as they had to stagger the renewals and some of us got the short straw. I think I was only charged 1/2 price for it though. Want to think that the permits renewed every 4 years back then. I took my renewal at the same place. I remember my SW1911 5” shooting like a laser.

 

[billtool]

The third time I renewed was at Spring Guns and ammo. The gent next to me when we were qualifying was wheelchair bound and quite frail. He had a ND while racking a round into an old wore out .380. Thankfully he didn’t shoot me and the range officer was on his game. He made sure the gentleman passed. The next time I renewed it was online. Gonna do it again this August.

 

[carlson1]

I personally enjoyed the class and learned a lot. In spite of being in LE I got my CHL in 1995. The class was taught by a retired LEO friend and learned a lot. I am still trying to learn and keep up.

I love sitting in on a class right after new legislation.

 

[sanspeu1r]

My $0.02 CHL should be just like your driver's license, good in every state. I even use my Idaho Driver's license in Africa with no problems. It needed a performance test as well as a knowledge of law test. I understand the fear of giving the gummint information, but such a license should not include information about your weapon, as is the case in Nevada. A driver's license says nothing about the vehicle. I DO think training should be required. Just sayin'

 

[Bozz10mm]

By the time I took the CHL class in 2013, the classroom time had been pared down to 6 hours. I learned what I needed to know about the concealed carry laws. I don't know what more they could teach in a 12 hour course. Maybe the same things, just talk slower, heh. There wasn't open carry or constitutional carry back then. Two more subjects they need to cover now.

 

[TexasRedneck]

I DO think training should be required. Just sayin'

Most arguments begin with something being said. Why shouldn't speech be licensed?

 

[DoubleDuty]

My $0.02 CHL should be just like your driver's license, good in every state. I even use my Idaho Driver's license in Africa with no problems. It needed a performance test as well as a knowledge of law test. I understand the fear of giving the gummint information, but such a license should not include information about your weapon, as is the case in Nevada. A driver's license says nothing about the vehicle. I DO think training should be required. Just sayin'

Show us where Constitutional carry doesn't work.

 

[F350-6]

Most arguments begin with something being said.

Not for married couples.

 

[Axxe55]

What if all our rights that are guaranteed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were administered on a pay to play premise, or only allowed to be exercised if you were deemed to have adequate training and instruction? Voting, expressing an opinion, freedom to worship, right to due process under the law, illegal search and seizures, etc. etc.

I;m not against anyone getting instruction and training, just against making it mandatory in order to exercise a Constitutional right, and being forced to pay a fee or tax to exercise that right. If you are forced into paying for a right, it's no longer a right, but a privilege afforded to a select few that are able to afford the privilege.

 

[TexasRedneck]

If you are forced into paying for a right, it's no longer a right, but a privilege afforded to a select few that are able to afford the privilege.

QFT!

 

[TexasRedneck]

Not for married couples.

Not always - but often enough.

 

[Axxe55]

Not always - but often enough.

Marriage ain't free either. Usually costs more to get out of one than getting into one though.