gigag04 wrote:I'll do you one better.
I'm a really good driver, I've been through performance driving schools, track days all over Texas, and taken countless pursuit driving courses in my LEO days.
I want an Enhanced DL, where the normal rules of the road don't apply to me.
jmra wrote:That is a vast oversimplification of the concept being discussed. Otherwise, this document http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/internetfo ... chl-16.pdf would be two pages long.jbarn wrote:jmra wrote:dac1842 wrote:I have thought this to myself for a long time. After seeing posts like this and others that seem like the folks that post them are after police type authority because they have a CHL, There are times I am more concerned about a CHL holder than I am a bad guy...
After being on this board for 6-7 years, I would think twice about pulling my weapon in a public place unless I personally was in danger.
I remind folks, the CHL laws were written to allow us to carry for personal protection.I have no desire to be a cop but the CHL law clearly was also written to include defending a third party.
The use of force laws have always allowed defense of a third person, and have nothing to do, really, with the CHL laws. The use of force laws are the same for CHL holders and those who do not hold one. Same for cops, too. (LEOs do have a section on escapees, etc.)
The CHL laws simply allow you to carry, and do not address the purpose.
I don't see the difference. My property, I can control what happens and who has access. You have a right to swing your fist, a right that ends before my nose. Same here.Dragonfighter wrote:More a paying hobby but that effects the point how?jbarn wrote:Just curious; do you own a business?Dragonfighter wrote:Just a word about private property rights. I see a vast difference between you and I controlling access to our property and a business or other facility opened to the public forbidding me from entering because of an otherwise legal activity. In the meantime, these places allow every other flea scratchin' dog to enter without so much as a "how do you do?". I think if its open to the general public, especially without a reasonable security apparatus in place, you should lose your "right" to restrict CHL carry on your property;that is if you even knew who it was that was carrying.Robert*PPS wrote:I haven't given any thought to something like that, but I can see some issues with it right off the bat. Property rights being usurped, as mentioned above. Also, think of how the CHL badgers would act if they had an ECHL? They be wearing capes and masks and making up funny names for themselves....
PRIVATE property is one thing, property you open to all manner of folks is another. I hope the difference is apparent.
- Restricted, limited and/or secure access, fine, regulate the carry of weapons anyway you'd like.
- Unrestricted public access, then no, you shouldn't be able to turn a law abiding citizen into a criminal for otherwise legally carrying self protection.
jmra wrote:dac1842 wrote:I have thought this to myself for a long time. After seeing posts like this and others that seem like the folks that post them are after police type authority because they have a CHL, There are times I am more concerned about a CHL holder than I am a bad guy...
After being on this board for 6-7 years, I would think twice about pulling my weapon in a public place unless I personally was in danger.
I remind folks, the CHL laws were written to allow us to carry for personal protection.
Just curious; do you own a business?Dragonfighter wrote:Just a word about private property rights. I see a vast difference between you and I controlling access to our property and a business or other facility opened to the public forbidding me from entering because of an otherwise legal activity. In the meantime, these places allow every other flea scratchin' dog to enter without so much as a "how do you do?". I think if its open to the general public, especially without a reasonable security apparatus in place, you should lose your "right" to restrict CHL carry on your property;that is if you even knew who it was that was carrying.Robert*PPS wrote:I haven't given any thought to something like that, but I can see some issues with it right off the bat. Property rights being usurped, as mentioned above. Also, think of how the CHL badgers would act if they had an ECHL? They be wearing capes and masks and making up funny names for themselves....
WildBill wrote:Sometimes I think that some people still have some romantic notion that being a ranger, sheriff or deputy means that all you have to do is be able to ride a horse and be good with a gun.mojo84 wrote:Darn. Maybe that's why he hasn't done it yet.WildBill wrote:I don't know if it's like in the old westerns where the sheriff can have you raise your right hand and throw you a tin shield.mojo84 wrote:I like the idea of being part of the sheriff's posse. I just can't get ours to deputize me.
I would like for a chl to be able to carry the same place as leos. Not really interested in additional authority associated with it though. Too much potential liability.
You mean....... 
What do you envision as better trained? Classroom training? Tactical Training? Perhaps force on force (using simunitions)?rp_photo wrote:jbarn wrote:rp_photo wrote:
I envision an ECHL as being a regular armed citizen who can carry in a few more places and is better-trained.
rp_photo wrote:I was thinking to myself today about the concept of Enhanced CHL that would afford privileges somewhere between Peace Officer and regular CHL. Extended privledges could include things such as being able to carry in off-limits places such as bars and schools, being exempt from 30.06, being able to open carry, 50-state reciprocity, and being more prepared to act offensively, i.e. come to the aid of others.
It would seem to me that ECHL's could fill a valuable role in society. Has any though ever been given to this?
