TexasCHLforum.com

wgoforth wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:

wgoforth wrote:

chuckybrown wrote:Slightly off topic, but it goes to some instructors. They're human, and like me, just don't absorb or remember it all:

A good friend of mine, and a business partner, is an instructor.

The other day we're driving to lunch, and I asked him what his carry choice was today. As we drove, I was sharing that I liked a certain pistol for OWB carry under a jacket for church. He turns to me and says "Chuck, you can't carry in church". We talked, he was adamant. I told him that we'd bet lunch, and I'd Google it on my smart phone and show him when we stopped in the parking lot.

I had steak for lunch.

Peace.

Yup, church carry gets misunderstood a lot. A local instructor in Brownwood taught until recently you can't carry in church and got corrected. They get hung up on the fact that the penal code DOES say that...then miss the last paragraph that was added by later legislature, saying it applies ONLY if the church had a 30.06.

A classic example of, "...a little learnin' can be a dangerous thing...".

Probably 1/4 of the preachers I know carry right into the pulpit. Self included.

wgoforth wrote:

chuckybrown wrote:Slightly off topic, but it goes to some instructors. They're human, and like me, just don't absorb or remember it all:

A good friend of mine, and a business partner, is an instructor.

The other day we're driving to lunch, and I asked him what his carry choice was today. As we drove, I was sharing that I liked a certain pistol for OWB carry under a jacket for church. He turns to me and says "Chuck, you can't carry in church". We talked, he was adamant. I told him that we'd bet lunch, and I'd Google it on my smart phone and show him when we stopped in the parking lot.

I had steak for lunch.

Peace.

Yup, church carry gets misunderstood a lot. A local instructor in Brownwood taught until recently you can't carry in church and got corrected. They get hung up on the fact that the penal code DOES say that...then miss the last paragraph that was added by later legislature, saying it applies ONLY if the church had a 30.06.

wgoforth wrote:

OldRingo said: C'mon 03, not "any old goof ball" can teach CHL classes. It takes money to get an Instructors license just as that medium is also required to obtain a CH license. Understanding the various signs and notifications must be optional?

BTW, has anyone mentioned that "concealed is concealed" over the duration of this thread?

Yes, it has been said by most of us...but are you noticing that this is NOT the CHL instructor saying this, but rather the DPS INSTRUCTORS CERTIFICATION school teaching this TO instructors? Thus the concern is NOT the keeping of it concealed, but that the DPS is TELLING instructors to teach that all gun signs are binding. Thus this isn't about the practice of carrying, but of TEACHING...and if the DPS teaches this today, instructors leave believing it, teach it to their classes...it becomes law without a shot fired.

03Lightningrocks wrote:

wgoforth wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:

baldeagle wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:The good folks at Bullet Trap teach CHL classes and work under the assumption that you know the laws. That sign does not apply to you if you have a CHL. That sign is to keep folks from coming in with loaded(UNCONCEALED) firearms. It is amazing how many well meaning folks will walk in with a loaded gun, whip it out of the box and ask them what it is worth or if they can "fix it". Again... this is NOT speculation... they don't mean for folks with a CHL to disarm in the parking lot or anywhere else.

Well, that's a bit irritating. The sign should then read "Unless you are a CHL holder, no loaded weapons." or something similar. The sign is misleading.

I am not trying to be a wise cracker but we should all know that the sign does not apply to us as CHL holders. The signage issues are covered in all CHL classes. There is only one sign that applies to us. All others don't. For me, there is nothing misleading about a "no loaded guns allowed" or a "gun busters" sign at any business. This one is no different.

Ehh, not so much I am afraid. I had no idea until going through CHL instructor training this week that instructors are being taught that all no gun signage tells you the intent and should be obeyed. During breaks, I talked with various other students about the matter and most seemed to have agreed that you have been served notice. In fact, the Captain went as far as to say that if a sign is non-compliant, call it in to the DPS... and that even if the business did not do what was proper, you are to respect their signage intent. While I do not agree, it is incorrect to assume that "the signage issues are covered in all CHL classes" to the correct view. What is disturbing, is that there were 81 instructors coming out of this class...and many more been/being taught this view.

Wow...that is more than disturbing. The instructer of that class should be reported for teaching improper training. I am surprised that they will just let any old goof ball teach CHL classes.