TexasCHLforum.com

rtschl wrote:

TXBO wrote:It's the fact that the legislature has sold you on their opinion and you can't sell them on ours.

So what do we do? Get rid of the pro gun/2A legislators and hope their replacements do vote that way? Like Charles I wish unlicensed carry/constitutional carry was accepted. But reality is what it is and it is political naivete to think we can just will the legislature to support this. It is also a waste of political capital to invest much in this issue at this time. That is reality that no one is going to be able to change this session. It will take time, hard work, and good relationships with the legislature to get there.

twomillenium wrote:

warnmar10 wrote:

twomillenium wrote:

warnmar10 wrote:Realistically, how many people who take a LTC class leave without a certificate of successful completion? The class requirements are anything but rigorous. So on the one hand I would argue the licensing requirements are wholly inadequate but I can't off hand think of another unalienable and Constitutionally protected right for which a license is required.

I suppose my compromise would be Constitutional carry except where currently prohibited and carry anywhere a peace officer can with a license, the license being a little more than just a silly test for which the answers are obvious and a shooting test that is so easy that most first time shooters can pass it.

Sense the testing is so silly. Would you want someone who can't pass it to carry?

Show me someone who couldn't pass the test and I'll think about it.

I've taken the class and test twice. The first time I passed but never got around to turning in my paperwork and after a couple of years it was too late. I passed the second time too and about 30 days later I had my CHL. There were no failures in either class I took. In both classes there were first time, (literally first time,) shooters who passed the shooting test. I would argue the test is a formality that could be done away with. -- OR -- If we're going to require training and testing it should be meaningful training and meaningful testing.

Having said all that, what is it like in the states that have Constitutional carry? Is it all Dodge City and blood in the streets in those states now?

Well if your not going to think about it, then neither am I. You have google just like I do. Why don't you do your own home work and answer your own questions with the facts that you find. One thing that may help you get traction, is to remember that the best way to eat an elephant is one bite at a time.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:... My concern is that gun owners will unknowingly find themselves on the wrong side of the law, perhaps in a very big way. ....

Charles L. Cotton wrote: I think the general public would be less concerned if Texas law were amended to require a background check to confirm that a person has not lost their constitutional rights (ex. convicted felon), then issue a license without requiring a fee or a class. This computer check would take mere seconds. This would be very similar to getting a voter's registration card that is required to vote in all elections.


Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:
The better argument for unlicensed carry is the lack of a problem in states that do not require a license. (Comparing Vermont with a total population lower than Austin, Texas (625,000 v. 800,000) is not productive.) With the coming change in the SCOTUS, we may finally get an opinion on the Second Amendment much close to the "shall not be infringed" concept, but that's far from certain.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

TXBO wrote:

rotor wrote:

TXBO wrote:

rotor wrote:...The argument is that it is a constitutional right and other things are just a privilege like driving a car. ....

That's not an argument. That's a fact.

All constitutional rights have some restrictions. I can only say that when I took my CHL class there were some not so sharp people taking the course that really did not know anything about handguns. At least after the range work they knew the basics. I think most people on this forum from what I have seen are pretty sharp about firearms. I don't believe the general public is. I don't think every yahoo out there is safe enough to carry a handgun. I trust the people on this sight as they have not only proven their safety but I can tell by their writing that they know what they are doing.

If that's the way you feel, why only require training for a license to carry? Why not for handling a long gun? Why not require training and a test just to purchase a firearm?

Perhaps because the discussion is about HB375, unlicensed carry of handguns.

Chas.

rotor wrote:

TXBO wrote:

rotor wrote:...The argument is that it is a constitutional right and other things are just a privilege like driving a car. ....

That's not an argument. That's a fact.

All constitutional rights have some restrictions. I can only say that when I took my CHL class there were some not so sharp people taking the course that really did not know anything about handguns. At least after the range work they knew the basics. I think most people on this forum from what I have seen are pretty sharp about firearms. I don't believe the general public is. I don't think every yahoo out there is safe enough to carry a handgun. I trust the people on this sight as they have not only proven their safety but I can tell by their writing that they know what they are doing.

rotor wrote: i would sure hate to see people on the road without passing an exam and some knowledge of the law, be it driving or carry. We have an excellent record in the public's mind right now, it may not be so good if completely untrained people carried. ....

rotor wrote:...The argument is that it is a constitutional right and other things are just a privilege like driving a car. ....

txglock21 wrote:I see both sides of it and to be honest, I don't care either way...but I DO like "by-passing" the NICS call every time I buy a new gun. Now some may say it only takes a few minutes more, but I have had several issues in the past (pre CHL) where the computers/phone lines were down, "may take awhile, don't call us, we'll call you", etc...