TexasCHLforum.com

frankie_the_yankee wrote:[
But for all of that, I am not seeing any news reports of CHL's accidently shooting themselves of others due to poor gun handling, so whatever "problem" there might be can't amount to a heck of a lot out in the real world.

There are some tools that help load cartridges into the Mags. I use a tool that came with my Ruger. it also works on just about any double stack 9mm. I had a friend show me a fancier tool that simplified, and sped up loading even more.

I still don't understand why requiring someone to be able to load their weapon and charge it would make the rest of us any safer. An inabilty to do this doesn't make a CHL holder more dangerous to the population at large. It just seems to me that we should be encouraging folks to get their CHLs rather than make it more difficult.

Perhaps we get to thinking that we belong to to an exclusive club of some sort. Requiring more difficulty would make us more exclusive. I don't want CHLers to be exclusive, I want to be just one of many millions. Sure we want them to be safe. But mandating that CHL holders be capable of field stripping their weapons , loading their Mags or charging their weapons doesn't make them any safer. That being said, a student should be able demonstrate muzzle and trigger discipline.

frankie_the_yankee wrote:I think someone should be able to safely load and unload the gun they choose to qualify with. There are tools that make it possible for anyone to load any magazine with very low effort. If someone is qualifying with a gun whose magazines they are not able to load easily, they should know about these tools and avail themselves of them.

I also think that people should be able to safely manipulate the slide of any gun they choose to qualify with.

I think I agree,
I believe every should be able to, but I don't believe their should be a legal requirement.
Would you rather folks that are physically inhibited from charging their weapons not be armed.?
Please keep in mind that the perceived recoil in an equivilant revolver can is harsher than their semautomatic cousins.
I also have been muzzled during a CHL class. I didn't like it at all, but I don't see where the lack of abilty to pull the slide back makes one less safe than not being to carry at all.

It is easy to expect someone to have the same abilitys we do? but as long as they don't create a danger for the rest of us we should make allowances. We don't require that people should be able to change a tire or their own oil to get a drivers license , and we all know how dangerous they are.

dac1842 wrote:The CHL firing line is not the place to teach someone how to shoot.

Yup, a student should be able to demonstrate safe firearm handling and a good understanding how to use it.

dac1842 wrote:I believe and I may stir up the ire of some of the folks here, but it would not be the first time, that to get the CHL part of the firearm proficiency should be loading and unloading a weapon and field stripping and putting back together. During my firearms portion there were several individuals that it was painfully obvious had never handled a weapon before and probably have not handled once since either. I have no problem with folks buying a weapon for protection at home. But if they are going to carry it in public with CHL demonstrating they are not a bigger danger than the crooks is not asking too much.

You are correct, you stirred me up
I won't go into the 2nd amendment right to keep and bare arms means we shouldn't need plastic at all.

I don't understand why it should be essential for some one to be able field strip their weapon or even be able to cock it, so that they can get permission from the state to be able to protect themselves. One of the best shooters I know, is also an instructor, while he still loads and cleans his weapons, he confided in me one day that it is a struggle sometimes because of arthritis. A lot of women I know have no interest at all in the inner workings of handguns, and gladly hand these tasks off to their significant others. It also helps make us feel more important. Requiring them to learn extra skills would be denying them the right to defend themselves. By insisting that these people have to learn extra skills we stand a chance of denying the ones who most need to carry.

A Marine Soldier or police police officer has other lives dependant on these skills, Having a CHL is about being able to protect oneself. The only ones they endanger is themselves when they can't perform these functions, and they would be in even more danger if we deny them the right to carry.

I understand that that we do not want people to endanger us or the public to be packing. I do not understand how a handicapped or arthritic or elderly person who can not physically charge their automatic would be a danger to the public. I don't understand why some ladys inability to field strip her 1911 makes her a danger to me.

The shooters mentioned don't sound like they were a threat to either themselves or others. It sounds like the guns they had sound like they may have been borrowed.
Some folks want to get their CHL so that they can freely buy and take their handguns to the range. While most of us know that we can now transport our weapons with minimal risk of arrest. but the General public may not be aware of this. This is why we have CHL classes.

We occasionally hear of some folks who cannot physically charge their weapons. Usually these are older people with arthritic hands. We've seen complaints that some folks (usually the elderly) barely seem to be able to qualify. These are exactly the folks that we need to get to arm themselves. We can only hope that after they get their CHL they will buy a suitable firearm, and get lots of practice.