TexasCHLforum.com

Ruark wrote:

CleverNickname wrote:I disagree. The CHL class boils down to "Don't be a jerk. You're not a junior policeman now. Here's where you can carry and where you can't. Please stay awake for long enough to regurgitate this info in a multiple choice test. Shoot this 50-round test that a blind spastic monkey could complete." Passing the CHL class doesn't make someone "elite" in any sense of the word.

Perhaps "elite" is too strong a word. But compared to some of the OC loonies, a CHL holder has at least a minimal status as being a law abiding, reasonable person. I guess it depends on what kind of CHL class you had. Mine was extremely thorough and detailed, and the teacher had 30 years of law enforcement (police, DEA, Blackwater) experience. Granted, it's not commando training, and it's not supposed to be. But having the exhaustive background check, etc. stands for something when it comes to credibility.

Let's not allow this discussion to be sidetracked into an argument on the content and value of CHL classes.

CleverNickname wrote:I disagree. The CHL class boils down to "Don't be a jerk. You're not a junior policeman now. Here's where you can carry and where you can't. Please stay awake for long enough to regurgitate this info in a multiple choice test. Shoot this 50-round test that a blind spastic monkey could complete." Passing the CHL class doesn't make someone "elite" in any sense of the word.

Russell wrote:Just to put my 2 cents in, I am very much against any attempts to lower the standards for who can receive their CHL. This includes shortening classroom time or especially removing some of the disqualifying criminal offenses. As it stands right now, those that have their CHL can say they are part of an "elite" group that has, for the most part, never been in trouble with the law. If we start lowering that bar we are only shooting ourselves in the foot